ASTEROID LIGHTCURVE DATABASE (LCDB) EXTENDED NOTES GENERATED: Oct 01, 2023 ASTEROID LIGHTCURVE DATABASE (LCDB) EXTENDED NOTES GENERATED: Oct 01, 2023 1 Ceres Drummond 2014 D_equatorial: 967 ± 10 km; D_polar: 892 ± 10 km. AKARI This note applies to all 'AKARI' details records. The Usui (2011) paper (AKARI/IRC Survey) used H values from Lowell Observatory's ASTORB file and assumed ± 0.05 mag error. In some cases, using the stated values for albedo and diameter in the standard formulae to compute H (see LCDB README) does not give the ASTORB value of H, usually differing by 0.01-0.02 mag. 2 Pallas Carry 2010a Density = 3.4 ± 0.9 g/cc. Dimensions: a = 275 ± 4 km; b = 258 ± 3 km; c = 238 ± 3 km. Durech 2011a This applies to all entries for Durech 2011a. All but 14 of the spin axis values in Durech 2011a are assumed values taken from the literature. See the original paper for specifics. Hanus 2017b Hanus 2017b is based on combining photometric, adaptive optics, and occulation observations. 3 Juno Pravec 2012b This note applies to all Pravec 2012b entries. In almost all cases, the original Pravec values were H_R. The H_V values were derived using assumed V-R values from various sources based on known taxonomic class or orbital position. If a diameter and albedo are given, these are revised values based on the original WISE H, G, D, and pV, corrected using the new H-G values and Harris and Harris (1997). Pal 2020 This applies to all records from Pal 2019 Period and amplitude errors were not included in the original data set. During the mass import of their results table, the period error was set to five units of the last decimal place. The amplitude error was set to 20% of the reported amplitude. The errors are a general guide only and should not be considered valid for statisitcal studies unless after reviewing the original plots. These are available at: http://archive.konkoly.hu/pub/tssys/dr1/object_plots/ 4 Vesta Fornasier 2011b Observations made from Rosetta spacecraft. Hasegawa 2014b H_B: 3.96 ± 0.01, G_B: 0.30 ± 0.02; H_SZ: 3.08 ± 0.02, G_SZ: 0.25 ± 0.01. 5 Astraea Durech 2009 The pole (126, +40) agrees well with occultation profiles. Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 6 Hebe Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Marsset 2017 Marsset 2017 combined photometric, adaptive optics, and occultation data. Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 7 Iris Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 8 Flora Torppa 2003 The sidereal period is believed incorrect (see Durech entry from DAMIT web site). The pole solution is still in close agreement with other solutions. Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from occultation-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Colazo 2021d This applies to all Colazo 2021d entries. There are up to three details entries per object: 1) H-G using Gaia GR magnitudes, 2) H-G with GR magnitudes transformed to V and adding ground-based data to include phase angles < 10 deg, and 3) H-G1,G2 using the same magnitudes as in 2. Only results where there were valid numbers for H and HErr and the G or G1/G2 errors were <= 1.0 were included in the LCDB entries. H/HErr were rounded to two decimal places and G/GErr values were rounded to three decimal places. For a new summary record, the MPCOrb values are used for H and G for groups 1 and 3. This provides the necessary consitency for H when generating frequency-diameter plots from LCDB data, which have have been historically based on the H(V)-G system. For the Details record, the H Band is 'GR' for group 1 and 'V' for groups 2 and 3. To help convey that the V magnitudes were derived from GR and assumed V-R magnitudes, the H Method is 'D' (Derived). The G Method will be empty for groups 1 and 2 since, regardless Colazo 2021d This applies to all Colazo 2021d entries. There are up to three details entries per object: 1) H-G using Gaia GR magnitudes, 2) H-G with GR magnitudes transformed to V and adding ground-based data to include phase angles < 10 deg, and 3) H-G1,G2 using the same magnitudes as in 2. Only results where there were valid numbers for H and HErr and the G or G1/G2 errors were <= 1.0 were included in the LCDB entries. H/HErr were rounded to two decimal places and G/GErr values were rounded to three decimal places. For a new summary record, the MPCOrb values are used for H and G for groups 1 and 3. This provides the necessary consitency for H when generating frequency-diameter plots from LCDB data, which have have been historically based on the H(V)-G system. For the Details record, the H Band is 'GR' for group 1 and 'V' for groups 2 and 3. To help convey that the V magnitudes were derived from GR and assumed V-R magnitudes, the H Method is 'D' (Derived). The G Method will be empty for groups 1 and 2 since, regardless 9 Metis Durech 2011web Pole solution verified by Keck AO and occulation observations. Drummond 2012 Effective diameter derived from ellipsoid of 218x175x129 km. 10 Hygiea Durech 2011a Second pole solution (312,-42) gives a diameter of 443 ± 45 km. This is not the preferred solution. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 11 Parthenope Mahlke 2021 The errors for H, G1, G2 are the larger of the HDI 95% values given for each parameter. In many cases, there are two entries for each asteroid, one for the c(yan) and the other for the o(range) ATLAS filter. The taxonomic class is on the Bus-DeMeo system was taken from various references. This work did not determine class independently. 13 Egeria Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Masiero 2017 The albedo error given for Masiero 2017 is the maximum possible value when converting from albedo values from log space to value space. 14 Irene Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Colazo 2021d This applies to all Colazo 2021d entries. There are up to three details entries per object: 1) H-G using Gaia GR magnitudes, 2) H-G with GR magnitudes transformed to V and adding ground-based data to include phase angles < 10 deg, and 3) H-G1,G2 using the same magnitudes as in 2. Only results where there were valid numbers for H and HErr and the G or G1/G2 errors were <= 1.0 were included in the LCDB entries. H/HErr were rounded to two decimal places and G/GErr values were rounded to three decimal places. For a new summary record, the MPCOrb values are used for H and G for groups 1 and 3. This provides the necessary consitency for H when generating frequency-diameter plots from LCDB data, which have have been historically based on the H(V)-G system. For the Details record, the H Band is 'GR' for group 1 and 'V' for groups 2 and 3. To help convey that the V magnitudes were derived from GR and assumed V-R magnitudes, the H Method is 'D' (Derived). The G Method will be empty for groups 1 and 2 since, regardless Martikainen 2021 This applies to all Martikainen 2021 entries (A 649, A98). Of the 492 asteroids in their tables, only 312 were included in the LCDB: those where H_G, G1, and G2 were found. They found that H_G and H_V had a strong 1:1 correlation, i.e., in almost all cases, the two values were essentially the same. For the Details records, the taxonomic class given by Martikainen et al. has a suffix of '(T)' (Tholen) or '(BDM)' Bus-DeMeo. The phase angle is the average of the min/max phase angles. The PAB values could not be computed. No errors were given for G1/G2. They have been assumed to be 0.05. Since the results are based in part on dense lightcurves, the Survey flag was set to LCI-D even though sparse Gaia data were included. 15 Eunomia Hanus 2012a Diameter derived from combined LC inversion model and adaptive optics data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 16 Psyche Durech 2011a Second pole solution (213,1) has a slightly larger error bar (36 km) for the diameter. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from occultation-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 17 Thetis Behrend 2007web Originally reported P = 12.27 ± 0.05. Updated in 2011. Behrend 2011web Originally reported P = 12.259 ± 0.007 h. Updated in 2011 with additional data. 19 Fortuna Durech 2011web Pole confirmed by HST and occultation observations. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Veres 2015 Veres et al. (2015) from Pan-STARRS photometry. The value for G is G12, not G1, and so the G2 values are NULL. 21 Lutetia Belskaya 2010a The period given was adopted from work by Faury (2008). Carry 2010b Shape model is non-convex. Durech 2017 Durech 2017: Combined photometric and thermal data. 22 Kalliope Descamps 2008a Linus D = 28 ± 2 km. Kalliope a = 117.5, b = 82, c = 62 km. Marchis 2008c D(Linus) > 22 km Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Stephens 2022c Based on data set that combined two observing runs about 10 days apart. 23 Thalia Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 27 Euterpe Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 28 Bellona Behrend 2006web Originally reported as 16.3 h. Behrend 2007web Originally reported as 16.32 h. Behrend 2008web Originally reported as 16.623 h. Modified to fit period found with 2012 data. Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 29 Amphitrite Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 30 Urania Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 31 Euphrosyne Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 32 Pomona Behrend 2008web Originally reported with P = 7.1. Updated in 2011 to fit period found with 2011 data (11.7 h). Updated in 2016 to fit period found from 2016 data. Behrend 2011web Originally reported P = 7.1 h. Updated in 2011 to fit period found from 2011 data. Updated in 2016 to force fit to period found from 2016 data. Behrend 2012web Originally reported 11.7 h. Changed to force a fit to period found from 2016 data. 34 Circe Durech 2011a Second pole (275,51) gives a diameter of 107 ± 10 km. The two solutions are about equally likely. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 35 Leukothea Pilcher 2009d Pole solution was determined using 'amplitude-aspect' method. 36 Atalante Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 37 Fides Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 39 Laetitia Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 40 Harmonia Hanus 2012a Diameter derived from combined LC inversion model and adaptive optics data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 41 Daphne Conrad 2008b Discovey of S/2008 (41) 1. Matter 2011 The diameter is based on a non-convex model using lightcurves and AO images. A convex model gives an effective diameter of 194-209 km. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 42 Isis Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 45 Eugenia Merline 1999 Discovery of S/1998 (45) 1 Marchis 2006c Detection of known satellite. Marchis 2007 Discovery of second satellite. D ~ 6 km. Hanus 2012a Diameter derived from combined LC inversion model and adaptive optics data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 47 Aglaja Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 50 Virginia Fornasier 2011a The taxonomic classes given by Fornasier et al. are on the Tholen system. 52 Europa Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Merline 2013a Diameter and albedo based on a rocky body. An equally likely solution assuming a collection of bare rock slabs gives D = 0.004 ± 0.001 km and pV = 0.45 ± 0.35. 53 Kalypso Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 54 Alexandra Torppa 2008a Sidereal period is for (307, 20) solution. Durech 2011a The second pole solution (156,13) is the least preferred. It also gives a different diameter of 135 ± 20 km and sidereal period of 7.022641 h. Durech 2011web The pole solution (318, +23) has P_sidereal = 7.022649 h. Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from occultation-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 62 Erato Yeh 2020 For Yeh 2020, the amplitude error was found with max(0.01, 0.1*YehAmp) Jiang 2021 This note applies to all Jiang 2021 entries. The diameter error is the larger of a two, non-linear error values. 68 Leto Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 69 Hesperia Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 70 Panopaea Wilawer 2022 This applies to all Wilawer 2022 (MNRAS 513, 3242-3251): The observations for each asteroid spanned several months. The phase and PAB angles are for the first date of the observations (Zero phase). Period errors were not given and so assumed to be 2 units of the last decimal place. 72 Feronia Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 80 Sappho Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 81 Terpsichore Timerson 2010 The diameter was calculated from the a/b values for the best-fit ellipse. It represents a minimum value. Timerson 2010 The diameter was calculated from the a/b values for the best-fit ellipse. It represents a minimum value. 82 Alkmene Timerson 2015 Occultation profile gives ellipsoid of 62.8 ± 0.9 x 55.4 ± 0.9 km. Effecitve diameter is based on area of the ellipse. The shape supports model 146 on the DAMIT site (http://astro.troja.mff.cuni.cz/projects/asteroids3D/web.php) 83 Beatrix Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 85 Io Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 87 Sylvia Behrend 2012web Single lightcurve from data spanning two months. The amplitude, and possibly synodic period, seemed to have changed over the interval. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Carry 2021 Multiple lightcurves from 1978-08-30 to 2008-04-01. 88 Thisbe Durech 2011a The second pole solution (247,50) gives a slightly larger effective diameter: 220 ± 16 km. This is the least preferred solution. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from occultation-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 89 Julia Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 90 Antiope Merline 2000a Discovery of satellite. Bartczak 2014 D1: 80.8 ± 1.8 km. D2: 80.4 ± 1.8 km. Separation: 174 ± 4 km. 93 Minerva Torppa 2008a Sidereal period is for (49, -40) pole solution. Marchis 2009 Estimated sizes: S1 4km; S2 3 km. Behrend 2011web Originally reported as P = 5.98 ± 0.05 h. Forced in 2012 to agree with period found using 2012 data. Marchis 2011a D_MinervaI = 4 ± 2 km. D_MinervaII = 3 ± 1 km. P_Orb(MI) = 57.79 h. P_Orb(MII) = 26.74 h. 94 Aurora Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 97 Klotho Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 99 Dike Waszczak 2015 Waszczak (2016) H values are based on G12 system. The G12 value is given instead of G and carries 'G' for the source flag. The LCDB U value is based on the Waszczak et al. 'relflag' value, with relflag = 0 given U = 1 and relflag = 1 given U = 2 103 Hera Wang 2019 G2: 0.45(1) 105 Artemis Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 107 Camilla Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Marsset 2016 Discovery of second satellite. Pajuelo 2018a Orbital period in binaries table is for S1. S2 108 Hecuba Behrend 2005web Originally reported 19.8 h. Updated in 2016 to fit new period. 114 Kassandra Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 119 Althaea Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 121 Hermione Descamps 2009a Pole (4, +13) has P_sidereal = 5.550878 h and is based on non-convex model. 125 Liberatrix Durech 2007 The pole (280, +74) has P_sidereal = 3.968199 h. 126 Velleda Behrend 2011web Originally reported P = 5.36 ± 0.05 h, A = 0.05 ± 0.01 mag. Updated in 2011 after additional data obtained. 128 Nemesis Doubled period (~78 h) cannot be formally excluded. Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 129 Antigone Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 130 Elektra Behrend 2001web Originally reported P = 5.43 h. Data forced to fit period found in 2011. Behrend 2009web Period originally reported as 5.43 ± 0.01 h. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Yang 2014 S/2014 (130) 1. Second satellite. Projected separation from primary approx. 550 km. Berdeu 2021 Discovery of third satellite. 