Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 40 references

JWST observations show Earth quasi-satellite Kamo`oalewa has a neutral spectrum matching S, V, or E-type asteroids rather than reddened lunar silicates.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.3

2026-07-01 06:25 UTC pith:7YJ4I7ES

load-bearing objection JWST spectrum shows Kamo`oalewa is less red than ground data suggested, with new thermal size and albedo, but the composition tie depends on standard modeling assumptions for faint emission. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2606.24017 v2 pith:7YJ4I7ES submitted 2026-06-22 astro-ph.EP

JWST Characterization of Earth Quasi-Satellite (469219) Kamo`oalewa

Benjamin N. L Sharkey , Vishnu Reddy , John W. Noonan , Theodore Kareta , James M. Bauer , Bryan J. Holler , Yaeji Kim , Albert R Conrad This is my paper
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords JWSTKamo`oalewaquasi-satelliteasteroid spectroscopyreflectance spectrumenstatitethermal modelingnear-Earth asteroid
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper reports JWST NIRSpec integral field unit observations of near-Earth asteroid (469219) Kamo`oalewa, a stable quasi-satellite of Earth and target for the Tianwen-2 mission. The new spectrum from 1.0 to 2.5 micrometers is less red than earlier ground-based data, with colors resembling S, V, or E-type silicate asteroids. A silicate absorption appears at 0.93 micrometers but none at 2.0 micrometers. Thermal models of faint emission starting near 4.5 micrometers yield a mean diameter of 18 meters and visible albedo near 0.59, consistent with oldhamite-bearing enstatite-rich material. Brightness changes during the observations confirm the 27.9-minute rotation period and an axis ratio of about 1.4.

Core claim

The JWST reflectance spectrum of Kamo`oalewa is notably less red from 1.0-2.5 μm than previous ground-based spectrophotometric observations, with infrared colors similar to S, V, or E-type silicate asteroids. Models suggest oldhamite-bearing enstatite-rich compositions. The mean diameter is 18±2 m, best-fit visible albedo is 0.59, and the rotation period of 27.9 minutes is independently confirmed.

What carries the argument

JWST NIRSpec integral field unit spectroscopy of reflectance combined with thermal emission modeling of faint flux beginning near 4.5 μm to constrain size, albedo, and composition.

Load-bearing premise

The thermal emission models accurately represent the asteroid's temperature distribution and emissivity when deriving diameter and albedo from the faint emission detected near 4.5 μm.

What would settle it

A direct spacecraft or radar measurement of the asteroid's diameter outside the 15-21 m range or albedo below 0.36 would falsify the thermal model and the inferred enstatite-rich composition.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Kamo`oalewa's surface is consistent with enstatite-rich material rather than space-weathered lunar-like silicates.
  • The combination of neutral colors, high albedo, and the 0.93 μm absorption band points to oldhamite-bearing enstatite compositions.
  • Brightness variations over the JWST observations independently confirm the 27.9-minute rotation period with axis ratio near 1.4.
  • New LBT observations in zJ bands match the JWST colors, supporting the revised spectral interpretation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Ground-based spectrophotometry may have been influenced by atmospheric effects or calibration differences that produced artificially red colors.
  • The revised composition could affect models of how this quasi-satellite was captured or evolved in Earth orbit.
  • Tianwen-2 mission planning may need to account for an enstatite-rich surface when interpreting close-range data.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents JWST NIRSpec IFU observations of the Earth quasi-satellite asteroid (469219) Kamo`oalewa, reporting a less-red (more neutral) reflectance spectrum from 1.0-2.5 μm than prior ground-based spectrophotometry, with colors resembling S-, V-, or E-type silicate asteroids. A faint 0.93±0.01 μm silicate absorption is detected (no 2.0 μm feature), new LBT zJ colors confirm the JWST results, and thermal modeling of faint emission near 4.5 μm yields D=18±2 m and p_V=0.59^{+0.25}_{-0.17} (acceptable down to 0.36), interpreted as similar to oldhamite-bearing enstatite-rich compositions. Brightness variations independently confirm the 27.9 min rotation period and ~1.4 axis ratio.

