Paper detail

The Composition of M-type asteroids II: Synthesis of spectroscopic and radar observations

This work updates and expands on results of our long-term radar-driven observational campaign of main-belt asteroids (MBAs) focused on Bus-DeMeo Xc- and Xk-type objects (Tholen X and M class asteroids) using the Arecibo radar and NASA Infrared Telescope Facilities (Ockert-Bell et al. 2008; 2010; Shepard et al. 2008; 2010). Eighteen of our targets were near-simultaneously observed with radar and those observations are described in Shepard et al. (2010). We combine our near-infrared data with available visible wavelength data for a more complete compositional analysis of our targets. Compositional evidence is derived from our target asteroid spectra using two different methods, a \c{hi}2 search for spectral matches in the RELAB database and parametric comparisons with meteorites. We present four new methods of parametric comparison, including discriminant analysis. Discriminant analysis identifies meteorite type with 85% accuracy. This paper synthesizes the results of these two analog search algorithms and reconciles those results with analogs suggested from radar data (Shepard et al. 2010). We have observed 29 asteroids, 18 in conjunction with radar observations. For eighteen out of twenty-nine objects observed (62%) our compositional predictions are consistent over two or more methods applied. We find that for our Xc and Xk targets the best fit is an iron meteorite for 34% of the samples. Enstatite Chondrites were best fits for 6 of our targets (21%). Stony-iron meteorites were best fits for 2 of our targets (7%). A discriminant analysis suggests that asteroids with no absorption band can be compared to iron meteorites and asteroids with both a 0.9 and 1.9 μm absorption band can be compared to stony-iron meteorites.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access8 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.