2009
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/200912741
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Photometry and models of selected main belt asteroids

Abstract: We analyze photometric observations of the three main-belt asteroids 350 Ornamenta, 771 Libera, and 984 Gretia, conducted over a twelve-year interval. Our data and those of other authors allow us to determine pole and shape models using the lightcurve inversion technique. In all three cases, a single pole solution was obtained without any significant mirror solution:This analysis and the development of asteroid models increase the set of asteroids with known spin and shape parameters, which consists of only ar… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 20 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…One way how to test the reliability of models based only on CSS data is to compare them with models derived from different photometric data set. So far, about a hundred of asteroid models were derived from dense data (e.g., Kaasalainen et al, 2002;Torppa et al, 2003;Slivan et al, 2003;Marciniak et al, 2007;Ďurech et al, 2007), another ∼ 100 models were derived from combined dense and sparse data (Ďurech et al, 2009;Hanuš et al, 2011). These models are believed to be reliable and thus correct.…”
Section: Reliability Of Asteroid Models Derived Only From the Catalinmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One way how to test the reliability of models based only on CSS data is to compare them with models derived from different photometric data set. So far, about a hundred of asteroid models were derived from dense data (e.g., Kaasalainen et al, 2002;Torppa et al, 2003;Slivan et al, 2003;Marciniak et al, 2007;Ďurech et al, 2007), another ∼ 100 models were derived from combined dense and sparse data (Ďurech et al, 2009;Hanuš et al, 2011). These models are believed to be reliable and thus correct.…”
Section: Reliability Of Asteroid Models Derived Only From the Catalinmentioning
confidence: 99%