132 Aethra Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR This note applies to all Binzel 2019 (2019Icar..324...41B) detail records: For the MITHNEOS method, VIS indicates visible data only. NIR indicates near-infrared data only. VISNIR indicates both. eVISNIR indicates the visible portion of the spectrum is from the Eight-Color Asteroid Survey (ECAS, Zellner et al. 1985) sVis indicates the visible portion of the spectrum is from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS, Ivezic et al. 2001). TAXON indicates the type is reported in the literature; see the source listed in the 'Taxon' reference column of the original file. For visible data only (VIS), the taxonomic type is from the Bus classification system (Bus and Binzel 2002). For visible plus near-infrared data (VISNIR), the taxonomic type is from the Bus-DeMeo classification system (DeMeo et al. 2009). '-comp' refers to the broad taxonomic complex. When multiple taxonomic classes are listed, they are in subjective order of most likely type first. ':' indicates the assignment is 135 Hertha Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 136 Austria Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. Durech 2016 Models from Durech et al. (2016) are posted on the DAMIT web site. http://astro.troja.mff.cuni.cz/projects/asteroids3D/web.php 139 Juewa Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 145 Adeona Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Wang 2018 Sidereal period for pole (122, -3): 15.0733 h 146 Lucina Durech 2009 The pole (305, -41) has P_sidereal = 18.55390 h. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 152 Atala Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 153 Hilda Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html Warner 2021i Model axis ratios (c = 1.0): a/b = 1.14, a/c = 1.4839. 155 Scylla Hanus 2018b The Hanus 2018b entries include results only if they are revisions or rejections of previously reported pole solutions. 158 Koronis Erasmus 2020 This note applies to all Erasmus 2020 (2020ApJS..247...13E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 for a period probability >= 75 and U = 2- for < 75. The family class (C or S) was assigned based on which had the higher probability (if 50, CS was assigned). All family values of Nysa-Polana were assigned to Nysa family. SWF (Sparse Wide-field) was assigned to the Survey entry. 160 Una Marciniak 2009a Pole (308, -41) has P_sidereal = 11.03316 h. 161 Athor Pilcher 2010b Pole solution was determined using 'amplitude-aspect' method. 165 Loreley Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 167 Urda Durech 2011a The second pole solution (107,-69) gives a slightly larger effective diameter: 51 ± 15 km. This is the least preferred solution. 176 Iduna Wang 2018 Sideral period for pole solution (156,+73): 11.29382 h. 178 Belisana Yeh 2020 For Yeh 2020, the amplitude error was found with max(0.01, 0.1*YehAmp) 184 Dejopeja Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 194 Prokne Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 196 Philomela Durech 2007 Pole (276, -49) has P_sidereal = 8.332827 h. 198 Ampella Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 201 Penelope Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 202 Chryseis Behrend 2005web Originally reported P = 11.8 ± 0.5. Updated in 2011. 208 Lacrimosa Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 211 Isolda Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 216 Kleopatra Marchis 2008e AO observations show two satellites, ~5 km and ~3 km. Distances: 650 km and 380 km, respectively. Shepard 2018 DimensionsL 276 x 94 x 178 km 221 Eos Hanus 2018a Hanus 2018 combined optical photometric and IR (WISE) data for shape modeling. Shape modeling quality rating (QF) is from Hanus 2017c. 224 Oceana Behrend 2006web Originally reported P = 18.93 ± 0.05. Updated in 2011. 228 Agathe Szabo 2016 The plots for Szabo 2016a were made available off-line. They were not included in the original paper or in supplemental data. 230 Athamantis Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 238 Hypatia Behrend 2004web Originally reported 8.88 h. Updated in 2011. 239 Adrastea Behrend 2007web Originally reported as 19.846 h. Modified based on results from later observations. 250 Bettina Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 266 Aline Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 271 Penthesilea Podlewska-Gaca 2021 This note applies to all Podlewska-Gaca et al. (2021) Ap. J. Suppl. Ser. 2021, id. 4. The given observation date is the mid-date for runs C9a and C9b. Few lightcurves were published. By default, entries from Table 2 were assigned U = 2; entries from Table 3 were rated U = 2-. entries in Table 4 were also given U = 2- with the errors assumed to be 25% of the listed period. 275 Sapientia Dose 2022c G values in Dose 2022c were derived by finding the value for G that gave the lowest RMS fit to the Fourier curve. The value for G may or may not be consistent with the taxonomic classification. 276 Adelheid Durech 2011a The second pole solution (199,-20) gives a slightly smaller diameter: 117 ± 15 km. The two solutions are about equally likely. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Occultation-inversion gives D = 125 ± 15. 282 Clorinde Dose 2023a The values for G in Dose 2023 (MPB 50, 65-73) were found by minimizing the RMS scatter of a Fourier fit, not by strict calculation. 283 Emma Durech 2011web Pole (251, +22) has P_sidereal = 6.895222 h. 298 Baptistina Carvano 2010 H_R = 10.92 was directly measured value. The H = 11.30 is the result of using H_R and V-R = 0.38 measured by the authors. 302 Clarissa Durech 2011a The first pole solution (28,-72) is preferred. 306 Unitas Durech 2011a The second pole solution (253,-17) gives a slightly larger diameter: 53 ± 5. This is the least preferred solution. 308 Polyxo Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 312 Pierretta Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 317 Roxane Merline 2009 Estimated Ds/Dp: 0.26 (based on magnitude differences). 331 Etheridgea Warner 2010i Presuming the nightly calibrations were correct, the data provide any number of solutions. If the two sessions are forced to overlay, a number of solutions, less than 24 h, are still possible. 345 Tercidina Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 349 Dembowska Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 350 Ornamenta Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 352 Gisela Erasmus 2020 This note applies to all Erasmus 2020 (2020ApJS..247...13E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 for a period probability >= 75 and U = 2- for < 75. The family class (C or S) was assigned based on which had the higher probability (if 50, CS was assigned). All family values of Nysa-Polana were assigned to Nysa family. SWF (Sparse Wide-field) was assigned to the Survey entry. 354 Eleonora Behrend 2001web Originally reported P = 4.3 ± 0.1. Updated in 2011 to fit data to a period found with a different data set. Behrend 2002web Originally reported P = 4.282 ± 0.005, A = 0.52 ± 0.02. Updated in 2011. Behrend 2006web Originally reported P = 4.27750 ± 0.00003 h, A = 0.20 ± 0.01. Updated in 2011. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 355 Gabriella Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 362 Havnia Wang 2015b Period for second pole is 16.918935 ± 0.000043 h. 370 Modestia Athanasopoulos 2022 The orginal paper reported a pole of (268, -92). |Latitude| > 90 deg is not allowed in LCDB. In such a case, 180 deg is added to or subtracted from the longitude and the complimentary latitude is used. In this case, that means latitude = -88 deg. 372 Palma Durech 2011a The second pole solution (44,17) gives a different diameter (198 ± 26 km) and sidereal period (8.58191 h). The two solutions are about as likely. 374 Burgundia Behrend 2018web Two halves of 13-h period are identical, leaving half-period a distinct possibility. 382 Dodona Behrend 2021web The two earliest observation runs were ignored in assigning the U code. They are what appear to be obvious outliers. 386 Siegena Behrend 2004web Period originally reported as 7.6 h. 390 Alma Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 391 Ingeborg Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 394 Arduina Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 409 Aspasia Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Occultation-inversion gives D = 173 ± 17 km. 414 Liriope Chang 2015 Chang (2015) H values are based on H-G system. The G values are in R, not V. All lightcurves rated U=2-3 by Chang were reviewed and a formal U code was assigned by the LCDB authors. The objects in their U = 1 list were all given U = 1. 418 Alemannia Gorby 2018 Results table has incorrect period. 423 Diotima Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 433 Eros Trilling 2010 The Trilling (2010) results are based on using values for H taken from the JPL Horizons site. In Trilling (2010), there is often a significant disagreement among the albedo, diameter, and H values when they are applied to the standard formula that relates these three values (see LCDB README file), i.e., using the Trilling albedo and diameter values gives a differnt value for H than stated, sometimes by up to 0.1 mag. Mueller 2011a H and G taken from other sources. Thomas 2011b This note applies to all entries for Thomas 2011b. Warm Spitzer observations. The error is the larger of the + or - (which were not the same). Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 434 Hungaria Morrison 1979 Morrison values were based on V(1,0) magnitude system. They have been converte Lucas 2017 The Lucas 2017 taxonomic classifications are on the Bus-DeMeo system. Wang 2021 This applies to all Wang & Xu (2021). The pole coordinates and sidereal period uncertanties were not specified. Default errors for longitude and latitude of ± 10 deg were used while the default period error used was 2 units in the last decimal place. 435 Ella Chang 2016 Chang (2016) H values are based on H-G system. The G values are in R, not V. All lightcurves with a period were initially given U = 2 regardless of rating by Chang et al. The plots for the 352 lightcurves that did not have complete coverage were reviewed and the U codes revised. In many of those cases, it appears that the half-period was found. For those, if the summary line depended on the Chang et al. entry, the period on the summary line is double that found by Chang et al. and carries a 'D' (determined) flag in the NOTES field. No errors were given for amplitudes, which were often dramatically overstated. 437 Rhodia Behrend 2005web Originally reported 52.8 h. Updated to fit period found with 2016 data. 444 Gyptis Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 469 Argentina Wang 2003 BIN: Reported possibility of being binary. Considered unreliable. Wang 2005 NPA: Reported secondary period of 8.74 hr. Considered unreliable. 470 Kilia Pilcher 2020f Second period of 119.3 h in lc_npar is one of several possibilities. 471 Papagena Torppa 2008a Sidereal period is for (29, 41) solution. 475 Ocllo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 479 Caprera Behrend 2002web Originally reported P = 5.259 ± 0.002 h, A = 0.34 ± 0.09 h. Updated in 2011 to fit data to a new period found with a different data set. Behrend 2004web Originally reported P = 5.247 ± 0.006 h, A = 0.08 ± 0.01 mag. Updated in 2011 to fit to a new period found from a different data set. Behrend 2007web Originally reported P = 5.2491 ± 0.0002, A = 0.07 ± 0.01 mag. Updated in 2011 to fit data a new period found with a different data set. 488 Kreusa Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 506 Marion Wang 2015b Period for second pole solution is 16.549751 ± 0.000060 511 Davida Conrad 2007 Measured ellipsoid (a,b,c): 357±2, 294±2, 231±50 km. 512 Taurinensis Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 522 Helga Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 531 Zerlina Behrend 2002web Originally reported 7.2 h. Updated to fit period found with 2016 data. 540 Rosamunde Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 544 Jetta Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 550 Senta Behrend 2004web Originally reported 19.584 h. Updated to fit period found in 2016. Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 566 Stereoskopia Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 585 Bilkis Wang 2016 All lightcurves for Wang et al. 2016 were forced to sidereal period and were in intensity units of the inversion model curve, therefore there were no amplitudes in magnitude given. 588 Achilles Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 617 Patroclus Buie 2015 Volume equivalent diameters based on derived ellipsods are D_Patroclus: 113 km; D_Menoetius: 104 km Chatelain 2016 The B-V and V-R magnitudes for the Chatelain 2016 (Icarus 271) were derived from the data table in Appendix A. The median errors for these color indexes in the paper are given, not the actual values for the individual results. The B-R and V-I magnitudes are from Table 3. The B-V and V-R values may not yield the exact numbers of the stated B-R and V-I magnitudes. Berthier 2020 Area-equivalent diameter. 624 Hektor The objects under Sonnett 2015 were observed in the W3 (12 um) band by WISE. The amplitude given is the maximum range of values, not the range of a fitted lightcurve. No periods were given for the data. 636 Erika Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 654 Zelinda Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 676 Melitta Behrend 2002web Originally reported as 8.5734. Behrend 2006web Originally reported as 14.09 h. 694 Ekard Timerson 2010 A least squares fit to the irregular shape derived from the occultation observations and based on a shape model by Torppa et al. (2003) yields the stated diameter. Timerson 2010 A least squares fit to the irregular shape derived from the occultation observations and based on a shape model by Torppa et al. (2003) yields the stated diameter. 699 Hela Behrend 2003web Originally reported 4.765 h. Updated to fit period found with 2016 data. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 702 Alauda Rojo 2011 R_orbit = 1230 km. 704 Interamnia Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 719 Albert Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 727 Nipponia Baxter 2019 Baxter et al. (2019) also reported shape models for each asteroid in their paper, but did not give the sidereal period or pole solution. 728 Leonisis Galad 2010c The lightcurves from Galad 2010c are based on data from the SDSS Moving Object Catalog. 763 Cupido Pilcher 2018d Ambiguous second period. Other possibility is 121 h. 777 Gutemberga Polakis 2018d The ambiuous table includes the half-period for this work. However, given the amplitude and low phase angle, the LCDB authors chose not to include the 'A' flag in the Notes field of this record or the summary line. 786 Bredichina Dose 2021b The period/amplitude given in results table are significantly different from those in the plot. The latter were close to previous results and so adopted for this entry. 809 Lundia Marchis 2012 Hv assumed V-R = 0.54. Bartczak 2017 Reported pole is the pole of the orbit for the fully syncrhonous binary. Amplitudes are for out of eclipse lightcurve. 825 Tanina Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 853 Nansenia Behrend 2001web Originally reported P = 9.31 h. Update in 2011 based on a new period but the solution is still highly ambiguous. 854 Frostia Marchis 2012 Hv assumed V-R = 0.54. 887 Alinda Morrison 1974 Morrison gives D = 5. in his table as well as log(D). The latter results in a value of 5.2 km. We used the latter. Dunlap 1979 The authors give H_v(1,0) = 14.10 ± 0.08. For conversion to the current H-G system, we use Ho = H(1,0) - 0.34. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: eVISNIR Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 901 Brunsia Wisniewski 1997 A period of 3.139 h (with bimodal curve) was also found by Wisniewski but the final paper adopted the triply-periodic value of 4.872 h. 911 Agamemnon Timerson 2013 Ds = 3-10 km. Based on single video observation. 925 Alphonsina Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 939 Isberga Carry 2015 D1: 12.4 ± 2.5 km; Ds: 3.6 ± 0.7 km 951 Gaspra Thomas 1994 Diameter is mean radius of irregular object with principal diam Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 966 Muschi Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 987 Wallia Behrend 2008web Period originally reported as 7.0 h. 1011 Laodamia Apostolovska 2014 a/b: 0.83; b/c: 1.3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1016 Anitra Pilcher 2016f Orbital period an approximate estimate based on four possible mutual events. First entry (Date: Nov 8, 2015) is for full data set covering three months. Subsequent entries are based on subsets. 1036 Ganymed Velichko 2012 Obs date estimated from phase angle given in paper. Velichko 2013 Ellipsoid lengths: a = 960 km, b = 770 km, c = 495 km. