Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 53 references

Impact chronology of leftover planetesimals

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Ancient Mars-crossing planetesimals, not later asteroid-belt objects, explain the Moon's cratering chronology, with about 0.015 Earth masses left over at the Moon's formation.

desk verdict Solid dynamical comparison with an honest framework, but the Archean calibration inverts lost vs. surviving fraction, so the headline mass estimate and the τ4=300 Myr rejection do not survive the current write-up. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.08499 v3 pith:QRMOB7RT submitted 2025-06-10 astro-ph.EP

R. Brasser This is my paper
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords impactchronologyleftoverplanetesimalslunarcraterMars-crossersArcheanspherulebedsterrestrialplanetformationN-bodysimulationse-foldingtime
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper argues that the steadily declining cratering rate recorded on the Moon and Mars was set by planetesimals left over from terrestrial planet formation, not by later asteroid-belt or E-belt sources. It simulates the 1-billion-year dynamical evolution of leftover populations from three formation models and finds that the cumulative impact record is a sum of exponentials with e-folding times clustering near 10, 35, 100, and more than 200 million years. The ~100-million-year term matches modern lunar and martian crater chronologies, so the paper concludes that the ancient crater record mostly records impacts by Mars-crossing leftover planetesimals. Calibrating against known Archean spherule beds, it infers about $0.015\,M_\oplus$ of leftover planetesimals at the time of the Moon's formation, with Earth-crossers initially at most half as numerous as Mars-crossers. A sympathetic reader would care because this ties the observed crater chronology to a specific, testable dynamical population and constrains models of how the terrestrial planets formed.

What carries the argument

The central object is the multi-exponential fit $F(>t)=\sum_{i=1}^N \alpha_i e^{-t/\tau_i}$ applied to cumulative impacts and to the surviving fraction of planetesimals. The fitted e-folding times cluster at $\tau_1\sim 10$ Myr, $\tau_2\sim 35$ Myr, $\tau_3\sim 100$ Myr, and $\tau_4>200$ Myr, and the paper assigns each to a dynamical mechanism: high-eccentricity Earth-crossers and the $\nu_6$ secular resonance, ordinary Earth and Venus crossers, Mars-crossers, and bodies leaking onto Mars-crossing orbits from beyond Mars. This decomposition carries the argument because it connects the observed ~100\,--\,150 Myr decline of the crater record to the $\tau_3$ term, implying that the impacting population was Mars-crossers. The other load-bearing element is the Archean spherule calibration: impactor diameters from Johnson \& Melosh (2012) are converted with a size-frequency slope of $-2$ to counts of $D>1$ km impacts, and the cratering-rate formula $\dot{C}=P_E |r| N$ links the observed spherule beds to the primordial population size.

What would settle it

A concrete test would be to find additional Archean spherule beds older than 2 Ga that are missing from the Glass & Simonson (2012) list, or to measure a size-frequency slope for the ancient impactor population that differs from $-2$; either would change the inferred primordial mass and could shift the balance between leftover planetesimals and the E-belt.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the lunar crater chronology, with its e-folding time near 145\,--\,150 Myr, is the signature of an ancient population of Mars-crossing leftover planetesimals whose dynamical loss timescale $\tau_3 \approx 100$ Myr matches the chronology's decline. The author runs GENGA simulations of leftovers from three models (Grand Tack, Depleted Disc, Implantation) and fits cumulative impacts with $F(>t)=\sum_i \alpha_i e^{-t/\tau_i}$, finding four robust timescales assigned to distinct dynamical sinks. Using the known Archean spherule beds, converted through Johnson \& Melosh impactor diameters, the paper derives an average Archean impact rate of $11.5\,\mathrm{Myr}^{-1}$ for $D>1$ km impactors, and from that a primordial leftover mass of about $0.015\,M_\oplus$. It concludes that roughly 75\% of the Archean spherule impacts came from leftover planetesimals rather than the E-belt, and that the initial perihelion distribution -- specifically a low fraction of Earth-crossers relative to Mars-crossers -- controls the rate of decline. The Depleted Disc model is discounted because it leaves too much mass in the inner main belt after 1 Gyr.