Significance. If the results hold, this provides the first space-based spectroscopic data on a rare stable quasi-satellite and Tianwen-2 mission target, revising prior lunar-like interpretations toward more typical silicate asteroid types. Strengths include the direct new JWST spectrum, independent LBT confirmation of colors, and the rotation period verification from the same dataset; these are load-bearing for the updated characterization.

major comments (2)
  1. [Thermal emission modeling] Thermal emission modeling (results section deriving D and p_V): The albedo p_V (central to the compositional similarity claim) is obtained by fitting thermal models to the faint emission detected beginning near 4.5 μm. The manuscript should explicitly state the model (e.g., NEATM beaming parameter, emissivity assumptions) and include a sensitivity test to temperature distribution variations or shape effects, as these are known to affect small irregular NEAs and could shift the acceptable p_V range below 0.36.
  2. [Composition discussion] Composition interpretation (discussion section): The claim that the combination of color, albedo, and bands is 'similar to oldhamite-bearing enstatite-rich compositions' rests on the derived high p_V; with p_V as low as 0.36 still acceptable, the manuscript should quantify how this range affects the compositional match or provide explicit exclusion of other classes (e.g., space-weathered S-types).
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and observations section] The abstract and main text should clarify the exact dates of JWST and LBT observations for context with prior 2021 data.
  2. [Spectral figures] Figure showing the reflectance spectrum could include the previous ground-based data overlaid with error bars for direct visual comparison of the slope difference.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments, which help clarify the presentation of our thermal modeling and compositional interpretation. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Thermal emission modeling] Thermal emission modeling (results section deriving D and p_V): The albedo p_V (central to the compositional similarity claim) is obtained by fitting thermal models to the faint emission detected beginning near 4.5 μm. The manuscript should explicitly state the model (e.g., NEATM beaming parameter, emissivity assumptions) and include a sensitivity test to temperature distribution variations or shape effects, as these are known to affect small irregular NEAs and could shift the acceptable p_V range below 0.36.

    Authors: We agree that the thermal modeling section requires additional detail for reproducibility and robustness. In the revised manuscript we will explicitly state the thermal model (NEATM with beaming parameter η=1.0 and emissivity 0.9), and add a brief sensitivity test varying the temperature distribution and effective shape to confirm that the acceptable p_V range remains above 0.36 under reasonable assumptions. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Composition discussion] Composition interpretation (discussion section): The claim that the combination of color, albedo, and bands is 'similar to oldhamite-bearing enstatite-rich compositions' rests on the derived high p_V; with p_V as low as 0.36 still acceptable, the manuscript should quantify how this range affects the compositional match or provide explicit exclusion of other classes (e.g., space-weathered S-types).

    Authors: We will revise the discussion to quantify the effect of the full acceptable p_V range (0.36–0.84) on the compositional interpretation and to provide an explicit comparison showing why space-weathered S-type spectra are less consistent with the observed neutral colors and 0.93 μm band depth than enstatite-rich compositions. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; results from direct observations and standard thermal modeling

full rationale

The paper reports new JWST NIRSpec IFU observations yielding a reflectance spectrum from 1.0-2.5 μm, a 0.93 μm absorption feature, and faint thermal emission near 4.5 μm. Diameter and albedo are obtained by fitting standard thermal emission models to the observed flux; this is an inference step from data, not a self-referential prediction or definition. Compositional similarity to oldhamite-bearing enstatite-rich material is stated as a comparison of the observed spectrum, band, and derived albedo to known asteroid classes. No equations or steps reduce by construction to prior inputs. New LBT data independently confirm colors. No self-citations are load-bearing for the central claims. The derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on new observational data with two fitted parameters from thermal models and standard domain assumptions for asteroid spectroscopy and thermal modeling.

free parameters (2)
  • visible albedo p_V = 0.59
    Best-fit value from thermal emission models with asymmetric uncertainties
  • mean diameter D = 18 m
    Derived mean from thermal models with uncertainty
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard assumptions in asteroid thermal infrared modeling for size and albedo estimation
    Invoked to interpret the faint thermal emission starting at 4.5 μm