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1052 Belgica Franco 2013b Ds/Dp >= 0.36 ± 0.02 Franco 2013c Ds/Dp = 0.36 ± 0.02 Franco 2020e The original paper gives Ds/Dp > 0.34. The 0.16 mag attenuation gives closer to 0.39. The latter is given in the lc_binaries table. 1055 Tynka Behrend 2012web Originally reported as P = 12.8 ± 0.5 h. Fornas 2023a Stepehens data (ALCDEF, 2012 Mar-May) included for analysis. 1061 Paeonia Pilcher 1987 Pilcher's notes for 1986 Dec. 4 show observations form 4:20-8:00 UT with fading by about 0.5 magnitude 5:10-7:00 UT, then brightening by 8:00. For 1986 Dec. 5, 1061 Paeonia was 'fairly easy at 5:20, 6:15, invisible at 7:20, dimly seen again 8:05 at lower altitude. 1065 Amundsenia Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 1069 Planckia Behrend 2006web Originally reported P = 11. h, A = 0.18. Updated in 2011 to fit data to new period. 1070 Tunica Waszczak (2015) H values are based on G12 system. The G12 value is given instead of G and carries 'G' for the source flag. The G2 value is NUL. The LCDB U value is based on the Waszczak et al. 'relflag' value, with relflag = 0 given U = 1 and relflag = 1 given U = 2 1082 Pirola Baker 2011a When using maximum light, H = 10.320 ± 0.013, G = 0.107 ± 0.016. 1089 Tama Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. Behrend 2011web Originally reported P = 16.45 ± 0.05, A = 0.12 ± 0.02 mag. Updated in 2011 with additional data. 1095 Tulipa Behrend 2005web Originally reported P = 2.78730 ± 0.00005 h, A = 0.20 ± 0.01 mag. Updated in 2011. 1100 Arnica Slivan 2008 A footnote to Table 2 in the Slivan et al. (2008) paper indicates that subsquent data (not included in the paper) show the period to be 14.535 h instead of the ~29 h reported in the paper. The 2007 data were not plotted in the paper. 1131 Porzia Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1134 Kepler Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 1139 Atami Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1152 Pawona Wang 2022 Sidereal period for (162, 58) and (323, 61): 3.41437 h. 1170 Siva Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 1183 Jutta Erasmus 2021 This note applies to all Erasmus et al. (2021, MNRAS). The Hv from JPL is generally within ±0.3 mag of the ATLAS H_c values reported in the paper. The C/S taxonomic class is dervived from the color indices and express as a probability. For the LCDB entries, objects >= 66% of C or S are assigned a single letter. Otherwise, C/S is listed. 1188 Gothlandia Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. Baker 2012a Using maximums of lightcurves, the authors found H = 11.425 ± 0.014 and G = 0.230 ± 0.015. Diameter and albedo are revisions to WISE values applying the author's H-G and Harris and Harris (1997) correction. 1198 Atlantis Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1204 Renzia Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1207 Ostenia Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 1268 Libya Warner 2023e Primary period (14.11) not ambiguous but there is a secondary period of 5.04 h that improves the primary lightcurve fit considerably but may not have a physical cause. 1270 Datura Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 1278 Kenya Oey 2012b The second tumbling period of 127 h is a likely but not definitive candidate. 1293 Sonja Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 1310 Villigera Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: eVISNIR 1313 Berna Marchis 2012 Hv assumed V-R = 0.54. 1316 Kasan Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 1333 Cevenola Marchis 2012 Hv assumed V-R = 0.54. 1346 Gotha Behrend 2006web Originally reported P = 2.6540 ± 0.0003 h. 1374 Isora Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1406 Komppa Behrend 2011web Authors reported P = 7.02 with 4 max/min. 1428 Mombasa Stephens 2012web A half-period of 8.38 h cannot be formally excluded. 1443 Ruppina Stephens 2020e axis ratios (c=1): a/b: 1.291, a/c: 1.210 1453 Fennia Warner 2016i To find the primary period, the satellite orbital period was forced to near previous results. 1468 Zomba Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1474 Beira Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 1489 Attila Chang 2019a This note applies to all Chang 2019 (ArXiv:1901.08719) detail records: The U code reported in Chang et al. is not necessarily the LCD value. Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 pending individual review. Amplitude errors were not given. A default of 10% of the amplitude was assigned pending individual review 1499 Pori Behrend 2008web Originally 3.36 h. Updated to fit period found in 2016. 1508 Kemi Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1509 Esclangona Merline 2003a Ds ~4 km. Distance from Primary: 140 km. Marchis 2012 Hv assumed V-R = 0.54. 1512 Oulu Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 1514 Ricouxa Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 1536 Pielinen Casalnuovo 2016 Secondary period P = 6.43 ± 0.01 h reported. Likely harmonic of main period. 1565 Lemaitre Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1566 Icarus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1580 Betulia Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 1593 Fagnes Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 1620 Geographos Durech 2008b Pole/period in spin axis table are for 1969 January 7.5. YORP acceleration found. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Durech 2022 YORP parameter: 1.14(03)*(10^-8 rad d^-2) 1627 Ivar Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Mueller 2011a H taken from another source. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1640 Nemo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1656 Suomi Franco 2022d Unexplained attenuation on 2022 May 18. 1667 Pels Stephens 2020e axis ratios (c=1): a/b:1.247m a/c: 1.135 1685 Toro Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Durech 2022 YORP Parameter: 0.33(3) * (10^-8 rad d^-2) 1723 Klemola Behrend 2005web Originally reported P = 6.22 h. Updated in 2011 to fit period found with 2011 data. 1727 Mette Behrend 2003web Period originally reported as 2.982 ± 0.002 h. Behrend 2006web Originally reported as P = 2.98141 ± 0.00005 h. Warner 2013i Ds/Dp: >= 0.20 ± 0.02. Unusual because primary is moderately elongated, a/b = 1.36:1 assuming equatorial view of triaxial ellipsoid. Warner 2013l Ds/Dp = 0.21 ± 0.02 Warner 2016l Orbital period forced to range near previous results. As stand-alone data set, insufficient evidence to suggest a satellite. 1741 Giclas Pravec 2019b Paired with (258640) 2002 ER36. This note applies to all Pravec 2019b: Albedos were not reported. They were calculated based on the H and Diameter given in the paper. This was done to allow comparing the albedo required to match the given values against the albedo given in the summary and/or other detail records. 1747 Wright Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1770 Schlesinger Pravec 2016web Orbital periods for 2016 have no real meaning. They were used to demonstrate behavior of lightcurve data beyond primary lightcurve. The 2015 secondary period could be independent rotation of the satellite or signs of a third member. 1777 Gehrels Pravec 1990web Reanalysis of the Wisniewski data. 1778 Alfven Chang 2014a This note applies to all entries from Chang et al. (2014, ApJ 788, A17) where they used 2nd order Fourier fits This produced amplitudes that didn't necessarily fit the data. The amplitudes in the LCDB were determined by the LCDB authors. In some cases, the precision of the period was considered too high and rounded to the nearest 0.1 h while in other cases, the stated period was converted to a >X h estimate. 1829 Dawson Galad 2010c Combined with data from Pray (2006a) 1830 Pogson Pravec 2012a D2/D1 = 0.28 ± 0.02. Value of D2/D1 = 0.30 ± 0.02 was adopted as mean of data from three apparitions. Pravec 2012a Asynchronous status assigned to satellite generating mutual events. Fauerbach 2019e The known secondary period of 3.2626 h was used to extact the primary rotation period. 1850 Kohoutek Chang (2016) H values are based on H-G system. The G values are in R, not V. All lightcurves with a period were initially given U = 2 regardless of rating by Chang et al. The plots for the 352 lightcurves that did not have complete coverage were reviewed and the U codes revised. In many of those cases, it appears that the half-period was found. For those, if the summary line depended on the Chang et al. entry, the period on the summary line is double that found by Chang et al. and carries a 'D' (determined) flag in the NOTES field. No errors were given for amplitudes, which were often dramatically overstated. 1862 Apollo Kaasalainen 2007 Period is for zero-epoch of November 13, 1980. Paper proved spin up due to YORP effect. Rozitis 2013 The authors assumed the pole and sidereal period from previous works to derive the required diameter and albedo to fit a thermophysical model that accuratly predicts Yarkovsky and YORP rates of change. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1863 Antinous Masiero 2017 The albedo error given for Masiero 2017 is the maximum possible value when converting from albedo values from log space to value space. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 1864 Daedalus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Masiero 2020a This note applies to all entries for Masiero et al. (2020a). The albedo error is the listed maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file since the actual date of observation was not given. The value for H is the 'model-out' value, which may differ slightly from the value used in the NEATM modeling (the value given in Tables 1-4). This maintains full agreement with the listed albedo and diameter. See Masiero et al. (2020a) for details about assumed errors in H and G. 1865 Cerberus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1866 Sisyphus Benner 1985 Ds/Dp ~ 0.1 Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1876 Napolitania Warner 2016b Suspected wide binary where primary has long period and large amplitude and the satellite has a short period and low amplitude. 1915 Quetzalcoatl Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 1916 Boreas Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1917 Cuyo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1937 Locarno Behrend 2019web Reported period 53.6 h but given amplitude and phase, the double period is more likely. 1943 Anteros Mueller 2011a H and G taken from other sources. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1947 Iso-Heikkila Galad 2010c For Galad 2010c entries, a compromise date of 2005 Oct 5 was used to compute phase and PAB for those objects based on SDSS data where no specific date information was provided. 1951 Lick Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1979 Sakharov Pravec 2011web Some suspected events seen but there was no consisetent solution for a secondary period. 1980 Tezcatlipoca Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1981 Midas Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR McGlasson 2022 A shape was reported (4x2x2) with one lobe being 30% larger. The neck joining the two lobes is about 60% of the width of the lobes. 2006 Polonskaya Pray 2005c Second period due to 1) asynchronous single satelltie or 2) second satellite. 2020 Ukko Pilcher 2015i Alternation solutions with bimodal and trimodal solutions are considered unlikely. 2030 Belyaev The errors for H, G1, G2 are the larger of the HDI 95% values given for each parameter. In many cases, there are two entries for each asteroid, one for the c(yan) and the other for the o(range) ATLAS filter. The taxonomic class is on the Bus-DeMeo system was taken from various references. This work did not determine class independently. 2059 Baboquivari Masiero 2021 This note applies to all entries for Masiero et al. (2021; Plan. Sci. J. 2, A162). The albedo error is the listed maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file since the actual date of observation was not given. The value for H is the 'model-out' value, which may differ slightly from the value used in the NEATM modeling (the value given in Tables 1-4). This maintains full agreement with the listed albedo and diameter. No specific errors for H and G were given. Default values of H_err = 0.05 and G_err = 0.1 were used. 2060 Chiron Belskaya 2010b To derive H, used V-R=0.36 and phase coefficient (not G) of 0.06 mag/degree. Belskaya 2015 The Belskaya et al. (2015) provides updated color index values for TNOs based on numerous references. See that paper for the original references. Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 2061 Anza Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 2062 Aten Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 2063 Bacchus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2064 Thomsen Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2074 Shoemaker Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2077 Kiangsu Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 2078 Nanking Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2099 Opik Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2100 Ra-Shalom Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2102 Tantalus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Rozek 2022 Radar did not detect a satellite D > 75 m, which leaves earlier reports of a secondary period unexplained. 2110 Moore-Sitterly Pravec 2019b Paired with (44612) 1999 RP27. 2121 Sevastopol Sokova 2019 Orbital period for retrograde solution: 37.153 ± 0.001 h. 2178 Kazakhstania Benishek 2018m Secondary has lightcurve amplitude of 0.02 mag; 2201 Oljato Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2204 Lyyli Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 2207 Antenor Stephens 2018k Orbital period is Binaries table is one of several solutions. 2212 Hephaistos Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2242 Balaton Marchini 2016b Estimated Ds/Dp is a minimum. 2253 Espinette Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 2312 Duboshin Warner 2023e P = 51.72 has significant secondary period of P2 = 19.58 h, A2 = 0.30. The two may be harmonically related (3:8 ratio). 2320 Blarney Bennefeld 2009b The Pal et al. result of 5.99 h is considered highly secure. The periods are close to a 7:6 ratio and the data from Bennefield will fit 5.99 h. Behrend 2020web The Pal et al. result of 5.99 h is considered highly secure. The periods are close to a 14:13 ratio and the data from Behrend will fit 5.99 h. 2329 Orthos Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 2335 James Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2340 Hathor Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2343 Siding Spring Pollock 2015b Secondary period in binary report attributed to third body. 2368 Beltrovata Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 2384 Schulhof Vokrouhlicky 2016b V-R = 0.49 ± 0.05 assumed. H_R = 11.64 ± 0.03. 2423 Ibarruri Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 2449 Kenos Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: eVISNIR 2453 Wabash Galad 2010c Combined with data from Pray (2006c) 2462 Nehalennia Szabo 2016 entries are based on Kepler 2 data. Most objects did not have a reported period/amplitude. 2483 Guinevere The objects under Sonnett 2015 were observed in the W3 (12 um) band by WISE. The amplitude given is the maximum range of values, not the range of a fitted lightcurve. No periods were given for the data. 2500 Alascattalo Bentz 2023 Period using V data. R data gave P = 2.786(0.050), A = 0.18(0.02). 2575 Bulgaria Athanasopoulos 2022 Paper gave Beta1 = 91, which is not allowed in LCDB, so a value of 90 was entered. 2577 Litva Warner 2009q P2 is assumed to be due to the rotation of the secondary. There is slight evidence that the secondary may be tidally locked and, therefore, P2 is due to the rotation of a third body in the system. Merline 2013b P_Orb(S2): 214 d (107 d). D(S2): 1.2 km. Merline 2013c P_Orb(S2): 214 d (107 d). D(S2): 1.2 km. D(S1): 1.4 km. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 2608 Seneca Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 2629 Rudra Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 2691 Sersic Oey 2016a No mutual events seen but second period found. See binary data table. 2712 Keaton This note applies to all Chang 2019 (ArXiv:1901.08719) detail records: The Chang et al. U codes are not necessarily those given in the LCDB. Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 pending individual review. 2744 Birgitta Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 2754 Efimov Pray 2006g Ds/Dp = 0.20 ± 0.03. 