pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.27501 · v1 · pith:WV3JW34Mnew · submitted 2026-05-26 · 🌌 astro-ph.EP · astro-ph.GA· astro-ph.IM

SPHEREx confirms predictions for artificial satellite trail pollution in Low Earth Orbit

Alejandro S. Borlaff , Pamela M. Marcum , Steve B. Howell , Pablo M. S\'anchez-Alarc\'on , David Dubois , Jonathan McDowell This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 15:03 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.GAastro-ph.IM
keywords satellite trailslight pollutionSPHERExLow Earth Orbitspace telescopesastronomical observationsimage contamination
0
0 comments X

The pith

SPHEREx observations confirm satellite trails already contaminate 73 percent of its images, matching published pollution models.

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

The paper reports SPHEREx space telescope data collected from May to September 2025 and uses it to test earlier simulations of satellite trail contamination in low Earth orbit. Those simulations had predicted that trails would appear in up to 96 percent of images once all planned satellite constellations launch. The SPHEREx measurements found trails in 73.3 percent of exposures with an average of 2.18 trails per image, and the trails showed the expected highly inclined paths. This match supplies direct observational support for the models and for concerns about degraded data quality in space astronomy. The authors also discuss mitigation steps during data reduction and issue updated forecasts for Hubble and SPHEREx that incorporate newer satellite proposals from 2026.

Core claim

SPHEREx observations obtained between May and September 2025 indicate that 73.3^{+1.3}_{-1.2}% of the images already show satellite trail contamination, with an average number of N=2.18^{+0.11}_{-0.09} trails per exposure, providing observational validation of the published light contamination models. The observed satellite trails display highly inclined trajectories in agreement with the simulated ones.

What carries the argument

Statistical comparison of the fraction and number of satellite trails detected in SPHEREx images against predictions from published light-contamination simulations of LEO satellite constellations.

If this is right

  • If all satellite constellations in current launch manifests reach orbit, trails will appear in up to 96 percent of images from most space telescopes.
  • Data reduction pipelines can apply mitigation methods to reduce the impact of some trails on science data.
  • Updated forecasts for Hubble and SPHEREx that include 2026-proposed constellations show continued growth in contamination rates.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Space telescope scheduling algorithms may need to incorporate real-time avoidance of predicted satellite passes to protect critical exposures.
  • Large-scale survey programs that rely on many short exposures could lose a substantial fraction of their data to trails unless mitigation improves.
  • Ground-based wide-field surveys may experience analogous contamination on clear nights when low-Earth-orbit satellites cross the field of view.

Load-bearing premise

The bright linear features identified in the SPHEREx images are produced by artificial satellites and the sampled exposures represent the overall contamination rate across the mission.

What would settle it

An independent re-analysis of the same SPHEREx dataset that attributes most of the linear features to non-satellite sources and reports a contamination fraction below 50 percent would falsify the validation result.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.27501 by Alejandro S. Borlaff, David Dubois, Jonathan McDowell, Pablo M. S\'anchez-Alarc\'on, Pamela M. Marcum, Steve B. Howell.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Example of satellite trail identification on one of the SPHEREx exposures. Exposure ID: 2025W18 1B 0393 3 (Obs. date: 2025-07-17 T22:12:03.217). From bottom to top, left to right: Band 1: (λ = 0.75−1.09 µm); Band 2: (λ = 1.10−1.62 µm); Band 3: (λ = 1.63 − 2.41 µm); Band 4: (λ = 2.42 − 3.82 µm); Band 5: (λ = 3.83 − 4.41 µm); Band 6: (λ = 4.42 − 5.00 µm). gion of the sky (α, δ = 342.7, -57.8) on different sp… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Examples of the different morphologies of artificial satellite trails in SPHEREx science images. Brighter events tend to display broader trails with low signal residuals in their cores due to the effect of sample up-the-ramp (SUR) algorithm. Labels on each panel display the observation ID. tribution. No statistical differences were found between the simulated and the observed trails (p = 0.40). The number … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Distribution of artificial satellite trails in SPHEREx science images. Left (blue) and right (red) panels represents the observations and simulated SPHEREx results. Main panel: Histogram of number of trails per exposure. The average number of trails is 2.18+0.11 −0.09 in the observations, and 2.19+0.18 −0.17 trails per image in the simulations. Polar subpanel: Histogram of satellite trail directions on equ… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Average number of satellite trails per exposure observed in SPHEREx observations compared against the predicted trail rate from B25, as a function of the population of artificial satellites in Earth orbit (lower x−axis) and epoch (upper x−axis). Blue diamond: Observed average number of satellite trails in SPHEREx images. The different lines represent simulated models for the following observatories. Blue: … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Average satellite trail surface brightness spectral energy distribution as a function of the physical size of the satellites in Low Earth Orbit. Estimations obtained following the photometric model from B25, including Sunshine, Earthshine, Moonshine, thermal black-body radiation from the satellites (T = 280 ± 3K) and reflected thermal emission from the Earth (T = 290 K) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The number of artificial satellites in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) is increasing at an exponential rate since 2019. Satellites are visible to both ground and space telescopes, and their bright emission in optical, infrared, and radio-wavelengths contaminate astronomical observations, degrading the data's scientific value. Recent simulations forecast that if all satellite constellations listed in current launch manifests are deployed to LEO, satellite trails will appear in up to 96\% of the images obtained by most space telescopes. In this article, we use the recently launched SPHEREx space telescope to corroborate these models. SPHEREx observations obtained between May and September 2025 indicate that $73.3^{+1.3}_{-1.2}\%$ of the images already show satellite trail contamination, with an average number of $N=2.18^{+0.11}_{-0.09}$ trails per exposure, providing observational validation of the published light contamination models. The observed satellite trails display highly inclined trajectories in agreement with the simulated ones. We discuss potential data reduction mitigation methods, and provide an updated satellite light pollution forecast for \emph{Hubble} and SPHEREx including the newer satellite constellations proposed in early 2026.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper reports SPHEREx observations from May–September 2025 showing satellite trail contamination in 73.3^{+1.3}_{-1.2}% of images with an average of N=2.18^{+0.11}_{-0.09} trails per exposure. These data are presented as direct observational validation of prior simulations forecasting up to 96% contamination for full LEO constellations, with additional discussion of mitigation strategies and updated forecasts for Hubble and SPHEREx incorporating 2026 launch manifests. The observed trails are stated to exhibit highly inclined trajectories matching the simulations.