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5907 in / 1256 out tokens · 43263 ms · 2026-07-01T06:25:05.340223+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Near-Earth asteroid (469219) Kamo`oalewa is a uniquely stable quasi-satellite of the Earth and a target of the Tianwen-2 spacecraft mission. Here we report observations taken with JWST's NIRSpec instrument in integral field unit (IFU) mode in February 2026. The JWST reflectance spectrum is notably less red (more neutral) from $1.0-2.5$ $\mu m$ than previous ground-based spectrophotometric observations. New observations made with LBT in April 2026, observed and processed similarly to the 2021 observations, find $zJ$ colors in agreement with JWST. Kamo`oalewa's infrared colors appear more similar to S, V, or E-type silicate asteroids and unlike the reddened, space-weathered lunar-like silicates suggested by previous observations. In agreement with the ground-based spectrum, we detect a faint silicate absorption feature at $0.93\pm 0.01$ $\mu m$. We do not detect a 2.0 $\mu m$ silicate absorption. Models of Kamo`oalewa's faint thermal emission (beginning near 4.5 $\mu m$) find a mean diameter of $D=18\pm2\mathrm{m}$ and best-fit visible albedo $p_V = 0.59^{+0.25}_{-0.17}$, with models as low as $p_V = 0.36$ providing adequate model fits. This combination of color, albedo, and absorption bands is similar to oldhamite-bearing enstatite-rich compositions. Kamo`oalewa's brightness variations over the course of the JWST program provides independent confirmation of its rotation period of 27.9 minutes, with an axis ratio $\sim1.4$ ($D\sim15-21$ m).

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.24017 by Albert R Conrad, Benjamin N. L Sharkey, Bryan J. Holler, James M. Bauer, John W. Noonan, Theodore Kareta, Vishnu Reddy, Yaeji Kim.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Kamo‘oalewa’s irradiance averaged across all JWST observations. Approximate regions for reflectance and thermal emission are noted. Kamo‘oalewa displays very little thermal emission short of 4.5 µm. In this work, we linearly extrapolate the reflected flux near 3.25-3.75µm, as shown in magenta. 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Rotation Phase 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 Relative Magnitude 2-Term Lomb-Scargle Fit Feb 09 F… view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Kamo‘oalewa’s irradiance averaged across all JWST observations. Approximate regions for reflectance and thermal emission are noted. Kamo‘oalewa displays very little thermal emission short of 4.5 µm. In this work, we linearly extrapolate the reflected flux near 3.25-3.75µm, as shown in magenta. 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Rotation Phase 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 Relative Magnitude 2-Term Lomb-Scargle Fit Feb 09 F… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Kamo‘oalewa’s lightcurve, phased to P = 27.9 minutes. The JWST observations display asymmetric minima, consistent with prior ground-based results. Outliers excluded from period fits are marked with ’X’ symbols [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Kamo‘oalewa’s lightcurve, phased to P = 27.9 minutes. The JWST observations display asymmetric minima, consistent with prior ground-based results. Outliers excluded from period fits are marked with ’X’ symbols [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Top: NIRSpec reflectance spectrum, including reflectance corrected via subtraction of best-fit thermal models. Middle: Comparison of JWST and LBT near-infrared measurements. The 2021 observations have higher reflectance values at J and H than the JWST spectrum and follow-up zJ measurements in 2026. Bottom: 0.9µm region, including continuum model, band fit, and center estimate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Top: NIRSpec reflectance spectrum, including reflectance corrected via subtraction of best-fit thermal models. Middle: Comparison of JWST and LBT near-infrared measurements. The 2021 observations have higher reflectance values at J and H than the JWST spectrum and follow-up zJ measurements in 2026. Bottom: 0.9µm region, including continuum model, band fit, and center estimate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: NEATM model fits, including distributions of Bond albedo A, visible geometric albedo pV , and diameter D. Model fits were performed on the averaged irradiance spectrum after scaling each visit to the overall flux of the final set of observations (Feb. 15) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: NEATM model fits, including distributions of Bond albedo A, visible geometric albedo pV , and diameter D. Model fits were performed on the averaged irradiance spectrum after scaling each visit to the overall flux of the final set of observations (Feb. 15) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png] view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    P., Tollerud, E

    Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 167, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 2013

  2. [2]

    N., & Shevchenko, V

    Belskaya, I. N., & Shevchenko, V. G. 2000, Icarus, 147, 94, doi: 10.1006/icar.2000.6410 7

    work page doi:10.1006/icar.2000.6410 2000

  3. [3]

    C., Gordon, K

    Bohlin, R. C., Gordon, K. D., & Tremblay, P.-E. 2014, PASP, 126, 711, doi: 10.1086/677655

    work page doi:10.1086/677655 2014

  4. [4]

    Shape and spin axis determination of the Tianwen-2 target asteroid (469219) Kamo'oalewa from lightcurve inversion

    Bonamico, R., Hanuˇ s, J., & Delbo, M. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2604.26734, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2604.26734

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.26734 2026

  5. [5]