2760 Kacha Warner 2021b Weak secondary period of 15.63 h, 0.04 mag provided better fit but is likely an artifcat of the Fourier anlayis. 2802 Weisell Behrend 2006web Originally reported as P = 37.74 ± 0.06 h, A = 0.41 ± 0.03 mag. Data forced to fit period found in 2011. 2815 Soma Pollock 2011 Ds/Dp = 0.25 ± 0.02. 2847 Parvati Behrend 2018web Overlooked binary? 2867 Steins Jorda 2008 Lightcurve data obtained by OSIRIS/Rosetta spacecraft. The phase angle was 41.7 as seen from the craft, not the Earth. Lamy 2008a Axis ratios: a/b: 1.17; a/c: 1.25. Size: 5.73 ± 0.52, 4.95 ± 0.45, 4.58 ± 0.41 km Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 2881 Meiden Polakis 2017a The assignment of the primary and secondary periods may be reversed, i.e., the longer of the two periods may be the primary. The rotation of the satellite responsible for events is locked to the orbital period. 2897 Ole Romer Pravec 2019b Paired with (182259) 2001 FZ185. 2937 Gibbs Warner 2019r Second period found but cause not established. Could be a tumbler or binary without mutual events. Warner 2019r The U = 3- rating is for the primary period, which is clearly established (unless the object is a low-level tumbler). 2968 Iliya Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 3025 Higson Behrend 2010web Originally reported 10.8 h. Updated to fit to period found with 2016 data. 3040 Kozai Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3073 Kursk Skiff 2019b Lightcurve forced to near primary period of known binary and shows effects of satellite events. 3102 Krok Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3103 Eger Durech 2012 YORP acceleration: (1.4 ± 0.6) x 10^-8 rad d^-2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3122 Florence Benner 2017 P_ORB_Inner: ~8h. P_ORB_Outer: ~24h. Satellites are assumed to be tidally locked to orbital period. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3138 Ciney Hills 2014a Author reported P = 56.1 h with monomodal lightcurve but 0.56 mag amplitude virtually assures a bimodal curve and, therefore, double period. 3157 Novikov Marchini 2019c The period in the work was 9.952 h. However, analysis of the data by the LCDB authors found that 14.930 h was more likely correct. 3198 Wallonia Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3199 Nefertiti Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3200 Phaethon Ansdell 2014 Color index values are the average of three values derived over several years. The errors were added in quadrature. Radar Team 2017c Diameter based on high-res (75m/pixel) images. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Tabeshian 2019 H-G_B: 14.57(2), 0.00(1); H-G_R:13.28(2),-0.10(1); H-G_I: 13.07(2), -0.08(1). 3250 Martebo Alvarez 2014b Author found H_R = 10.84. A V-R = 0.38 was assumed to give H_V = 11.22 ± 0.06. 3255 Tholen Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3260 Vizbor Diameter and albedo taken from Warner 2012, which revised WISE diameter and albedo with new H-G and Harris and Harris (1997). 3267 Glo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3287 Olmstead Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3288 Seleucus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3309 Brorfelde Warner 2009i Ds/Dp: 0.26 ± 0.02 3343 Nedzel Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3352 McAuliffe Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3361 Orpheus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3362 Khufu Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3401 Vanphilos Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3402 Wisdom Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3443 Leetsungdao Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3481 Xianglupeak Pravec 2012web A single suspect attentuation was seen. 3494 Purple Mountain Cantu 2016 Authors adopted shorter (monomodal) period. However, the amplitude and phase angle dictated a bimodal solution at the longer period. 3548 Eurybates Noll 2020a Obs date is for first detection. 3551 Verenia Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 3552 Don Quixote Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3553 Mera Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 3554 Amun Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3581 Alvarez Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3623 Chaplin Marchis 2012 Hv assumed V-R = 0.54. 3635 Kreutz Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3669 Vertinskij Behrend 2020web Period matches orbital period of satellite (Christmann et al. 2020; CBET 4749). 3671 Dionysus Mueller 2011a H taken from another source. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3673 Levy Pravec 2007web Refinements on the original parameters reported by Pray et al in CBET 1165. 3674 Erbisbuhl Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3691 Bede Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3704 Gaoshiqi Pravec 2010web Systematic residuals seen, possibly due to another lightcurve component, but no good solution could be found. 3737 Beckman Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3749 Balam Merline 2002a Estimated size of satellite: 1.5 km. Marchis 2008b This is a trinary system, with a more distant satellite reported via AO observations (2002, IAUC 7827) Behrend 2014web Lightcurve shows mutual events (Amp_max = 0.46 ± 0.03) but rotation of primary not isolated. Pravec 2019b Paired with (312497) 2009 BR60. Pravec 2019b Binary information for this record is for the second satellite in (3749) Balam system. 3752 Camillo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3753 Cruithne Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3757 Anagolay Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 3761 Romanskaya Clark 2020 Results table gives P = 9.456 h. 3782 Celle Marchis 2012 Hv found using assumged V-I = 0.88. 3792 Preston Pravec 2016web The 23.8 h orbital period is based on a bimodal solution derived from a monomodal solution of 11.91 h. Possible, very shallow mutual events. Benishek 2017c If not binary, the two periods may indicate low-level tumbling. 3800 Karayusuf Warner 2008m Two possible mutual events. Insufficient data to calculate a period. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3833 Calingasta Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3841 Dicicco Klinglesmith 2015d Ds/Dp in Binary table is a minimum. 3854 George Warner 2006f Suspicious attenutations but insufficient data for valid analysis. 3858 Dorchester Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3908 Nyx Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3912 Troja Benishek 2021h Lightcurves availalbe at http://www.asu.cas.cz/~asteroid/03912_2021a_p1.png http://www.asu.cas.cz/~asteroid/03912_2021a_porb.png 3920 Aubignan Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3951 Zichichi Franco 2018c Some attenuations due to satellite observed. Period is based on single-period solution. 3982 Kastel' Pravec 2005b Second period in binary table may be 2.918 h. 3988 Huma Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4015 Wilson-Harrington Also know as 107P/Wilson-Harrington. It has been observed to exhibit a cometary appearance. Photometry of this object may be contaminated by unresolved coma and not represent net nucleus brightness. Urakawa 2011 The authors reported pole solutions. However, these are not considered reliable since they are based on data that are too limited for proper spin axis modeling. Urakawa 2012 The authors provided four possible solutions that involved either tumbling, a binary object, or a single body in PA rotation. The spin axis and period are for for the PA solution. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: eVISNIR 'Worked as' field is '1979 VA=165P' in original paper. 4022 Nonna Behrend 2013web Authors reported P = 1.31 h; this seems unlikely and so the double period was entered for the details record. 4034 Vishnu Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 4055 Magellan Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4142 Dersu-Uzala Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4162 SAF Dose 2022b Author gave 3.850 h for a monomodal lightcurve. There are indications that a doubled-period, with bimodal lightcurve, might be preferred. 4179 Toutatis Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4183 Cuno Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4197 Morpheus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4205 David Hughes Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 4225 Hobart Behrend 2023web Reported as P = 8.3202 h. This gives either a 3 or 6 maximum lightcurve (depending on the impretation of the maximums). The period given is 2/3 the reported period with a bimodal lightcurve. 4263 Abashiri Pravec 2012web A few deviations were see but nothing significant or convincing. 4276 Clifford Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 4336 Jasniewicz Owings 2018 The longer period is determined from data and based on removing one night from the lightcurve. 4337 Arecibo Gault 2022 Second, confirming occulation on 2021 June 9. Dp = 24.4 ± 0.6 km, Ds = 13.0 ± 1.5 (assuming circular shapes derived from occltation chords. 4341 Poseidon Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 4370 Dickens Benishek 2021j Secondary outside of events shows 0.04 mag lightcurve, a/b = 1.3 ± 0.1. Pravec 2021web Tenative lightcurves at http://www.asu.cas.cz/~asteroid/04370_2021a_p1.png http://www.asu.cas.cz/~asteroid/04370_2021a_porb.png 4401 Aditi Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 4435 Holt Stephens 2018c Mutual events not tied to orbital period seen: possible second satellite. Stephens 2018g Attenuations not tied to the orbital period may indicate a second satellite. See original paper for the evolution of the primary lightcurve and mutual events. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 4450 Pan Carbognani 2008b Values for G and Pv were assumed based on Wisniewski (1997). Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 4451 Grieve Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4486 Mithra The amplitude, A = 0.5, is an estimate based on the derived shape of the asteroid and an equatorial view. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4492 Debussy Marchis 2012 Hv found using V-R 0.54. 4495 Dassanowsky Ambiguity is for P1. Binary status not in doubt. Warner 2019i Ambiguity is for P1. Adopted period is favored because of estimated size ratio of system and binary modeling (Pravec et al., 2010) 4503 Cleobulus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 4524 Barklajdetolli Athanasopoulos 2022 The original paper reported Beta2 = 93 deg. Values |beta| > 90 are not allowed in the LCDB and so B2 = 90 was used. 4528 Berg Fornas 2023a Polakis data (ALCDEF, 2018 Feb) included in solution. 4541 Mizuno Pray 2015b Ds/Dp >= 0.24 4544 Xanthus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 4555 Josefaperez Pravec 2007web Variations in mean levels of the calibrated Ondrejov R data suggest that there may be a rotation of an unresolved satellite. 4558 Janesick Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4587 Rees Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4660 Nereus The pV = 0.3 is based on Pravec et al. (2021web) assumption of G = 0.43. Using the default pV = 0.2 gives a diameter of 0.516 km. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4666 Dietz Pravec 2015web One suspected event captured. Oey 2018a Data from 2011 and 2015 included in analysis. Possible third period seen in 2015 and 2018 data. Warner 2021g Alternate orbital solution is 33.4 h, which is near that found in 2018 and for which the mutual events were much better defined. 4688 1980 WF This note applies to all Binzel 2019 (2019Icar..324...41B) detail records: VIS indicates visible data only. NIR indicates near-infrared data only. VISNIR indicates both. eVISNIR indicates the visible portion of the spectrum is from the Eight-Color Asteroid Survey (ECAS, Zellner et al. 1985) sVis indicates the visible portion of the spectrum is from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS, Ivezic et al. 2001). TAXON indicates the type is reported in the literature; see the source listed in the 'Taxon' reference column of the original file. For visible data only (VIS), the taxonomic type is from the Bus classification system (Bus and Binzel 2002). For visible plus near-infrared data (VISNIR), the taxonomic type is from the Bus-DeMeo classification system (DeMeo et al. 2009). '-comp' refers to the broad taxonomic complex. When multiple taxonomic classes are listed, they are in subjective order of most likely type first. ':' indicates the assignment is uncertain. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4690 Strasbourg Warner 2011j Multiple solutions possible because of the limited data set. Analysis by Petr Pravec. 4708 Polydoros Stephens 2018i Period taken from plot. Results table and text each have a different period. 4718 Araki Pravec 2017web The nature of the two periods is uncertain. They could be the result of a binary or low level tumbling, thus this record carries both flags. 4729 Mikhailmil' Ruthroff 2012a Lightcurve has very unusual shape. The period could really lie between 15-30 h. 4765 Wasserburg Pravec 2019b Paired with (350716) 2001 XO105. 4775 Hansen Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 4788 Simpson Sogorb 2021 Third period (3.1506 h) may be due to eclipsing/occultating secondary or a third body. 4905 Hiromi Pravec 2019b Paired with (7813) Anderserikson. 4910 Kawasato Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 4947 Ninkasi Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 4953 1990 MU Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4954 Eric Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4957 Brucemurray Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 4995 Griffin Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5003 Silvanominuto Waszczak (2016) H values are based on G12 system. The G12 value is given instead of G and carries 'G' for the source flag. The G2 value is NULL. The LCDB U value is based on the Waszczak et al. 'relflag' value, with relflag = 0 given U = 1 and relflag = 1 given U = 2 5011 Ptah Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5026 Martes Pravec 2019b Paired with 2005 WW113. 5066 Garradd Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 5076 Lebedev-Kumach The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 5104 Skripnichenko Behrend 2023web Reported as 5.56457 h. The amplitude and high degree of symmentry of the quadramodal lightcurve make this unlikely. 5131 1990 BG Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5143 Heracles Taylor 2012b Dp = 3.6 ± 1.2 km; Ds = 0.6 ± 0.3 km. Orbital period of 16 h is based on period 14-17 h. A period of 40-57 h cannot be excluded, but it is inconsistent with the assumption of a synchronously rotating secondary. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5145 Pholus Tegler 2005 Dimensions (diameters) determined by calculation to be 310 X 160 x 150 km. This gives an effective spheroidal diameter of ~190 km. Belskaya 2010b To derive H, used V-R=0.77 and phase coefficient (not G) of 0.083 mag/degree. 5230 Asahina Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5247 Krylov Lee 2020 P = 82.28 is the strongest apparent period, the conjunction of the period of rotation (368.7 h) and rotation (67.27 h). 5261 Eureka Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Skiff 2019b Raw plot shows total eclipse/occultation due to satellite. Skiff 2019b Raw plot shows mutual event due to satellite. 5275 Zdislava Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 5332 Davidaguilar Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 5349 Paulharris Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 5381 Sekhmet Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 5384 Changjiangcun The low WISE and AKARI albedos indicate that C-type is a better choice rather than the LCDB default of ES for Hungaria members. 5392 Parker Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5402 Kejosmith Benishek 2018j The ambiguity is for Porb. It may be 32.62 h instead of the adopted 16.31 h. 5407 1992 AX Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5425 Vojtech Vander Haagen 2012a Author reported a trimodal solution of 3.972 h. This is considered highly unlikely. 5496 1973 NA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 5510 1988 RF7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 5535 Annefrank Hillier 2011 Stardust and ground-based observations. 