Comparing the data reduction pipelines of FRIPON, DFN, WMPL, and AMOS: Geminids Case Study
Fuente:
arXiv
Gespeichert in:
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Veröffentlicht: |
2025
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| _version_ | 1866908610322235392 |
|---|---|
| author | Shober, P. M. Vaubaillon, J. Anghel, S. Devillepoix, H. A. R. Hlobik, F. Matlovič, P. Tóth, J. Vida, D. Sansom, E. K. Jansen-Sturgeon, T. Colas, F. Malgoyre, A. Kornoš, L. Ďuriš, F. Pazderová, V. Bouley, S. Zanda, B. Vernazza, P. |
| author_facet | Shober, P. M. Vaubaillon, J. Anghel, S. Devillepoix, H. A. R. Hlobik, F. Matlovič, P. Tóth, J. Vida, D. Sansom, E. K. Jansen-Sturgeon, T. Colas, F. Malgoyre, A. Kornoš, L. Ďuriš, F. Pazderová, V. Bouley, S. Zanda, B. Vernazza, P. |
| contents | Methods. We processed a dataset of 584 Geminid fireballs observed by FRIPON between 2016 and 2023. The single-station astrometric data is converted into the Global Fireball Exchange (GFE) standard format for uniform processing. We assess variations in trajectory, velocity, radiant, and orbital element calculations across the pipelines and compare them to previously published Geminid measurements.
Results. The radiant and velocity solutions provided by the four data reduction pipelines are all within the range of previously published values. However, there are some nuances. Particularly, the radiants estimated by WMPL, DFN, and AMOS are nearly identical. Whereas FRIPON reports a systematic shift in right ascension (-0.3 degrees), caused by improper handling of the precession. Additionally, the FRIPON data reduction pipeline also tends to overestimate the initial velocity (+0.3 km s-1) due to the deceleration model used as the velocity solver. The FRIPON velocity method relies on having a well-constrained deceleration profile; however, for the Geminids, many are low-deceleration events, leading to an overestimation of the initial velocity. On the other end of the spectrum, the DFN tends to predict lower velocities, particularly for poorly observed events. However, this velocity shift vanishes for the DFN when we only consider Geminids with at least three observations or more. The primary difference identified in the analysis concerns the velocity uncertainties. Despite all four pipelines achieving similar residuals between their trajectories and observations, their velocity uncertainties vary systematically, with WMPL outputting the smallest values, followed by AMOS, FRIPON, and DFN. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2510_21690 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Comparing the data reduction pipelines of FRIPON, DFN, WMPL, and AMOS: Geminids Case Study Shober, P. M. Vaubaillon, J. Anghel, S. Devillepoix, H. A. R. Hlobik, F. Matlovič, P. Tóth, J. Vida, D. Sansom, E. K. Jansen-Sturgeon, T. Colas, F. Malgoyre, A. Kornoš, L. Ďuriš, F. Pazderová, V. Bouley, S. Zanda, B. Vernazza, P. Earth and Planetary Astrophysics Instrumentation and Methods for Astrophysics Methods. We processed a dataset of 584 Geminid fireballs observed by FRIPON between 2016 and 2023. The single-station astrometric data is converted into the Global Fireball Exchange (GFE) standard format for uniform processing. We assess variations in trajectory, velocity, radiant, and orbital element calculations across the pipelines and compare them to previously published Geminid measurements. Results. The radiant and velocity solutions provided by the four data reduction pipelines are all within the range of previously published values. However, there are some nuances. Particularly, the radiants estimated by WMPL, DFN, and AMOS are nearly identical. Whereas FRIPON reports a systematic shift in right ascension (-0.3 degrees), caused by improper handling of the precession. Additionally, the FRIPON data reduction pipeline also tends to overestimate the initial velocity (+0.3 km s-1) due to the deceleration model used as the velocity solver. The FRIPON velocity method relies on having a well-constrained deceleration profile; however, for the Geminids, many are low-deceleration events, leading to an overestimation of the initial velocity. On the other end of the spectrum, the DFN tends to predict lower velocities, particularly for poorly observed events. However, this velocity shift vanishes for the DFN when we only consider Geminids with at least three observations or more. The primary difference identified in the analysis concerns the velocity uncertainties. Despite all four pipelines achieving similar residuals between their trajectories and observations, their velocity uncertainties vary systematically, with WMPL outputting the smallest values, followed by AMOS, FRIPON, and DFN. |
| title | Comparing the data reduction pipelines of FRIPON, DFN, WMPL, and AMOS: Geminids Case Study |
| topic | Earth and Planetary Astrophysics Instrumentation and Methods for Astrophysics |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.21690 |