Inversion of HIPPARCOS and Gaia photometric data for asteroids - Asteroid rotational properties from sparse photometric data

Free Access

Table A.3

Results of photometric inversion of GDR2 photometric data for asteroids numbered up to 500, using both a regular triaxial ellipsoid shape model and a cellinoid shape model.

Object	No. of GDR2	Known	Rotation period (h)	Rotation period (h)	Notes
	measurements	Rotation period (h)	from data inversion	from data inversion
			(triaxial ellipsoid)	(cellinoid shape)
216	17	5.385	5.3854	5.3855	Present also in HIPPARCOS data set.
					Triaxial ellipsoid pole consistent
					with ground-based determinations.
511	23	5.1297	5.1300	5.1290	Present also in HIPPARCOS data set.
					Possible inversion of sense of spin
					in the triaxial ellipsoid solution.

26	39	13.110	–	13.1106	Pole solution compatible with
					ground-based estimates, but with
					inverted sense of rotation.
48	32	11.89	11.8946	11.8903	Cellinoid pole solution compatible
					with ground-based estimates,
					but with inverted sense ofrotation.
52	28	5.6304	–	5.6248	Pole solution different from
					ground-based determinations.
54	28	7.024	7.0117	7.0224	Pole ambiguity.
79	36	5.978	5.9601	–	Pole longitude 180° ambiguity.
95	30	8.705	8.7015	8.7049	Pole ambiguity.
123	26	10.04	–	–	Multiple solutions, no good one.
154	41	25.224	25.2672	25.2481	Triaxial ellipsoid shape finds
					an opposite sense of spin with respect
					to (few) ground-based estimates.
155	28	7.9597	7.9592	7.9592	Poor agreement with ground-based
					pole solutions.
156	33	22.37	–	–	Best solutions give P = 22.11 h.
159	36	24.476	24.4792	24.4780	Pole unknown for this object.
165	31	7.226	–	7.1723	Pole solution in agreement with
					ground-based estimates.
183	31	11.77	11.7691	11.7690	Triaxial ellipsoid pole solution in
					partial agreement with ground-based
					estimates.
188	26	11.98	11.9770	–	Pole solution in partial agreement
					with ground-based estimates.
190	28	6.52	–	6.5187	Pole solution not very far from
					ground-based estimates, but inverse
					sense of rotation.
204	38	19.489	–	19.4868	Pole unknown for this object.
205	46	14.911	–	14.9039	Pole unknown for this object.
213	41	8.045	–	–	Pole unknown for this object.
217	29	25.272	25.2553	–	An alternative period solution
					exists. Pole unknown.
226	36	11.147	–	11.1436	Pole longitude 180° away from
					published ground-based solution.
236	33	12.336	–	12.3452	Computed pole far from (only one)
					ground-based solution.
260	28	8.29	8.2904	8.2905	Good agreement with ground-based
					pole solution.
264	31	9.2276	–	–	Strange ecliptic longitude – mag
					data distribution.
271	31	18.787	18.7866	18.7866	Good agreement with ground-based
					pole solution.
276	34	6.315	6.3191	6.3195	Good agreement with ground-based
					pole solution.
277	30	29.69	29.6927	–	Pole in agreement with some
					ground-based solutions.
295	32	10.730	21.4103	10.7055	Triaxial ellipsoid solution gives
					P ≃ 2P(ground-based).
					Pole unknown for this object.
300	28	6.8423	–	–	Pole unknown for this object.
318	29	42.49	–	–	Pole unknown for this object.
323	26	9.463	–	–	Pole unknown for this object.
340	51	8.0062	8.0060	8.0062	Cellinoid pole close ground-based
					solution. Uncertain sense of spin.
348	31	7.3812	7.3835	7.3840	More than one pole solution.
					Pole unknown for this object.
350	38	9.178	–	9.1817	Pole solution in agreement with
					ground-based estimate.
362	28	16.92	16.9272	16.9256	Alternative P solutions exist for
					triaxial ellipsoid shape.
					Cellinoid pole solution far from
					ground-based estimate.
388	27	9.516	9.5124	–	Equivalent (slightly better) period
					solutions exist.
					Pole unknown for this object.
399	37	9.136	9.1463	9.1463	Different pole solutions.
411	30	11.344	22.7024	10.4431	Triaxial ellipsoid solution gives
					P ≃ 2P(ground-based). Different
					pole solutions, all in disagreement with
					ground-based estimates.
441	36	10.446	10.4430	10.4431	Triaxial ellipsoid pole solution in good
					agreement with ground-based solutions.
445	29	19.97	19.9762	–	Pole unknown for this object.

Notes. Only asteroids that have a number of Gaia measurements >25 are listed. The exceptions are (216) Kleopatra and (511) Davida, for which HIPPARCOS data were also available. As shown in Table A.1, HIPPARCOS-based inversion was successful for Kleopatra and unsuccessful for Davida, whereas using GDR2 data,this asteroid can be successfully inverted as well. No estimate of the error bars in the obtained periods are given for the reasons explained in the text.

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.