Load-bearing premise

The whole calibration assumes the known Archean spherule-bed list is complete and that a single $-2$ size-frequency slope converts impactor diameters into $D>1$ km impact counts; the author explicitly says he will treat the list as complete even though completeness is unclear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The lunar and martian crater chronologies become direct records of the decay of leftover planetesimals, so their e-folding times constrain the dynamical state of the inner Solar System at 4.5 Ga.
  • The Archean spherule beds are mostly explained by leftover planetesimals rather than the E-belt, with the E-belt contributing roughly a quarter of the impacts.
  • The primordial leftover population of about $0.015\,M_\oplus$ provides a target for late-accretion budgets, including highly siderophile element inventories of the Moon and terrestrial planets.
  • The requirement that Earth-crossers were at most half as numerous as Mars-crossers at the Moon-forming time rules out formation models that leave a large Earth-crossing population, including the Depleted Disc model as configured here.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper, if the spherule list is incomplete then the $0.015\,M_\oplus$ estimate is a lower bound; a more complete Archean impact record would raise the required primordial leftover population.
  • Beyond the paper, the same four-timescale decomposition gives a concrete prediction for Mars: the Werner chronology's slower decline corresponds to a lower initial Earth-crosser fraction, which future crater dating on Mars could test.
  • Beyond the paper, finding that a smooth $\tau_3$ decline explains the lunar record weakens the case for a distinct late heavy bombardment spike, a distinction that lunar sample age distributions could help discriminate.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper simulates the 1 Gyr dynamical evolution of leftover planetesimals from three terrestrial-planet formation models (Grand Tack, Depleted Disc, and Asteroid-Belt Implantation) using the GENGA N-body integrator. It fits the cumulative impact counts on Earth and Mars and the surviving planetesimal fraction as sums of exponentials, finding clustered e-folding times near 10, 35, 100, and >200 Myr. These are attributed to distinct removal mechanisms: high-eccentricity Earth-crossers and the nu6 resonance, Earth-crossers, Mars-crossers, and objects leaking from beyond Mars. The paper uses Archean spherule-bed data to calibrate the absolute impactor population and concludes that Archean impacts were mostly supplied by leftover planetesimals, that the primordial leftover mass at the Moon-forming epoch was about 0.015 Earth masses, and that the initial number of Earth-crossers must have been at most half that of Mars-crossers.