5573 Hilarydownes The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 5585 Parks Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 5587 1990 SB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5604 1992 FE Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5620 Jasonwheeler Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 5626 Melissabrucker Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5642 Bobbywilliams Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 5645 1990 SP Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5646 1990 TR Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5649 Donnashirley Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 5653 Camarillo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 5656 Oldfield The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 5660 1974 MA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5674 Wolff Aznar 2016b Ds/Dp >= 0.80 5693 1993 EA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: eVISNIR 5720 Halweaver Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 5732 1988 WC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 5751 Zao Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 5786 Talos Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5797 Bivoj Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 5817 Robertfrazer Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5828 1991 AM Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 5836 1993 MF Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5867 1988 RE Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 5870 Baltimore Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 5899 Jedicke Warner 2010h The amplitude of the primary was too low to establish a period with certainty. The mutual events, however, were well-defined. Warner 2010n The amplitude of the primary was too low to establish a period with certainty. The mutual events, however, were well-defined. 5968 Trauger Warner 2014d Unexplained 'event' on Sep 5. Possible period solutions assuming a satellite are P_orb = 15.9 or 31.7 h. 6037 1988 EG Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 6041 Juterkilian Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 6042 Cheshirecat Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 6047 1991 TB1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 6053 1993 BW3 Warner 2015s Result of combining data sets from 2015 January and March. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 6063 Jason Warner 2017n Radar could not confirm long period. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 6070 Rheinland Vokrouhlicky 2011 H_R actually found. Authors used V-R = 0.49 ± 0.05 to convert to H. Vokrouhlicky 2017b See paper for discussion of pole solution uncertainties. Pravec 2019b Paired with (54827) Kurpfalz. 6084 Bascom Pravec 2012a Residual variations of 0.02 mag may indicate rotation of a satellite. 6170 Levasseur Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 6178 1986 DA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 6183 Viscome Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 6186 Zenon Benishek 2017b S1 has amplitude of 0.04 mag. 6239 Minos Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 6261 Chione Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 6369 1983 UC Pravec 2019b Paired with (510132) 2010 UY57. The Observing Circumstances are for lightcurves from 2013. 6386 Keithnoll Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 6411 Tamaga Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 6444 Ryuzin Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 6455 1992 HE Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 6456 Golombek The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a p_V = 0.18. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 6489 Golevka Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 6500 Kodaira Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 6523 Clube Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 6569 Ondaatje Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 6585 O'Keefe Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 6611 1993 VW Pravec 2005web The second period maybe the secondary's rotation or the orbtial period. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 6764 Kirillavrov Polakis 2022a Analysis of TESS data (Pal et al, 2020, Ap. J. 247, A26). 6809 Sakuma Pravec 2018web Suspected mutual events observed on two nights. 6847 Kunz-Hallstein Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 6909 Levison Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7002 Bronshten Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 7025 1993 QA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 7079 Baghdad Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 7088 Ishtar Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 7092 Cadmus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 7132 Casulli Franco 2020e The original gives Ds/Dp ~ 0.21. The 0.11 mag attenuation gives Ds/Dp ~ 0.33. The latter is used in the lc_binaries table. 7165 Pendleton Behrend 2023web Data show possible binary events. 7187 Isobe Warner 2011o Weak secondary period: P = 16.33 ± 0.04 h, A = 0.12 ± 0.01 mag. Warner 2011o Weak secondary period: P = 16.378 ± 0.05 h, A = 0.05 ± 0.01 mag. 7304 Namiki Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7307 Takei Benishek 2021e Secondary has lightcurve amplitude (in the combined primary plus secondary lightcurve) of 0.05 mag. 7335 1989 JA Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 7336 Saunders Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7341 1991 VK Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7343 Ockeghem Pravec 2019b Paired with (154634) 2003 XX38. 7350 1993 VA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 7358 Oze Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7393 Luginbuhl Warner 2019k Out of event satellite lightcurve indicates elongation of about 1.7:1 7474 1992 TC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 7480 Norwan Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 7482 1994 PC1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7488 Robertpaul Stephens 2022e P2 isn't a formal solution, just that one that, when subtracted, results in a U = 3- P1. 7517 Alisondoane The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 7560 Spudis Warner 2013d There is a weak secondary period of 22.6 h. The 2004 apparition showed a possible binary with orbital period of 23.4 h. 7604 Kridsadaporn Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 7722 Firneis This applies to all Colazo 2021d entries. There are up to three details entries per object: 1) H-G using Gaia GR magnitudes, 2) H-G with GR magnitudes transformed to V and adding ground-based data to include phase angles < 10 deg, and 3) H-G1,G2 using the same magnitudes as in 2. Only results where there were valid numbers for H and HErr and the G or G1/G2 errors were <= 1.0 were included in the LCDB entries. H/HErr were rounded to two decimal places and G/GErr values were rounded to three decimal places. For a new summary record, the MPCOrb values are used for H and G for groups 1 and 3. This provides the necessary consitency for H when generating frequency-diameter plots from LCDB data, which have have been historically based on the H(V)-G system. For the Details record, the H Band is 'GR' for group 1 and 'V' for groups 2 and 3. To help convey that the V magnitudes were derived from GR and assumed V-R magnitudes, the H Method is 'D' (Derived). The G Method will be empty for groups 1 and 2 since, regardless 7753 1988 XB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7757 Kameya Warner 2011web Data too noisy to give reasonable period or amplitude. 7758 Poulanderson Warner 2012m Only one event well seen, maybe a second. Several other orbital period solutions fit, ranging out to about 100 hours. 7760 1990 RW3 Galad 2010c Combined with data from Pray (2006f) 7813 Anderserikson Pravec 2019b Paired with (4905) Hiromi. 7818 Muirhead Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 7822 1991 CS Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7888 1993 UC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7889 1994 LX Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7977 1977 QQ5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 8013 Gordonmoore Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 8014 1990 MF Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 8034 Akka Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 8037 1993 HO1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 8167 Ishii Pravec 2021web Two attenutions suspected on Feb 6 and 9. 8176 1991 WA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 8201 1994 AH2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 8306 Shoko Polishook 2014a Likely mutual events seen twice, but insufficient data to determine the orbital period for a satellite. Pravec 2014a Possible third body. Pravec 2019b Paired with 2011 SR158. 8345 Ulmerspatz The lightcurves from the 2011-2012 apparition give strong indications that this asteroid might be a tidally-locked binary of nearly equal sized components, similar to 90 Antiope. Klinglesmith 2012c When using the full data set, P = 17.1192 ± 0.0008 h. 8355 Masuo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 8356 Wadhwa Pravec 2008web http://www.asu.cas.cz:80/~asteroid/08356.png 8369 Miyata Warner 2011s Subtracting a weak secondary period of 49.24 h improves the RMS fit of the 2.73 h period noticeably. 8373 Stephengould Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 8444 Popovich Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 8566 1996 EN Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 8567 1996 HW1 Magri 2011 Authors give ellipsoid of 3.8x1.6x1.5 km, which gives an effective spheroidal diameter of about 2 km. Composite lightcurves were not provided, only overlays of the lightcurve data over the model curve. The U=3 rating refers to the overall quality of the data set used to find the pole, shape, and sidereal period. Trilling 2016 This applies to all Trilling 2016 (AJ 152): the listed errors for the diameter and albedo are the larger of the ± values, which were not the same. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 8651 Alineraynal Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 8828 1988 RC7 The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 8861 Jenskandler Hayes-Gehrke 2023c P = 4.500 is a trimodal solution. 8864 1991 VU The albedo error given for Masiero 2017 is the maximum possible value when converting from albedo values from log space to value space. 9068 1993 OD Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Pravec 2019b Paired with (455327) 2002 OP28. Pravec 2019b Paired with (455327) 2002 OP28. 9069 Hovland Marchis 2012 Hv assumed V-R = 0.54. 9082 Leonardmartin Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 9162 Kwiila Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 9202 1993 PB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 9400 1994 TW1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 9671 Hemera Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 9783 Tensho-kan Pravec 2019b Paired with (348018) 2003 SF334. 9856 1991 EE Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 9881 Sampson Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 9950 ESA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 9969 Braille Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 9992 1997 TG19 Higgins 2006f Incorrectly referenced in text as 1997 TH19. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 10051 Albee Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 10115 1992 SK Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR Durech 2022 YORP Parameter: 8.3(6) * (10^8 rad d^-2) 10123 Fideoja Pravec 2019b Paired with (117306) 2004 VF21. 10132 Lummelunda Benishek 2018f See original paper for evolution of the primary lightcurve and attenuation events. Salvaggio 2018b Shorter period in ambiguous table comes from lightcurve plot while longer period in detail record comes from text. 10145 1994 CK1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 10150 1994 PN Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 10165 1995 BL2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 10199 Chariklo Belskaya 2010b To derive H, used V-R=0.48 and phase coefficient (not G) of 0.06 mag/degree. 10247 Amphiaraos McNeill 2021 This note applies to all entries for McNeill et al. (2021; Plan. Sci. J. 2, A6). The H-G (Bowell) model was used for finidng Hc/Ho and, from all appearances, Go not Gv. Table 1 lists Hv values taken from the JPL database and not Ho (the orange data being far more prevalent) or Hc. The error for Hv was presumed to be 0.05 mag 10261 Nikdollezhal' The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 10295 Hippolyta Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 10296 Rominadisisto The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 10302 1989 ML Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Warner 2022i Final solution when using additive period anlaysis required P3 = 18.90, A3=0.15. 10502 Armaghobs Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 10563 Izhdubar Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 10779 1991 LW Warner 2011o One-night stand. Period is based on a half-period analysis. 11001 Andrewulff Pravec 2012web Partial attenuations seen but not enough to confirm binary status. 11054 1991 FA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 11066 Sigurd Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 11284 Belenus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 11286 1990 RO8 Pravec 2019b Paired with (59394) 1999 FZ23. 11311 Peleus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 11351 Leucus Mottola 2020 V-SR: 0.313 ± 0.021 11398 1998 YP11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 11405 1999 CV3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 11500 Tomaiyowit Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 11677 1998 DY4 Pravec 2019b Paired with (412065) 2013 ET86. Pravec 2019b Paired with (412065) 2013 ET86. 11836 Eileen Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 11842 Kap'bos Ye 2011 Asteroid pair with (228747) 2002 VH3, for which Ye found B-V = 0.704 ± 0.154, V-R = 0.480 ± 0.057, and V-I = 0.829 ± 0.111. 11885 Summanus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 12016 Green The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 12326 Shirasaki Pray 2017a Secondary period may be due to rotation of the satellite or a third body. If the former, the system would be fully-asynchronous and not singly-asychronous. 12376 Cochabamba The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 12538 1998 OH Vaduvescu 2017 Sloan g magnitudes Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Warner 2019h Two close solutions that are not harmonically related. See the binaries file. The two periods could also be the result of tumbling. Both possibilties fit the data. Warner 2019p The split-halves plot for 5.16 h essentially duplicates the two halves. In this case, the shorter period was adopted. 12711 Tukmit Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 12923 Zephyr Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 13123 Tyson Pravec 2022web No lightcurve for suspected secondary period. 13186 1996 UM Wang 2021 Sideral period for (38, +35): 4.29828 h 13284 1998 QB52 Pravec 2019b Paired with (154828) 2004 RT8. Pravec 2019b Paired with (154828) 2004 RT8. 13331 1998 SU52 Warner 2011k A weak secondary period of ~15.1 h was observed but could not be explained. 13355 1998 TP17 Pravec 2023web Second period is well-established. It could be due to tumbling or a satellite, therefore, the asteroid is listed as both types. 13553 Masaakikoyama Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Warner 2019b Single period found 39 h, very similar to Pravec et al. 2005. 13651 1997 BR Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 13732 Woodall Ye 2011 Asteroid pair with (1979) Sakharov, for which Ye found B-V = 1.086 and V-R = 0.409. 13819 1999 SX5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 14017 1994 NS Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 14222 1999 WS1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 14309 Defoy Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 14395 Tommorgan Warner 2013d Second period of 40.4 provided by P. Pravec. The second solution is not unique. Others are possible. 14402 1991 DB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 14581 1998 RT4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 14806 1981 EV25 Pravec 2019b Paired with (496028) 2008 SC9. 