
TL;DR
This paper compares the performance of various NEO search telescopes using simplified physical models, providing insights into their relative effectiveness and the factors influencing their detection capabilities.
Contribution
It introduces a straightforward method to estimate and compare NEO search performance across different telescopes and models, addressing limitations of complex simulation codes.
Findings
Ground-based LSST and space-based instruments show differing detection efficiencies.
Infrared telescopes may struggle with tumbling asteroids.
Performance metrics vary significantly with asteroid distribution models.
Abstract
Multiple terrestrial and space-based telescopes have been proposed for detecting and tracking near-Earth objects (NEOs). Detailed simulations of the search performance of these systems have used complex computer codes that are not widely available, which hinders accurate cross-comparison of the proposals and obscures whether they have consistent assumptions. Moreover, some proposed instruments would survey infrared (IR) bands, whereas others would operate in the visible band, and differences among asteroid thermal and visible light models used in the simulations further complicate like-to-like comparisons. I use simple physical principles to estimate basic performance metrics for the ground-based Large Synoptic Survey Telescope and three space-based instruments - Sentinel, NEOCam, and a Cubesat constellation. The performance is measured against two different NEO distributions, the…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