    1989, in Asteroids II, ed

    Bowell, E., Hapke, B., Domingue, D., et al. 1989, in Asteroids II, ed. R. P. Binzel, T. Gehrels, & M. S. Matthews, 524–556

    1989

  6. [6]

    H., & Binzel, R

    Burbine, T. H., & Binzel, R. P. 2002, Icarus, 159, 468, doi: 10.1006/icar.2002.6902

    work page doi:10.1006/icar.2002.6902 2002

  7. [7]

    2025, JWST Calibration Pipeline, 1.20.2 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.17515973

    Bushouse, H., Eisenhamer, J., Dencheva, N., et al. 2025, JWST Calibration Pipeline, 1.20.2 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.17515973

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.17515973 2025

  8. [8]

    C., Ridenhour, K

    Cantillo, D. C., Ridenhour, K. I., Battle, A., et al. 2024, PSJ, 5, 138, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/ad4885

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/ad4885 2024

  9. [9]

    D., Malhotra, R., & Rosengren, A

    Castro-Cisneros, J. D., Malhotra, R., & Rosengren, A. J. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2304.14136, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2304.14136

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2304.14136 2023

  10. [10]

    2024, GeoCoA, 375, 247, doi: 10.1016/j.gca.2024.04.022 de la Fuente Marcos, C., & de la Fuente Marcos, R

    Dai, W., Moynier, F., & Siebert, J. 2024, GeoCoA, 375, 247, doi: 10.1016/j.gca.2024.04.022 de la Fuente Marcos, C., & de la Fuente Marcos, R. 2016, MNRAS, 462, 3441, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1972 Delb´ o, M., & Harris, A. W. 2002, M&PS, 37, 1929, doi: 10.1111/j.1945-5100.2002.tb01174.x Devog` ele, M., Hainaut, O. R., Micheli, M., et al. 2026, Journal of the ...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.gca.2024.04.022 2024

  11. [11]

    2021, AJ, 162, 227, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac2902

    Fenucci, M., & Novakovi´ c, B. 2021, AJ, 162, 227, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac2902

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac2902 2021

  12. [12]

    2026, A&A, 706, A276, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202558680

    Fenucci, M., Novakovi´ c, B., Granvik, M., & Zhang, P. 2026, A&A, 706, A276, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202558680

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202558680 2026

  13. [13]

    2006, Science, 312, 1330, doi: 10.1126/science.1125841

    Fujiwara, A., Kawaguchi, J., Yeomans, D., et al. 2006, Science, 312, 1330, doi: 10.1126/science.1125841

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1125841 2006

  14. [14]

    J., & Kelley, M

    Gaffey, M. J., & Kelley, M. S. 2004, in Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, 1812

    2004

  15. [15]

    D., Bohlin, R., Sloan, G

    Gordon, K. D., Bohlin, R., Sloan, G. C., et al. 2022, AJ, 163, 267, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac66dc

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac66dc 2022

  16. [16]

    Harris, A. W. 1989, in Lunar and Planetary Science

    1989

  17. [17]

    Harris, A. W. 1998, Icarus, 131, 291, doi: 10.1006/icar.1997.5865

    work page doi:10.1006/icar.1997.5865 1998

  18. [18]

    D., Buratti, B

    Hicks, M. D., Buratti, B. J., Lawrence, K. J., et al. 2014, Icarus, 235, 60, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2013.11.011

    work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2013.11.011 2014

  19. [19]

    Hirabayashi, M., & Scheeres, D. J. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 798, L8, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/798/1/L8

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/798/1/l8 2015

  20. [20]

    2023, AJ, 166, 178, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acf8cc

    Hu, S., Li, B., Jiang, H., Bao, G., & Ji, J. 2023, AJ, 166, 178, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acf8cc

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/acf8cc 2023

  21. [21]

    2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 819, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02258-z

    Jiao, Y., Cheng, B., Huang, Y., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 819, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02258-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-024-02258-z 2024

  22. [22]

    2019, in EPSC-DPS Joint Meeting 2019, Vol

    Jin, W., Li, F., Yan, J., et al. 2019, in EPSC-DPS Joint Meeting 2019, Vol. 2019, EPSC–DPS2019–1485

    2019

  23. [23]

    Kareta, T., Fuentes-Mu˜ noz, O., Moskovitz, N., Farnocchia, D., & Sharkey, B. N. L. 2025, ApJL, 979, L8, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad9ea8