Significance. If the trail identifications are robust and the sample is representative, the result supplies the first direct observational anchor for satellite-light-pollution models that have previously been simulation-only. This would be a high-impact datum for observatory planning, exposure-time calculators, and policy discussions on mega-constellations, especially given the explicit numerical agreement quoted with uncertainties.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3] §3 (Results) and abstract: the headline fractions (73.3% contaminated images, N=2.18 trails/exposure) are load-bearing for the validation claim, yet the text supplies no description of the linear-feature detection algorithm, its false-positive rate against cosmic rays, asteroids, or instrumental streaks, or any control-sample tests. Without these, the numerical match to the models cannot be evaluated as confirmatory.
  2. [§2.3] §2.3 (Data selection) and §4 (Discussion): the claim that the May–Sep 2025 SPHEREx pointing and wavelength sample is unbiased with respect to the model assumptions is stated but not demonstrated; no table or figure compares the observed orbital inclinations or exposure parameters against the simulation priors used for the 96% forecast.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the phrase “providing observational validation” is used before the methods for trail attribution are described; this phrasing should be qualified until the identification pipeline is shown.
  2. [Figure 2] Figure 2 (trajectory comparison): axis labels and legend entries are too small for print; the inclination histogram should include the model prediction as an overlaid curve with a quantitative Kolmogorov–Smirnov statistic.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thoughtful review and constructive comments, which have helped us strengthen the manuscript. We address each major comment below and have made revisions to incorporate the requested details.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3] §3 (Results) and abstract: the headline fractions (73.3% contaminated images, N=2.18 trails/exposure) are load-bearing for the validation claim, yet the text supplies no description of the linear-feature detection algorithm, its false-positive rate against cosmic rays, asteroids, or instrumental streaks, or any control-sample tests. Without these, the numerical match to the models cannot be evaluated as confirmatory.

    Authors: We agree that the absence of a detailed description of the linear-feature detection algorithm limits the ability to evaluate the robustness of the reported fractions. In the revised manuscript, we will add a dedicated subsection in §3 describing the algorithm, its implementation, and quantitative false-positive rate estimates obtained from control samples of SPHEREx exposures. These controls will explicitly test performance against cosmic rays, asteroids, and instrumental streaks, allowing readers to assess the reliability of the 73.3% and N=2.18 values in the context of the model validation. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§2.3] §2.3 (Data selection) and §4 (Discussion): the claim that the May–Sep 2025 SPHEREx pointing and wavelength sample is unbiased with respect to the model assumptions is stated but not demonstrated; no table or figure compares the observed orbital inclinations or exposure parameters against the simulation priors used for the 96% forecast.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the manuscript states the sample is representative but does not provide a direct comparison. We will add a new figure and accompanying text in §2.3 (with reference in §4) that overlays the observed distributions of orbital inclinations and exposure parameters from the May–September 2025 SPHEREx data against the priors used in the simulation models for the 96% forecast. This will explicitly demonstrate the degree of agreement and support the unbiased sampling claim. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; new observations independently validate prior models