14827 Hypnos Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 14868 1990 RA7 The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 14875 1990 WZ1 For Yeh 2020, the amplitude error was found with max(0.01, 0.1*YehAmp) 14923 1994 TU3 Warner 2009b Recalibration of comp star mags led to different period. 14982 1997 TH19 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 15107 Toepperwein Pravec 2019b Paired with (291188) 2006 AL54. Pravec 2021b Asteroid pair with (291188) 2006 AL54. 15350 Naganuma Pravec 2010web Period taken from 2005 observations. 15430 1998 UR31 Pravec 2010web Brightness drops by >0.10 mag seen on 2010-05-06 and 07, but period not established. 15607 2000 GA124 The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 15609 Kosmaczewski Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 15700 1987 QD Durkee 2010c Two possible periods for the orbit were 50.3 and 62.9 h. Neither could be conclusively established. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 15745 Yuliya Warner 2018m The primary and orbital period were found by forcing the data to fit near the periods found by Aznar et al. (2018). The listed primary period is one of dozens of possible solutions. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 15778 1993 NH Warner 2015e Possible wide binary. The long period is the rotation of the primary. 15817 Lucianotesi Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 15822 Genefahnestock Warner 2011c Suspected events seen on three nights in 2010 mid-June. None seen in 2010 late June or early July. 16064 Davidharvey Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 16126 1999 XQ86 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2015 AH1. 16142 Leung Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 16426 1988 EC Diameter and albedo based on H from Warner (2012) and application of Harris and Harris (1997) correction to WISE diameter and albedo. 16635 1993 QO Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 16636 1993 QP Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 16657 1993 UB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 16815 1997 UA9 Pravec 2019b Paired with (436551) 2011 GD83. 16816 1997 UF9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 16834 1997 WU22 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 16868 1998 AK8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 16960 1998 QS52 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 17188 1999 WC2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 17198 Gorjup Pravec 2019b Paired with (229056) 2004 FC126. 17274 2000 LC16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 17288 2000 NZ10 Pravec 2019b Paired with (203489) 2002 AL80. 17435 di Giovanni Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 17511 1992 QN Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 17700 Oleksiygolubov Pray 2018a Additional attenuations of 0.14-0.18 mag are not tied to orbital period and may indicate a third body. 18106 Blume Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 18109 2000 NG11 The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 18172 2000 QL7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 18181 2000 QD34 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 18514 1996 TE11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 18620 1998 DS10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 18736 1998 NU Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Warner 2019m Despite the low amplitude of the secondary period, the period spectrum clearly favors 11.95 h or 23.9 h. The low amplitude and nearly Earth day period of the secondary lightcurve make a weak case for being binary. 18882 1999 YN4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 18916 2000 OG44 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 19127 Olegefremov Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 19204 Joshuatree Stephens 2016h Main period forced to solution from 2016 data. 19261 1995 MB Behrend 2021web Period was reported by Behrend as 9.130 h. However, that solution is based on only two nights and at significant phase angle, ~19 deg, while the 2010 curves from Cabognani and Owings are at a considerably lower phase angle, 5-6 deg. The latter, along with fairly large amplitude, would make a double period, quad extrema, curve very unlikely, bordering on impossible. On the other hand, the Behrend curve could be essentially monomodal, with just a very muted secondary maximum. Also troubling is the very sharp maxima of the Behrend fit. Sharp minima are expected and can be even more extreme due to shadowing, but very narrow maxima (broadside view) are much less expected. 19289 1996 HY12 Pravec 2019b Paired with (278067) 2006 YY40. 19309 1996 UK1 Galad 2008c Several bimodal solutions possible in the range of 4.16-5.91 h. 19356 1997 GH3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 19388 1998 DQ3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 19764 2000 NF5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Warner 2021a P3/A3 11.931 h/0.08 mag produces much cleaner P1/P2 lightcurves. It doesn't have a physical nature but filters the effects of near-Earth day commensurate observations. 20062 1993 QB3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 20086 1994 LW Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 20236 1998 BZ7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 20255 1998 FX2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 20384 1998 KW51 Clark 2021 4 uneven maximums for given period. 20425 1998 VD35 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 20429 1998 YN1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 20446 1999 JB80 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 20452 1999 KG4 The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 20691 1999 VY72 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 20749 2000 AD199 The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 20790 2000 SE45 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 20826 2000 UV13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 20882 Paulsanchez Warner 2019n Data split into two sets to show evolution of the mutual events. 20958 A900 MA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 21028 1989 TO Pravec 2019b Paired with (481085) 2005 SA135. 21088 Chelyabinsk Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 21149 Kenmitchell Warner 2024 2015 Results: A third period, P3 = 60.4 ± 0.1 h, A3 = 0.16 ± 0.02 mag, was required to get P1/P2 similar to 2023. 21436 Chaoyichi Pravec 2019b Paired with (334916) 2003 YK39. 21601 1998 XO89 French 2013 Authors confirmed that the period in paper's table and not the one in the lightcurve plot is the correct value. 21709 Sethmurray Yeh 2020 For Yeh 2020, the amplitude error was found with max(0.01, 0.1*YehAmp) 21966 Hamadori Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 22099 2000 EX106 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 22449 Ottijeff Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 22753 1998 WT Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: eVISNIR 22771 1999 CU3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 22807 1999 RK7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 22891 1999 SO11 For Yeh 2020, the amplitude error was found with max(0.01, 0.1*YehAmp) 23183 2000 OY21 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 23186 2000 PO8 Warner 2021i Model dimensions (c = 1): a/b = 1.2, a/c = 2.3. 23187 2000 PN9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 23548 1994 EF2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 23615 1996 FK12 Warner 2015l A suspected 'wide binary'. The long period is the primary. The short period (U = 3) is for the fully asynchronous satellite. 23621 1996 PA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 23692 Nandatianwenners Clark 2020 Result of combining data from 2015 and 2019. The DateObs is the mid-date for the 2015 data set. Clark 2020 Results table gives P = 9.315 h. 23714 1998 EC3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 23971 1998 YU9 The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a netural spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 23983 1999 NS11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 23998 1999 RP29 Pravec 2019b Paired with (205383) 2001 BV47. 24077 1999 TD233 Warner 2014f Given periods may not be actual values, but linear combinations of the true NPAR periods. 24445 2000 PM8 Monteiro 2018b For all Monteiro 2018b: if the table date, period, and/or amplitude disagreed with the lightcurve, the value(s) in the plot were used. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 24475 2000 VN2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 24693 1990 SB2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 24761 Ahau Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 24814 1994 VW1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 25021 Nischaykumar Pravec 2019b Paired with (453818) 2011 SJ109. 25037 1998 QC37 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 25143 Itokawa Mueller 2011a H and G taken from other sources. Nishihara 2018 Using all data from 2001-2004, P = 12.1324 h Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 25330 1999 KV4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 25332 1999 KK6 Warner 2013b Alternate suspected P2: 16.18 h. 25362 1999 TH24 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 25884 Asai Pravec 2019b Paired with (48527) 1993 LC1. 25916 2001 CP44 Warner 2018m Period revised based on 2018 data/analysis. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 26093 1987 UA1 Pravec 2012web Double period not formally excluded. 26166 1995 QN3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 26209 1997 RD1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 26308 1998 SM165 Brown 2002 Sep ~ 6000 km 26416 1999 XM84 Pravec 2019b Paired with (214954) 2007 WO58. 26420 1999 XL103 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2012 TS209. 26737 Adambradley Stephens 2020c Weak secondary period of 20-40 h noticeably improved the RMS for the 2.7 h solution. 26760 2001 KP41 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 26858 Misterrogers Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 26879 Haines Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 27002 1998 DV9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 27346 2000 DN8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 28736 2000 GE133 The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 28913 2000 OT Behrend 2003web Period originally reported as 15.30 h. 29075 1950 DA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 29292 Conniewalker Pravec 2011web Several possible tumbling solutions. 29407 1996 UW Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 30105 2000 FO3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 30301 Kuditipudi Pravec 2019b Paired with (205231) 2000 QY110. 30717 1937 UD Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 30786 Karkoschka Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 30825 1990 TG1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 31210 1998 BX7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 31221 1998 BP26 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 31345 1998 PG Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 31346 1998 PB1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 31367 1998 WB9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 31415 1999 AK23 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 31669 1999 JT6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 31832 2000 AP59 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 31843 2000 CQ80 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 31869 2000 EF101 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 32122 2000 LD10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 32575 2001 QY78 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 32827 1992 DF1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 32897 Curtharris Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 32906 1994 RH Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 32957 1996 HX20 Pravec 2019b Paired with (38707) 2000 QK89. 33046 1997 UF2 Pravec 2014web P2 not determined. One attenuations seen, but unexplained. 33325 1998 RH3 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2012 AX10. 33342 1998 WT24 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 33881 2000 JK66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 34048 2000 OR35 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 34613 2000 UR13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 34755 2001 QW120 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 35107 1991 VH Merline 2008 AO observations separated primary and satellite. Angular separation of 0.08' (~3.1 km). Satellite ~2.0 mag fainter. Separation and size agree with Pravec (IAUC 6607). Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 35368 1997 UB8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 35396 1997 XF11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 35432 1998 BG9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 35670 1998 SU27 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 35783 1999 JU20 Warner 2022g Some suspicious secondary periods between 2-5 h, but the lightcurve amplitude and noise are about the same. 36017 1999 ND43 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 36183 1999 TX16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 36284 2000 DM8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 37336 2001 RM Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 37384 2001 WU1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 37424 2001 YA3 Benishek 2021k An unexplained attenuation may be due to third body. 38071 1999 GU3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 38079 1999 HF Pravec 2020web The amplitudes for the Pravec 2020web observation subsets are for outside the mutual events. 38086 Beowulf Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 38184 1999 KF Pravec 2019b Paired with (221867) 2008 GR80. 38707 2000 QK89 Pravec 2019b Paired with (32957) 1996 HX20. 39235 2000 YH55 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 39489 1981 EU6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 39565 1992 SL Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 39572 1993 DQ1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 39702 1996 TZ10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 40267 1999 GJ4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 40310 1999 KU4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 40366 1999 NF27 Pravec 2019b Paired with (78024) 2002 JO70. 42355 Typhon Noll 2006a Ds/Dp: ~0.5, assuming same albedo for both bodies. Grundy 2008 Orbit SMA: 1628 ± 29 km. Ds: 84 ± 16 km. Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. 42887 1999 RV155 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 42946 1999 TU95 Pravec 2019b Paired with (165548) 2001 DO37. 43008 1999 UD31 Pravec 2019b Paired with (441549) 2008 TM68. 43017 1999 VA2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 44200 1998 MJ25 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 44534 1998 YZ9 Polishook 2012b Authors gave P=22.5 h but with monomodal solution. The amplitude virtually assures a bimodal lightcurve with a period about double the stated value. 44612 1999 RP27 Pravec 2012web Period assumed from work in 2010. Pravec 2012web Period assumed from work in 2010. Pravec 2019b Paired with (2210) Moore-Sitterly. 44619 1999 RO42 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 44620 1999 RS43 Pravec 2019b Paired with (295745) 2008 UH98. 45251 1999 YN Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 45991 2001 BQ70 The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 46162 2001 FM78 Pravec 2019b Paired with (323879) 2004 SA204. 46829 McMahon Pravec 2019b Paired with 2014 VR4. Observing Circumstances are for lightcurves from 2015 Feb. 47035 1998 WS Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 47171 Lempo Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. 47581 2000 AN178 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 47648 2000 CA40 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 48468 1991 SS1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 48527 1993 LC1 Pravec 2019b Paired with (25884) Asai. 48603 1995 BC2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 48621 1995 OC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 48652 1995 VB Pravec 2019b Paired with (139156) 2001 FP106. 