Significance. If the quantitative conclusions held, the paper would provide a useful link between dynamical models of terrestrial planet formation and lunar/Martian crater chronologies. The simulation campaign is extensive: three formation models, 16 simulations each, 131k test particles per model, 1 Gyr integrations, and a Monte Carlo check of the Earth/Venus scattering lifetime. The multi-exponential decomposition and the association of each timescale with a specific dynamical class are valuable and appear internally consistent. However, the headline mass estimate and the source apportionment rest on a calibration step in Section 4 that contains an arithmetic inversion, and on completeness assumptions that the author explicitly acknowledges. These quantitative claims are currently not supported by the calculation as written, although the underlying simulation results may still be sound.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 4, after Eq. (5)] The derivation of the 3.47 Ga population is arithmetically inconsistent. The text states that 227k lost objects 'represent a decline of 63%' with tau4 = 1.5 Gyr and Delta t = 1.47 Gyr; the lost fraction is 1 - exp(-1.47/1.5) = 0.62, so the population at 3.47 Ga should be 227k / 0.62 ≈ 3.6e5. The quoted value of 617k instead corresponds to dividing by exp(-1.47/1.5) ≈ 0.37, i.e., treating 227k as the surviving population. This error propagates to the inferred primordial population: with 1% surviving to 3.47 Ga, the initial number is about 36 million, not 60 million, and the inferred mass is about 0.009 Earth masses, not 0.015. The same inversion invalidates the rejection of tau4 = 300 Myr: for tau4 = 300 Myr the 3.47 Ga population is 227k / [1 - exp(-1.47/0.3)] ≈ 2.3e5 and the primordial mass is about 0.006 Earth masses, which is not 'implausibly large'. All conclusions in Sections 4 and 5 that use 617k or 0.015 Earth masses must be recomputed.
  2. [Section 4, Table 2] The quantitative calibration assumes that the Glass & Simonson (2012) spherule-bed list is complete and that a single size-frequency slope of -2 converts each observed impactor diameter to a cumulative count of D > 1 km impactors. The author explicitly states 'It is not clear whether this list is complete, but I will treat it as such.' These assumptions are load-bearing: an incomplete record, a slope that varies with size, or a break in the SFD would change the 227k normalization and hence the inferred primordial mass. The paper does not quantify the sensitivity to either assumption. The author should either justify completeness quantitatively or present the mass and source-apportionment results as a range bracketing plausible incompleteness and SFD variations.
  3. [Section 4, final paragraph] The statement that Archean impacts were 'predominantly (~75%)' supplied by leftover planetesimals is not supported by the numbers presented. From the paper's own values, the leftover reservoir supplies 617k / (617k + 340k) ≈ 64% of the required objects, and with the corrected 3.47 Ga population from the first comment the share is about 52%. The E-belt comparison also uses a different impact probability and assumes no collisional evolution, so the relative apportionment is not derived on a common basis. The 75% figure and the conclusion that leftover planetesimals dominate the Archean impacts need to be re-derived explicitly, with corrected numbers and stated assumptions.
  4. [Sections 3.2 and 5] The conclusion that the number of Earth-crossers at the Moon-forming epoch had to be at most half that of Mars-crossers is not derived from a controlled variation of initial conditions. The paper only compares three fixed formation models whose initial Earth-crossing fractions are 70% (GT), 50% (ABI), and 35% (DD); it never varies the perihelion distribution independently while holding other parameters fixed. The inference from tau3 ≈ 100 Myr to an upper bound on the Earth-crosser fraction is therefore an interpretation of the models rather than a demonstrated, falsifiable constraint. A quantitative test, such as resampling the initial perihelion distribution to enforce different Earth-crosser-to-Mars-crosser ratios and checking which values reproduce both tau3 and the spherule-bed normalization, is needed before this can stand as a conclusion.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 2] The initial Earth-crossing fraction for the Depleted Disc model is given as 30% in Section 2 but as 35% in Section 3.2; these values should be reconciled.
  2. [Section 2, Fig. 2 caption] 'An example of this cloning in shown in Fig. 2' should read 'is shown in Fig. 2'.
  3. [Section 3.2] The sentence 'the difference increase to to 37% for tau1' contains a duplicated word and should read 'the difference increases to 37%'.
  4. [References] The reference for Öpik (1951) lists the journal as 'Pattern Recognition and Image Analysis'; the correct venue is Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, Section A, volume 54, page 165.
  5. [Section 4] The conversion from the D > 1 km count to a mass in Earth masses is not shown; the paper should state the assumed largest object size, density, and SFD upper cutoff that produce 0.015 Earth masses from 60 million objects, so that the corrected mass estimate can be reproduced.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the dynamical fits are self-contained and the Section 4 mass estimate is a labeled calibration; the Section 4 arithmetic inversion is a correctness risk, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The core derivation is self-contained: Sections 2 and 3 simulate three leftover-planetesimal populations with GENGA, fit the cumulative impact and remaining fractions to the multi-exponential form of Eq. (3), and compare the fitted tau3 ~ 100 Myr to the external Neukum/Werner chronologies. Nothing in that chain defines the output in terms of the input; the chronologies are not used to choose the fit parameters. The Section 4 mass estimate is explicitly a calibration rather than a prediction: the paper states that it places a constraint on the initial population using the known Archean spherule beds and discloses that the spherule list is treated as complete. A calibration is not circular if it is labeled as such. The conclusion that Archean impacts were mostly leftover planetesimals rests on comparing the calibrated leftover mass and the E-belt mass against external constraints, which is inverse modeling rather than a self-definitional reduction. The claim that Earth-crossers at the time of the Moon's formation had to be at most half the Mars-crossers is an interpretive inference from the fitted timescales, not a read-off of the initial conditions. The principal genuine problem is an arithmetic inversion in Section 4: the statement that 227k objects represent a 63% decline should give N(3.47 Ga) = 227k/0.63 ~ 360k, not 617k, which is obtained by dividing by the surviving fraction exp(-1.47/1.5). This inflates the inferred mass from roughly 0.009 to 0.015 Earth masses and undermines the stated rejection of tau4 = 300 Myr, where a self-citation (Brasser et al. 2021) is invoked. Because tau4 = 1.5 Gyr is also supported by the paper's own remaining-population fits and by Nesvorny et al. (2017), this self-citation is not load-bearing, and per rule 4 it is not circularity. The Section 4 issue is a correctness and calibration risk, not a circular step.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on a small set of fitted numbers (mass estimate, e-folding times) and several domain assumptions inherited from prior literature or chosen ad hoc (model initial conditions, spherule bed completeness, SFD slope, current planetary configuration). No new physical entities are introduced. The largest unquantified assumption is the completeness and conversion of the spherule bed record.