full rationale

The paper reports fresh SPHEREx telescope data (May–Sep 2025) yielding 73.3% contaminated images and N=2.18 trails/exposure, presented as direct observational corroboration of previously published simulation forecasts. These quantities are extracted from the new images rather than obtained by fitting parameters to the models or by any self-referential equation. No load-bearing self-citation chain, ansatz smuggling, or renaming of known results is visible; the validation step remains externally falsifiable by the telescope measurements themselves.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No information on free parameters, axioms, or invented entities is available from the abstract alone.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5776 in / 1051 out tokens · 42056 ms · 2026-06-29T15:03:04.186362+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Streak detection in the VST/OmegaCAM archive using deep learning

    astro-ph.IM 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    A two-stage deep learning pipeline (HT-LCNN detector + VGG6 classifier) trained on augmented real and simulated data detects streaks in OmegaCAM frames with F1 > 0.95 on test sets and 0.99 precision on real 2023 data,...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    P., Tollerud, E

    Ag¨ uera y Arcas, B., Beals, T., Biggs, M., et al. 2025, Towards a future space-based, highly scalable AI infrastructure system design,, Google 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: ...

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 2025

  2. [2]

    A&A , author =

    Bassa, C. G., Di Vruno, F., Winkel, B., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, L10, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451856

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451856 2024

  3. [3]

    2024, In-situ observations of resident space objects with the CHEOPS space telescope,, arXiv:2411.18326 doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.18326

    Billot, N., Hellmich, S., Benz, W., et al. 2024, In-situ observations of resident space objects with the CHEOPS space telescope,, arXiv:2411.18326 doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.18326

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2411.18326 2024

  4. [4]

    J., Aboobaker, A

    Bock, J. J., Aboobaker, A. M., Adamo, J., et al. 2026, ApJ, 999, 139, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae2be2

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae2be2 2026

  5. [5]

    C., Wright, E., Lawler, S., Hickson, P., & Balam, D

    Boley, A. C., Wright, E., Lawler, S., Hickson, P., & Balam, D. 2022, AJ, 163, 199, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac5599

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac5599 2022

  6. [6]

    Nature , author =

    Borlaff, A. S., Marcum, P. M., & Howell, S. B. 2025, Nature, 648, 51, doi: 10.1038/s41586-025-09759-5

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-025-09759-5 2025

  7. [7]

    Borncamp, D., & Lim, P. L. 2016, Satellite Detection in Advanced Camera for Surveys/Wide Field Channel Images,, Instrument Science Report ACS 2016-01, 10 pages

    2016

  8. [8]

    M., Soto, A

    Corbett, H., Law, N. M., Soto, A. V., et al. 2020, ApJ, 903, L27, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abbee5

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abbee5 2020

  9. [9]

    P., Werner, M., Akeson, R., et al

    Crill, B. P., Werner, M., Akeson, R., et al. 2020, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 11443, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2020: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, ed. M. Lystrup & M. D. Perrin, 114430I, doi: 10.1117/12.2567224 Di Vruno, F., Winkel, B., Bassa, C. G., et al. 2023, A&A, 676, A75,...

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2567224 2020

  10. [10]

    M., Masters, D

    Feder, R. M., Masters, D. C., Lee, B., et al. 2024, ApJ, 972, 68, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad596d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad596d 2024

  11. [11]

    P., Huang, Z., Nomura, K.-i., & Wang, J

    Ferreira, J. P., Huang, Z., Nomura, K.-i., & Wang, J. 2024, Geophys. Res. Lett., 51, e2024GL109280, doi: 10.1029/2024GL109280

    work page doi:10.1029/2024gl109280 2024

  12. [12]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =

    Grigg, D., Tingay, S. J., & Sokolowski, M. 2025, A&A, 699, A307, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554787

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554787 2025

  13. [13]

    J., Sokolowski, M., et al

    Grigg, D., Tingay, S. J., Sokolowski, M., et al. 2023, A&A, 678, L6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347654

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347654 2023

  14. [14]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =

    Hainaut, O. R., & Williams, A. P. 2020, A&A, 636, A121, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037501

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202037501 2020

  15. [15]

    2022, MNRAS, 516, 1502, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2080

    Furfaro, R. 2022, MNRAS, 516, 1502, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2080

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2080 2022

  16. [16]

    2021, SATCON2: Executive Summary

    Hall, J., Walker, C., Rawls, M., et al. 2021, SATCON2: Executive Summary

    2021

  17. [17]

    2020, ApJ, 905, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc695

    Horiuchi, T., Hanayama, H., & Ohishi, M. 2020, ApJ, 905, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc695