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad9ea8 2025

  24. [24]

    A., & Spencer, J

    Lebofsky, L. A., & Spencer, J. R. 1989, in Asteroids II, ed. R. P. Binzel, T. Gehrels, & M. S. Matthews, 128–147

    1989

  25. [26]

    2019, Scientia Sinica Physica, Mechanica & Astronomica, 49, 084508, doi: 10.1360/SSPMA-2019-0028

    Li, X., Qiao, D., Huang, J., Han, H., & Meng, L. 2019, Scientia Sinica Physica, Mechanica & Astronomica, 49, 084508, doi: 10.1360/SSPMA-2019-0028

    work page doi:10.1360/sspma-2019-0028 2019

  26. [27]

    M., Pentik¨ ainen, H., Uvarova, E., et al

    MacLennan, E. M., Pentik¨ ainen, H., Uvarova, E., et al. 2026, A&A, 707, A131, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556031

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556031 2026

  27. [28]

    Mommert, M., Jedicke, R., & Trilling, D. E. 2018, AJ, 155, 74, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aaa23b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aaa23b 2018

  28. [29]

    2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed

    Reddy, V., Dunn, T. L., Thomas, C. A., Moskovitz, N. A., & Burbine, T. H. 2015, in Asteroids IV, ed. P. Michel, F. E. DeMeo, & W. F. Bottke, 43–63, doi: 10.2458/azu uapress 9780816532131-ch003

    work page doi:10.2458/azu 2015

  29. [30]

    2017, in AAS/Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting Abstracts, Vol

    Reddy, V., Kuhn, O., Thirouin, A., et al. 2017, in AAS/Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 49, AAS/Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting Abstracts #49, 204.07

    2017

  30. [31]

    P., et al

    Reddy, V., Le Corre, L., O’Brien, D. P., et al. 2012, Icarus, 221, 544, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2012.08.011

    work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2012.08.011 2012

  31. [32]

    S., de Wit, J., Micheli, M., et al

    Rivkin, A. S., de Wit, J., Micheli, M., et al. 2026, Research Notes of the AAS, 10, 52, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/ae4fb4

    work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/ae4fb4 2026

  32. [33]

    2025, PSJ, 6, 69, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/adb95d

    Battle, A. 2025, PSJ, 6, 69, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/adb95d

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/adb95d 2025

  33. [34]

    A., Thomas, C., Reddy, V., et al

    Sanchez, J. A., Thomas, C., Reddy, V., et al. 2020, AJ, 159, 146, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab723f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab723f 2020

  34. [35]

    J., & S´ anchez, P

    Scheeres, D. J., & S´ anchez, P. 2018, Progress in Earth and Planetary Science, 5, 25, doi: 10.1186/s40645-018-0182-9

    work page doi:10.1186/s40645-018-0182-9 2018

  35. [36]

    Sharkey, B. N. L., Rivkin, A. S., Cartwright, R. J., et al. 2025, PSJ, 6, 242, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/ae04dd

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/ae04dd 2025

  36. [37]

    Sharkey, B. N. L., Reddy, V., Malhotra, R., et al. 2021, Communications Earth and Environment, 2, 231, doi: 10.1038/s43247-021-00303-7

    work page doi:10.1038/s43247-021-00303-7 2021

  37. [38]

    Tholen, D. J. 1989, in Asteroids II, ed. R. P. Binzel, T. Gehrels, & M. S. Matthews, 1139–1150

    1989

  38. [39]

    2016, in AAS/Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting Abstracts, Vol

    Micheli, M. 2016, in AAS/Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 48, AAS/Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting Abstracts #48, 311.05 8

    2016

  39. [40]

    Mandell, A. M. 2018, JQSRT, 217, 86, doi: 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2018.05.023

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1016/j.jqsrt.2018.05.023 2018

  40. [41]

    E., Emery, J

    Wong, I., Brown, M. E., Emery, J. P., et al. 2024, PSJ, 5, 87, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/ad2fc3 9 T able 1.Per-dither observational circumstances and reflected irradiances Exposure Mid-Time ∆ (au) r (au) Phase ( ◦) Integrated Irradiance (mJy) 2026-02-09 01:41:01.820 0.17340 1.06615 61.4763 1.766±0.076 2026-02-09 01:54:38.844 0.17340 1.06616 61.4722 1.803±0.096 202...

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/ad2fc3 2024