free parameters (4)
  • Initial leftover planetesimal mass at 4.5 Ga = 0.015 M⊕
    Derived from the Archean spherule bed counts, an assumed Earth impact probability of 7.5%, a size-frequency slope of -2, and a 99% population decline by 1 Gyr.
  • e-folding times and weights in the multi-exponential fit (tau_i, alpha_i) = tau1~10 Myr, tau2~35 Myr, tau3~100 Myr, tau4>200 Myr; alpha_i as in Table 1
    Fitted to the cumulative impact and remaining-fraction curves from the simulations; these are descriptive outputs, not derived from first principles, but they are used to identify physical mechanisms.
  • Kernel width in KDE cloning of initial conditions = 0.005
    Chosen by trial and error to prevent the eccentricity distribution from widening too much; affects the generated initial conditions.
  • Perihelion and aphelion filter thresholds for initial conditions = q<2 au (2.1 au for DD), Q<4.5 au
    Hand-chosen cuts on the planetesimal population; the text is ambiguous about whether q<2 au is retained or removed, which is internally inconsistent with the figures.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The three terrestrial planet formation models (Grand Tack, Depleted Disc, Implantation) provide representative leftover planetesimal populations 60 Myr after the start of the simulations.
    The initial conditions for the 1 Gyr integrations are snapshots from these models; they are not independently reproduced in this paper and come from the author's private database.
  • ad hoc to paper The current planetary configuration (Mercury through Neptune plus Vesta and Ceres) can be used for the 1 Gyr integration.
    Section 2 acknowledges 'this procedure gravitationally shocks the orbits of the test particles', and no alternative is offered; the validity of this approximation is assumed.
  • domain assumption The Archean spherule bed list of Glass & Simonson (2012) is complete and the Johnson & Melosh (2012) impactor diameter estimates are correct.
    Section 4 states 'It is not clear whether this list is complete, but I will treat it as such'; the mass estimate depends directly on this assumption.
  • domain assumption The impactor size-frequency distribution has a differential slope of -2, used to convert impactor diameters to the number of impacts with D>1 km.
    Section 4 uses this slope without independent justification; it directly sets the normalization of the inferred impactor population.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Impact chronology of leftover planetesimals." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QRMOB7RT

@misc{pith2026250608499,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Impact chronology of leftover planetesimals},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QRMOB7RT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.08499}
}
read the original abstract