49791 1999 XF31 Pravec 2019b Paired with (436459) 2011 CL97. 50000 Quaoar Fraser 2013 Period is for a non-zero eccentric orbit. A solution near 298.3 h is possible assuming a zero eccentricity. 50867 2000 GM4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 51157 2000 HB57 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 51609 2001 HZ32 Pravec 2019b Paired with (322672) 1999 TE221. 51866 2001 PH3 Pravec 2019b Paired with (326894) 2003 WV25. 52340 1992 SY Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 52387 Huitzilopochtli Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 52750 1998 KK17 Warner 2017c Suspected very wide binary. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 52760 1998 ML14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: eVISNIR 52762 1998 MT24 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: eVISNIR 52768 1998 OR2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 52773 1998 QU12 Pravec 2019b Paired with (279865) 2001 HU24. 52852 1998 RB75 Pravec 2019b Paired with (250322) 2003 SC7. 53319 1999 JM8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR Skiff 2019b Mid-date is approximate. Additional data from October also available. 53430 1999 TY16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 53431 1999 UQ10 Warner 2010k A weak signal with a period of 38.4 h was found. If this is subtracted from the data, the scatter in the data was reduced significantly. There was insufficent evidence to attribute the signal to a specific cause. 53435 1999 VM40 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 53537 Zhangyun Pravec 2019b Paired with (503955) 2004 ED107. 53576 2000 CS47 Pravec 2019b Paired with ((421781) 2014 QG22. 53789 2000 ED104 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 54041 2000 GQ113 Pravec 2019b Paired with (220143) 2002 TO134. 54071 2000 GQ146 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 54509 YORP Lowry 2007a Date for phase is end of period: Jul 28, 2001 - Jul 27, 2002. Paper proved spin up due to YORP effect. Lowry 2007a Date for phase is end of period: Aug. 12, 2004 - Aug. 31, 2005. Paper proved spin up due to YORP effect. Lowry 2007a Date for phase is end of period: Jul 27, 2002 - Aug. 27, 2003. Paper proved spin up due to YORP effect. Lowry 2007a Date for phase is end of period: Jul. 29, 2003 - Sep. 11, 2004. Paper proved spin up due to YORP effect. Taylor 2007 Date for phase is for beginning of observations that spanned from 2001 - 2005. Diameter and spin axis were determined from radar observations. Paper proved spin up due to YORP effect. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 54660 2000 UJ1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 54686 2001 DU8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 54690 2001 EB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 54789 2001 MZ7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Warner 2023a Secondary period lightcurve resembles one for a slightly elongated body, i.e., there is a possiblity that this is a 'very wide binary.' 54827 Kurpfalz Pravec 2010a Paired with (6070) Rheinland. Pravec 2019b Paired with (6070) Rheinland. 55532 2001 WG2 Stephens 2014e Unique solution not possible. Second period for NPAR table is one of several contenders. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 55576 Amycus Thirouin 2010 Number given as 55567, which is 2002 CS6. The LCDB authors presumed the name/designation were correct. 55764 1992 DG12 Pravec 2019b Unspecified other possible periods. Paried with (305693) 2009 BB131. 55913 1998 FL12 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2005 GQ107. 56048 1998 XV39 Pravec 2019b Paired with (76148) 2000 EP17. 56150 1999 CT103 Originally Derm4l in Dermawan Ph.D. thesis. 56232 1999 JM31 Pravec 2019b Paired with (115978) 2003 WQ56. 56700 2000 LL28 Pravec 2019b Paired with (414166) 2008 AU67. 57047 2001 LG1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 57202 2001 QJ53 Pravec 2019b Paired with (276353) 2002 UY20. 58046 2002 XA14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 59184 1999 AR15 Pravec 2019b Paired with (293667) 2007 PD19. 59394 1999 FZ23 Pravec 2019b Paired with (11286) 1990 RO8. 60458 2000 CM114 Grundy 2019b For Grundy 2019b, the spin axis values are for the orbital pole. The primary's pole will be the same or similar. 60546 2000 EE85 Pravec 2019b Paired with (88604) 2001 QH293. 60677 2000 GO18 Pravec 2019b Paired with (142131) 2002 RV11. 60735 2000 GF82 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 60744 2000 GB93 Pravec 2019b Paired with (218099) 2002 MH3. 60924 2000 JF44 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 61461 2000 QA31 Warner 2011o One-night stand. Solution is based on a half-period analysis. 61799 2000 QC184 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 63047 2000 WQ93 Pravec 2019b Paired with (393274) 2013 WJ82. 63095 2000 WS142 Popescu 2018b The original Popescu group/family was not used. Instead, one of the LCDB defaults was used based on the orbital elements 63160 2000 YN8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 63164 2000 YU14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 63291 2001 DU87 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 63341 2001 FD77 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 63440 Rozek Pravec 2019b Paired with (331933) 2004 TV14. 63583 2001 QP31 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 63970 2001 SG72 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2013 CT63. 65489 Ceto Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. 65679 1989 UQ Mueller 2011a H taken from another source. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 65706 1992 NA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 65733 1993 PC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 65784 Naderayama Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 65803 Didymos The Schierich (2009) results use previous lightcurve data to model the satellite:primary size ratio (D2/D1), pole of the orbital plane, and sidereal period of the orbit. The spin axis pole of the primary is considered to be the same as that of the orbit, i.e., the orbit lies in the primary's equatorial plane. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 65996 1998 MX5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 66008 1998 QH2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 66063 1998 RO1 The Schierich (2009) results use previous lightcurve data to model the satellite:primary size ratio (D2/D1), pole of the orbital plane, and sidereal period of the orbit. The spin axis pole of the primary is considered to be the same as that of the orbit, i.e., the orbit lies in the primary's equatorial plane. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 66146 1998 TU3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 66251 1999 GJ2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 66272 1999 JW6 Warner 2021d A third period of P3 = 15.99 h is likely due to diurnal systematics. It has no effect on the P1/P2 solutions save to remove some noise from each lightcurve. 66358 1999 JW87 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 66391 Moshup The Schierich (2009) results use previous lightcurve data to model the satellite:primary size ratio (D2/D1), pole of the orbital plane, and sidereal period of the orbit. The spin axis pole of the primary is considered to be the same as that of the orbit, i.e., the orbit lies in the primary's equatorial plane. Behrend 2018web Apparent mutual event on 2018 June 7 (UT) but not mentioned. Behrend 2018web No signs of known satellite. Behrend 2019web Phased curve shows known satellite mutual events. No secondary period reported. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 66419 1999 NR13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 66652 Borasisi Noll 2004 Alternate solution: P = 1109.6 ± 1.6 h. Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. Grundy 2011 Orbital period determined from astrometric measurements. 66659 1999 TJ1 Pravec 2019b Paired with (446085) 2013 CW179. 66959 1999 XO35 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 67399 2000 PJ6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 67502 2000 RE44 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 67729 2000 UQ23 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 67865 2000 WG23 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 68063 2000 YJ66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Warner 2022b An additional period of 5.73 h suggests a third body in the system. 68216 2001 CV26 Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Stephens 2015g No satellite found with radar observations in 2009. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 68278 2001 FC7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS Pravec 2019web Unexplained deviations on 2018 Jan 14, 20, and 24. 68346 2001 KZ66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Zegmott 2021 Original raw optical data available at https://cdsarc.cds.unistra.fr/ftp/J/MNRAS/507/4914/ Zegmott 2021 YORP detection: (8.43 ± 0.69)*10^-8 rad/day/day. Combinded optical and radar data. Original optical raw data available at https://cdsarc.cds.unistra.fr/ftp/J/MNRAS/507/4914/. Zegmott 2021 Original raw optical data available at https://cdsarc.cds.unistra.fr/ftp/J/MNRAS/507/4914/ Zegmott 2021 Original raw lightcurve data available at https://cdsarc.cds.unistra.fr/ftp/J/MNRAS/507/4914/ Zegmott 2021 Original raw optical data available at https://cdsarc.cds.unistra.fr/ftp/J/MNRAS/507/4914/ 68350 2001 MK3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 68359 2001 OZ13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 68372 2001 PM9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 68548 2001 XR31 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 68950 2002 QF15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 69142 2003 FL115 Pravec 2019b Paired with (127502) 2002 TP59. 69230 Hermes Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 69298 1992 DR9 Paired with 2012 FF11. 69311 Russ Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 69406 Martz-Kohl Warner 2011k If the shorter period is correct, this makes the asteroid a good binary candidate. 70030 Margaretmiller Warner 2012b No mutual events seen but independent observations from two locations show a secondary period of either 15.8 or 11.5 h. 70511 1999 TL103 Pravec 2019b Paired with (462176) 2007 TC334. 71997 2000 WD178 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 72204 2000 YV133 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 72748 2001 FR126 Popescu 2018b The original Popescu group/family was not used. Instead, one of the LCDB defaults was used based on the orbital elements 73735 1993 QE3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 74096 1998 QD15 Pravec 2019b Paired with (224857) 2006 YE45. 74789 1999 SY5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 76111 2000 DK106 Pravec 2019b Paired with (354652) 2005 JY103. 76148 2000 EP17 Pravec 2019b Paired with (56048) 1998 XV39. 76978 2001 BY60 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 77971 Donnolo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 78024 2002 JO70 Pravec 2019b Paired with (40366) 1999 NF 27. 78085 2002 LV23 Pravec 2023web Probably binary. The solution for the two periods appears unique (but it is not clear which of them is the primary period). 78587 2002 SZ12 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 79340 1996 TO41 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 79360 Sila-Nunam Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. 79576 1998 QG98 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 80218 1999 VO123 Pravec 2019b Paired with (213471) 2002 ES90. 80806 2000 CM105 Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. In this case, V-I is for the combined light since the binary pair could not be resolved. 82075 2000 YW134 Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. In this case, V-I is for the combined light since the binary pair could not be resolved. 82105 2001 FG26 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 82676 2001 PV23 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 84203 2002 RD133 Pravec 2019b Paired with (285637) 2000 SS4. 85182 1991 AQ Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 85185 Lederman Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 85236 1993 KH Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 85274 1994 GH Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 85275 1994 LY Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Masiero 2020b The geocentric phase angle and PAB in the Masiero 2020b details records were computed using the mean MJD given in the file. H-G are the values used for the model and appear only in details records. The MPCORB H-G at the time of import are used in the summary line. The albedo error is the larger linear error listed in the table. The diameter is the corrected value (see Masiero et al. 2020b). 85490 1997 SE5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 85585 Mjolnir Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 85709 1998 SG36 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 85713 1998 SS49 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 85770 1998 UP1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 85774 1998 UT18 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 85804 1998 WQ5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 85818 1998 XM4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 85839 1998 YO4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 85848 1998 YP29 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 85867 1999 BY9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 85938 1999 DJ4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 85953 1999 FK21 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 85989 1999 JD6 Aznar 2018b Published lightcurve is inverted, i.e., faintest when at top. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 85990 1999 JV6 Giorgini 2016 Yarkovsky detection. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Giorgini 2019 Yarkovsky detection. Replaces text in CBET 4279. Rozek 2019b Model is based on lightcurve/radar combination for a bilobed shape without a narrow 'neck.' 86039 1999 NC43 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 86067 1999 RM28 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 86212 1999 TG21 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 86324 1999 WA2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 86326 1999 WK13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 86450 2000 CK33 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 86626 2000 EV124 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 86667 2000 FO10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 86819 2000 GK137 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 86829 2000 GR146 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 87024 2000 JS66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Pravec 2021web A2 amplitude assumed to be same as A1. Warner 2022c Third period: 39.46 ± 0.01, A = 0.13 ± 0.02. See Pravec et al. (2021web). 87311 2000 QJ1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 87510 2000 QJ183 Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 87684 2000 SY2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Warner 2021a P2 is not a rotational alias of P1 and so the ambiguity lies in explaining the two periods. The low amplitudes and nearly the same periods precludes these being periods of a tumbler. 87887 2000 SS286 Pravec 2019b Paried with (415992) 2002 AT49. 88188 2000 XH44 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Warner 2021g Very wide binary candidate, but solution is very tenuous. 88254 2001 FM129 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 88259 2001 HJ7 Pravec 2019b Paired with (337181) 1999 VA117. 88604 2001 QH293 Pravec 2019b Paired with (60546) 2000 EE85. 88611 Teharonhiawako Osip 2003 Diameter is for primary if assuming density = 1.0 gcm^-3. Secondary diameter: 136 ± 10 km. 88666 2001 RP79 Pravec 2019b Paired with (501710) 2014 UY23. 