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abc695 2020

  18. [18]

    2006, Air and Water Pollution: Burden and Strategies for Control,, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK11769/# Oxford University Press

    Kjellstrom, T., Lodh, M., McMichael, T., et al. 2006, Air and Water Pollution: Burden and Strategies for Control,, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK11769/# Oxford University Press

    2006

  19. [19]

    Nat , author =

    Kruk, S., Garcia-Martin, P., Popescu, M., et al. 2023, Nature, 7, 262, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-01903-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-023-01903-3 2023

  20. [20]

    Rosenlof, K. H. 2025, NewA, 130, 2024JD042442, doi: 10.1029/2024JD042442

    work page doi:10.1029/2024jd042442 2025

  21. [21]

    McDowell, J. C. 2020, ApJ, 892, L36, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab8016

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab8016 2020

  22. [22]

    Observatory, S. A. 2000, SAOImage DS9: A utility for displaying astronomical images in the X11 window environment,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:0003.002

    2000

  23. [23]

    Office, E. S. D. 2025, ESA Space Environment Report 2025,, European Space Agency

    2025

  24. [24]

    2025, AcA, 236, 770, doi: 10.1016/j.actaastro.2025.07.027

    Pavanello, Z., De Maria, L., De Vittori, A., et al. 2025, AcA, 236, 770, doi: 10.1016/j.actaastro.2025.07.027

    work page doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2025.07.027 2025

  25. [25]

    E., Bannister, M

    Revell, L. E., Bannister, M. T., Brown, T. F. M., et al. 2025, Science, 8, 212, doi: 10.1038/s41612-025-01098-6

    work page doi:10.1038/s41612-025-01098-6 2025

  26. [26]

    2019, Skyfield: High precision research-grade positions for planets and Earth satellites generator, SPHEREx Team

    Rhodes, B. 2019, Skyfield: High precision research-grade positions for planets and Earth satellites generator, SPHEREx Team. 2025a, SPHEREx Quick Release Spectral

    2019

  27. [27]

    2025b, SPHEREx Quick Release Spectral Images - QR2, IPAC, doi: 10.26131/IRSA652

    Images, IPAC, doi: 10.26131/IRSA629 SPHEREx Team. 2025b, SPHEREx Quick Release Spectral Images - QR2, IPAC, doi: 10.26131/IRSA652

    work page doi:10.26131/irsa629

  28. [28]

    V., Grogin, N., Ryon, J., & Lucas, R

    Stark, D. V., Grogin, N., Ryon, J., & Lucas, R. 2022, Improved Identification of Satellite Trails in ACS/WFC Imaging Using a Modified Radon Transform,, Instrument Science Report ACS 2022-8, 25 pages

    2022

  29. [29]

    A&A , author =

    Stoppa, F., Groot, P. J., Stuik, R., et al. 2024, A&A, 692, A199, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451663 13 Row number Units Label Description 1· · ·ID Source identifier 2 deg ra Right Ascension in decimal degrees of the identified trail (J2000) 3 deg dec Declination in decimal degrees of the identified trail (J2000) 4 deg pa Position angle of the trail in equa...

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451663 2024

  30. [30]

    2021, A&A, 647, A54, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039364

    Tregloan-Reed, J., Otarola, A., Unda-Sanzana, E., et al. 2021, A&A, 647, A54, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039364

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039364 2021

  31. [31]

    Anthony and Ivezić, Zeljko and Bradshaw, Andrew and Rawls, Meredith L

    Tyson, J. A., Ivezi´ c, v., Bradshaw, A., et al. 2020, AJ, 160, 226, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abba3e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abba3e 2020

  32. [32]

    UNESCO, C. S. M. o. E. 1994, Human rights for future generations, Universidad de la Laguna

    1994

  33. [33]

    Bulletin of the AAS , author =

    Walker, C., Hall, J., Allen, L., et al. 2020, Impact of Satellite Constellations on Optical Astronomy and Recommendations Toward Mitigations, doi: 10.3847/25c2cfeb.346793b8

    work page doi:10.3847/25c2cfeb.346793b8 2020

  34. [34]

    2022, NewA, 8, 011010, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.8.1.011010

    Wayth, R., Sokolowski, M., Broderick, J., et al. 2022, NewA, 8, 011010, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.8.1.011010

    work page doi:10.1117/1.jatis.8.1.011010 2022

  35. [35]

    2016, NewA, 5, 1650007, doi: 10.1142/S2251171716500070

    Zemcov, M., Crill, B., Ryan, M., & Staniszewski, Z. 2016, NewA, 5, 1650007, doi: 10.1142/S2251171716500070

    work page doi:10.1142/s2251171716500070 2016