After the formation of the Moon the terrestrial planets were pummelled by impacts from planetesimals left over from terrestrial planet formation. This work attempts to reproduce the impact rates set by modern crater chronologies using leftover planetesimals from three different dynamical models of terrestrial planet formation. I ran dynamical simulations for 1 billion years using leftover planetesimals from the Grand Tack, Depleted Disc and Implantation models of terrestrial planet formation with the GENGA N-body integrator. I fit the cumulative impacts on the Earth and Mars using a function that is a sum of exponentials with different weighing factors and e-folding times. Most fits require three or four terms. The fitted timescales cluster around t1=10 Myr, t2=35 Myr, t3=100 Myr and t4>200 Myr. I attribute them to dynamical losses of planetesimals through different mechanisms: high-eccentricity Earth crossers and the nu6 secular resonance, Earth crossers, Mars crossers, and objects leaking on to Mars crossing orbits from beyond Mars. I place a constraint on the initial population using the known Archean terrestrial spherule beds, and I conclude that the Archean impacts were mostly created by leftover planetesimals. The inferred mass in leftover planetesimals at the time of the Moon's formation was about 0.015 Earth masses. The third time constant is comparable to that of modern crater chronologies. As such, the crater chronologies are indicative of impacts by an ancient population of Mars crossers. The initial perihelion distribution of the leftovers is a major factor in setting the rate of decline: to reproduce the current crater chronologies the number of Earth crossers at the time of the Moon's formation had to be at most half of the Mars crossers. These results together place constraints on dynamical models of terrestrial planet formation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.08499 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Initial conditions of leftover planetesimals for the various models. Top row: semi-major axis versus eccentricity. The grey, orange, blue, and red lines denote the eccentricity required to cross the orbits of Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars, respectively. The colour coding is a proxy for the inclination, indicated by the colour bar. Bottom row: cumulative distributions in perihelion, inclination, and semi-major axis… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Initial conditions and clones using KernelDensity sampling for the GT model. The black dots show the initial distribution, and the red dots are the clones. orbits: Mercury to Neptune, plus dwarf planets Vesta and Ceres. I realise that the orbits and masses of the current planets are different from those that existed in the planet formation simulations; this procedure gravitationally shocks the orbits of the test par… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Snapshots of the dynamical evolution of leftover planetesimals for the ABI model. The panels are for different times (in Myr), as indicated by the titles. Each panel depicts semi-major axis versus eccentricity, with the colours depicting the inclination, as indicated by the colourbar. A different visualisation of the evolution of the planetesimals is shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Snapshots at 1 Gyr of the planetesimals showing the semi-major axis versus inclination compared to the actual main belt. The red lines are the ν16 and ν6 secular resonances. Panel titles indicate the model used. Asteroid belt data were downloaded from AstDys-2. all cam…
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Heat maps of the dynamical evolution of planetesimals showing the semi-major axis versus perihelion for all three models: GT (top), ABI (middle), and DD (bottom). The density increases from blue to red, with blue dots indicating few planetesimals ventured in a specific…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Left column: Evolution of the cumulative perihelion distribution. Right column: Impacts on Earth (blue) and Mars (red), the fraction of planetesimals remaining (black), and the total planetesimals that are removed (orange) for GT (top), ABI (middle), and DD (bottom). A…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Heat maps of the initial semi-major axis versus eccentricity of planetesimals that are removed at different quartiles during the simulation. Red and blue lines indicate Mars- and Earth-crossing orbits. The top four panels are for the GT model and the bottom four panels…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Cumulative distribution of the dynamical lifetime of planetesi￾mals scattered by the Earth and Venus using the Monte Carlo method of Arnold (1965), which relies on Öpik’s equations. The median lifetime is close to the value of τ2 found from numerical simulations. To ca…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    H., Nakajima, M., Wünnemann, K., Helhoski, S., & Trail, D

    Allen, N. H., Nakajima, M., Wünnemann, K., Helhoski, S., & Trail, D. 2022, Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets, 127, e2022JE007186

    work page 2022

  2. [2]

    Arnold, J. R. 1965, ApJ, 141, 1536

    work page 1965

  3. [3]

    F., Levison, H

    Bottke, W. F., Levison, H. F., Nesvorný, D., & Dones, L. 2007, Icarus, 190, 203

    work page 2007

  4. [4]

    F., Morbidelli, A., Jedicke, R., et al

    Bottke, W. F., Morbidelli, A., Jedicke, R., et al. 2002, Icarus, 156, 399

    2002

  5. [5]

    F., V okrouhlický, D., Minton, D., et al

    Bottke, W. F., V okrouhlický, D., Minton, D., et al. 2012, Nature, 485, 78

    work page 2012

  6. [6]

    2025, A&A, 694, A318

    Brasser, R. 2025, A&A, 694, A318

    work page 2025

  7. [7]

    J., & Werner, S

    Brasser, R., Matsumura, S., Ida, S., Mojzsis, S. J., & Werner, S. C. 2016, ApJ, 821, 75

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    J., Werner, S

    Brasser, R., Mojzsis, S. J., Werner, S. C., & Abramov, O. 2021, Icarus, 361, 114389

    work page 2021

Show all 53 references
  1. [9]

    C., & Mojzsis, S

    Brasser, R., Werner, S. C., & Mojzsis, S. J. 2020, Icarus, 338, 113514

    2020

  2. [10]

    W., & Werner, S

    Brasser, R., Wong, E. W., & Werner, S. C. 2025, A&A, 695, A276

    2025

  3. [11]

    Chambers, J. E. 2001, Icarus, 152, 205

    2001

  4. [12]

    2017, Nature, 541, 521

    Dauphas, N. 2017, Nature, 541, 521

    2017

  5. [13]

    Day, J. M. D., Walker, R. J., Qin, L., & Rumble, III, D. 2012, Nature Geoscience, 5, 614

    2012

  6. [14]

    J., et al

    Dones, L., Gladman, B., Melosh, H. J., et al. 1999, Icarus, 142, 509

    1999

  7. [15]

    Duncan, M. J. & Levison, H. F. 1997, Science, 276, 1670

    1997

  8. [16]

    J., Levison, H

    Duncan, M. J., Levison, H. F., & Budd, S. M. 1995, AJ, 110, 3073

    1995

  9. [17]

    & V okrouhlický, D

    Farinella, P. & V okrouhlický, D. 1999, Science, 283, 1507

    1999

  10. [18]

    Farinella, P., V okrouhlický, D., & Hartmann, W. K. 1998, Icarus, 132, 378 Fernández, J. A. & Helal, M. 2023, Icarus, 394, 115398

    1998

  11. [19]

    J., Migliorini, F., Morbidelli, A., et al

    Gladman, B. J., Migliorini, F., Morbidelli, A., et al. 1997, Science, 277, 197

    1997

  12. [20]

    Glass, B. P. & Simonson, B. M. 2012, Elements, 8, 43

    2012

  13. [21]

    F., Tsiganis, K., & Morbidelli, A

    Gomes, R., Levison, H. F., Tsiganis, K., & Morbidelli, A. 2005, Nature, 435, 466

    2005

  14. [22]

    2018, Icarus, 312, 181

    Granvik, M., Morbidelli, A., Jedicke, R., et al. 2018, Icarus, 312, 181

    2018

  15. [23]

    Grimm, S. L. & Stadel, J. G. 2014, ApJ, 796, 23

    2014

  16. [24]

    L., Stadel, J

    Grimm, S. L., Stadel, J. G., Brasser, R., Meier, M. M. M., & Mordasini, C. 2022, ApJ, 932, 124

    2022

  17. [25]

    Hansen, B. M. S. 2009, ApJ, 703, 1131

    2009

  18. [26]

    S., ˇCrne, A

    Huber, M. S., ˇCrne, A. E., McDonald, I., et al. 2014, Geology, 42, 375

    2014

  19. [27]

    C., & Tsuchida, M

    Izidoro, A., Haghighipour, N., Winter, O. C., & Tsuchida, M. 2014, ApJ, 782, 31

    2014

  20. [28]

    Johnson, B. C. & Melosh, H. J. 2012, Nature, 485, 75

    2012

  21. [29]

    2021, Space Sci

    Lammer, H., Brasser, R., Johansen, A., Scherf, M., & Leitzinger, M. 2021, Space Sci. Rev., 217, 7

    2021

  22. [30]

    & Brasser, R

    Mah, J. & Brasser, R. 2021, Icarus, 354, 114052

    2021

  23. [31]

    2000, Icarus, 145, 332

    Michel, P., Migliorini, F., Morbidelli, A., & Zappalà, V . 2000, Icarus, 145, 332

    2000

  24. [32]

    1998, Science, 281, 2022

    Migliorini, F., Michel, P., Morbidelli, A., Nesvorny, D., & Zappala, V . 1998, Science, 281, 2022

    1998

  25. [33]

    Minton, D. A. & Malhotra, R. 2010, Icarus, 207, 744

    2010

  26. [34]

    & Gladman, B

    Morbidelli, A. & Gladman, B. 1998, Meteoritics and Space Science, 33, 999

    1998

  27. [35]

    & Nesvorný, D

    Morbidelli, A. & Nesvorný, D. 1999, Icarus, 139, 295

    1999

  28. [36]

    2018, Icarus, 305, 262

    Morbidelli, A., Nesvorný, D., Laurenz, V ., et al. 2018, Icarus, 305, 262

    2018

  29. [37]

    2012, Icarus, 219, 737 Nesvorný, D

    Morbidelli, A., Tsiganis, K., Batygin, K., Crida, A., & Gomes, R. 2012, Icarus, 219, 737 Nesvorný, D. & Morbidelli, A. 1998, AJ, 116, 3029 Nesvorný, D., Roig, F., & Bottke, W. F. 2017, AJ, 153, 103 Nesvorný, D., Roig, F. V ., V okrouhlický, D., et al. 2022, ApJ, 941, L9

    2012

  30. [38]

    A., & Hartmann, W

    Neukum, G., Ivanov, B. A., & Hartmann, W. K. 2001, Space Sci. Rev., 96, 55

    2001

  31. [39]

    1975, Moon, 12, 201 O’Brien, D

    Neukum, G., Koenig, B., & Arkani-Hamed, J. 1975, Moon, 12, 201 O’Brien, D. P., Morbidelli, A., & Levison, H. F. 2006, Icarus, 184, 39 Öpik, E. J. 1951, Pattern Recognition and Image Analysis, 54, 165

    1975

  32. [40]

    2011, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825

    Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., et al. 2011, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825

    2011

  33. [41]

    N., O’Brien, D

    Raymond, S. N., O’Brien, D. P., Morbidelli, A., & Kaib, N. A. 2009, Icarus, 203, 644

    2009

  34. [42]

    N., Quinn, T., & Lunine, J

    Raymond, S. N., Quinn, T., & Lunine, J. I. 2006, Icarus, 183, 265

    2006

  35. [43]

    Simonson, B. M. & Glass, B. P. 2004, Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci., 32, 329

    2004

  36. [44]

    B., Froeschlé, C., & Gonczi, R

    Valsecchi, G. B., Froeschlé, C., & Gonczi, R. 1997, Planet. Space Sci., 45, 1561

    1997

  37. [45]

    B., Milani, A., Gronchi, G

    Valsecchi, G. B., Milani, A., Gronchi, G. F., & Chesley, S. R. 2003, A&A, 408, 1179 V okrouhlický, D. & Farinella, P. 1998, AJ, 116, 2032 V okrouhlický, D. & Farinella, P. 1999, AJ, 118, 3049 V okrouhlický, D. & Farinella, P. 2000, Nature, 407, 606

    2003

  38. [46]

    Walsh, K. J. & Levison, H. F. 2019, Icarus, 329, 88

    2019

  39. [47]

    J., Morbidelli, A., Raymond, S

    Walsh, K. J., Morbidelli, A., Raymond, S. N., O’Brien, D. P., & Mandell, A. M. 2011, Nature, 475, 206

    2011

  40. [48]

    Werner, S. C. 2019, Meteoritics and Space Science, 54, 1182

    2019

  41. [49]

    C., Bultel, B., & Rolf, T

    Werner, S. C., Bultel, B., & Rolf, T. 2023, The Planetary Science Journal, 4, 147

    2023

  42. [50]

    C., Ody, A., & Poulet, F

    Werner, S. C., Ody, A., & Poulet, F. 2014, Science, 343, 1343

    2014

  43. [51]

    Wetherill, G. W. 1977, Lunar and Planetary Science Conference Proceedings, 1, 1

    1977

  44. [52]

    Williams, J. G. & Faulkner, J. 1981, Icarus, 46, 390

    1981

  45. [53]

    Woo, J. M. Y ., Grimm, S., Brasser, R., & Stadel, J. 2021, Icarus, 359, 114305 Article number, page 12 of 12

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.