88710 2001 SL9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 88938 2001 TR33 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 89136 2001 US16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 89355 2001 VS78 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 89766 2002 AO62 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 89830 2002 CE Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 89958 2002 LY45 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 90075 2002 VU94 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 90367 2003 LC5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 90403 2003 YE45 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 90416 2003 YK118 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 90482 Orcus Brown 2010 The stated diameter is the effecitve size of the Orcus-Vanth system. Individual diameters are 900 and 280 km, assuming the desnities and albedos are the same. If Vanth's albedo is 0.5 that of Orcus, the diameters are 860 and 380 km. The semi-major axis of the satellite orbit is 8980 ± 20 km. Sickafoose 2019 Diameter assumes a spherical shape. 92336 2000 GY81 Pravec 2019b Paired with (143662) 2003 SP84. 92359 2000 HC24 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 93040 2000 SG Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 93751 2000 WH1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 94210 2001 BK33 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 95626 2002 GZ32 Santos-Sanz 2020 Volume-equivalent diameter from 366x306x120 km. 95711 2003 AK Pravec 2007web Period > 10h. 100 hr is one of several possible solutions. 96011 2004 PD6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 96189 Pygmalion Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 96315 1997 AP10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 96562 1998 SZ138 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 96590 1998 XB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 97805 2000 OJ15 Pravec 2019b Paired with (279230) 2009 UX122. 98866 Giannabussolari Pravec 2019b Paired with 2015 RV228. 98891 2001 BK41 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 98943 2001 CC21 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Warner 2023e P1 = 5.0159 h is secure but requires subtracting two periods of unknown origin: P2 = 15.82(0.01), A2 = 1.30(0.03), P3 = 11.26(0.02), A3 = 0.21(0.05) 99248 2001 KY66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 99799 2002 LJ3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 99869 2002 PF46 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 99907 1989 VA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 99913 1997 CZ5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 99935 2002 AV4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 99942 Apophis Licandro 2016b Diameter and albedo are the averages of the min/max values. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 100004 1983 VA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 100017 1989 TN2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 100085 1992 UY4 Mueller 2011a H taken from another source. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 100316 1995 MM2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 100440 1996 PJ6 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2011 SE164. 100480 1996 UK Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 100553 Dariofo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 100756 1998 FM5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS Warner 2022i Final solution required P3=2.54 h, A=0.08 mag. Periods 2 and 3 are artifacts of additive multi-period analysis. 100926 1998 MQ Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 101027 1998 QL71 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 101065 1998 RV11 Pravec 2019b Paired with (368313) 2002 PY103. 101402 1998 VG1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 101429 1998 VF31 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 101554 1999 AL4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 101703 1999 CA150 Pravec 2019b Paired with (142694) 2002 TW243. 101742 1999 FO7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 101811 1999 JQ6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 101818 1999 JD13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 101952 1999 RY31 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 101955 Bennu Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 102528 1999 US3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 102803 1999 VA169 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 103055 1999 XR134 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2008 UZ220. 103067 1999 XA143 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 103501 2000 AT245 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 103506 2000 BD1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 103732 2000 CO103 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 104444 2000 GR3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 105155 2000 NG26 Warner 2012g Many possible periods. 105158 2000 OL Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 105247 2000 QH3 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2009 SZ67. 105943 2000 SY233 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 106589 2000 WN107 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 108182 2001 HY13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 108410 2001 KG32 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 108519 2001 LF Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 108522 2001 LQ Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 108663 2001 NE21 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 109077 2001 QR25 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 109226 2001 QH91 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 112221 2002 KH4 Warner 2019p The binaries table gives P1 = 2.479 h and Ds/Dp >= 0.22. The P1 solution is extremely weak. 112249 2002 LM9 Pravec 2019b Paired with (261878) 2006 GR49. 112985 2002 RS28 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 114553 2003 BH42 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 114924 2003 QL41 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 115978 2003 WQ56 Pravec 2019b Paired with (56232) 1999 JM31. 117306 2004 VF21 Pravec 2019b Paired with (10123) Fideoja. 118112 2665 T-3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 119067 2001 KP76 Marchis 2008a No lightcurves per se. Hubble observations show a binary system with components about the same size separated by 0'.29, or about 8200 km. 119979 2002 WC19 Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. In this case, V-I is the combined light since the binary pair could not be resolved. 120347 Salacia Noll 2006e Satellite 2.3 mag fainter. Stansberry 2012 SMAxis of orbit: 5619 ± 87 km. Individual diameters: Primary: 905 ± 103 km; Secondary: 303 ± 35 km. 120352 Gordonwong Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 120450 1982 SV Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 120578 1995 QV12 Warner 2014f Large zero-point offsets required to get period. Could be signs of tumbling. 121210 1999 QG2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 122011 2000 GL28 Originally Derm8f in Dermawan Ph.D. thesis. 122173 2000 KC28 Pravec 2019b Paired with (259585) 2003 UG220. 122421 2000 QZ101 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 124146 2001 MQ12 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 124200 2001 OM81 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 125475 2001 WA15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 129493 1995 BM2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 129541 1996 PQ9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 129737 1999 AA9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 130778 2000 SX369 Pravec 2015web Possible second period. 131045 2000 YH32 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 133027 2002 XJ4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 133090 2003 MS9 Michimani 2023 Result using two data sets: 2021 Oct an 2021 Dec. 133531 2003 TJ5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 134340 Pluto Tholen 1997 The diameter of 2700 km is the effective diameter of the Pluto/Charon system based on Pv and H. Pluto: D = 2350 ± 50 km. Charon (primary satellite): D = 1250 ± 50 km Nix (S/2005 P1): Sep: 48700 km. D ~ 46 km Hydra (S/2005 P2): Sep 64800 km. D ~ 61 km. 134371 1995 RH Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 134422 1998 QM3 Warner 2015d The periods are two of several sets of solutions. 134509 1999 FC8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 134860 2000 OJ67 Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. 136108 Haumea Lellouch 2010 Visible and Thermal observations. Lockwood 2014 Ellipsoid lengths: a = 960 km, b = 770 km, c = 495 km. Dunham 2019 Diameter computed from volume of ellipsoid with (abc) = (1050,840,537) km. 136472 Makemake Lim 2010 A dark area has 0.02 < p_v < 0.12 and 310 < D_eff < 380 km. 136564 1977 VA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 136582 1992 BA This note applies to all entries for Masiero et al. (2020a). The albedo error is the listed maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file since the actual date of observation was not given. The value for H is the 'model-out' value, which may differ slightly from the value used in the NEATM modeling (the value given in Tables 1-4). This maintains full agreement with the listed albedo and diameter. See Masiero et al. (2020a) for details about assumed errors in H and G. 136617 1994 CC Brozovic 2009b Estimated sizes: S1 > 100 m; S2 > 5 m. Brozovic 2011 Inner satellite: D = 113 ± 30 m. P = 26 ± 12 h. P_orb = 29.832 ± 2.400 h. Outer satellite: D = 80 ± 30m. P = 14 ± 7h. P_orb = 201.024 ± 12.0 h. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 136618 1994 CN2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 136745 1995 WL8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 136770 1996 PC1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 136793 1997 AQ18 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 136795 Tatsunokingo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 136818 Selqet Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 136839 1997 WT22 The geocentric phase angle and PAB in the Masiero 2020b details records were computed using the mean MJD given in the file. H-G are the values used for the model and appear only in details records. The MPCORB H-G at the time of import are used in the summary line. The albedo error is the larger linear error listed in the table. The diameter is the corrected value (see Masiero et al. 2020b). 136849 1998 CS1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 136923 1998 JH2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 136993 1998 ST49 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 137032 1998 UO1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 137052 Tjelvar Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 137062 1998 WM Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 137064 1998 WP5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 137069 1998 WQ15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 137084 1998 XS16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 137125 1999 CT3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 137126 1999 CF9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 137158 1999 FB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 137170 1999 HF1 Warner 2016n No indications of known satellite. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 137199 1999 KX4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 137230 1999 RG22 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 137427 1999 TF211 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 137671 1999 XP35 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 137799 1999 YB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 137805 1999 YK5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 137924 2000 BD19 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 137925 2000 BJ19 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 138013 2000 CN101 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 138127 2000 EE14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 138131 2000 ES20 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 138155 2000 ES70 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 138175 2000 EE104 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 138205 2000 EZ148 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 138258 2000 GD2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 138325 2000 GO82 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 138404 2000 HA24 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 138524 2000 OJ8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 138846 2000 VJ61 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 138852 2000 WN10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 138883 2000 YL29 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Skiff 2019b Lightcurve shape is similar to one produced by a satellite with mutual events. If so, Ds/Dp ~ 0.38. 138893 2000 YH66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 138911 2001 AE2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 138937 2001 BK16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 138947 2001 BA40 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 138971 2001 CB21 Period from Warner/Stephens is based on the combined data set. See independent entries in details tables for the two dates. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS Pravec 2022web Longer period is not formally excluded but is less likely. Warner 2022f Based on data from 2022 Feb 27 and 28 139056 2001 FY Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 139156 2001 FP106 Pravec 2019b Paired with (48652) 1995 VB. 139345 2001 KA67 Stephens 2018j Suspected very wide binary. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 139359 2001 ME1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 139537 2001 QE25 Pravec 2019b Paired with (210904) 2001 SR218. 139622 2001 QQ142 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 139775 2001 QG298 Lacerda 2011 The paper presumes a 'contact binary.' However, the lightcurves presented do not show the obvious indicators of 'shoulders' in the descending and ascending branches. The lightcurve can be equally explained by a simple, highly-elongated body. 140039 2001 SO73 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 141018 2001 WC47 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 141052 2001 XR1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 141079 2001 XS30 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 141354 2002 AJ29 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 141424 2002 CD Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 141432 2002 CQ11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 141484 2002 DB4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 141498 2002 EZ16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 141593 2002 HK12 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 141670 2002 JS100 Warner 2018a Period of 4.719 h cannot be formally excluded, but is not likely. 142040 2002 QE15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 142131 2002 RV11 Pravec 2019b Paired with (60677) 2000 GO18. 142348 2002 RX211 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 142464 2002 TC9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 142555 2002 TB58 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 142561 2002 TX68 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 142694 2002 TW243 Pravec 2019b Paired with (101703) 1999 CA150. 142781 2002 UM11 Warner 2014e Multiple solutions possible due to the nearly flat lightcurve. 143381 2003 BC21 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 143487 2003 CR20 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 143624 2003 HM16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 143651 2003 QO104 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 143662 2003 SP84 Pravec 2019b Paired with (92336) 2000 GY81. 143947 2003 YQ117 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 144411 2004 EW9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 144898 2004 VD17 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 144900 2004 VG64 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 144901 2004 WG1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 144922 2005 CK38 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 145656 4788 P-L Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 145720 1993 OX7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 147431 2003 JA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 148480 2001 FE155 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 148780 Altjira Grundy 2011 Orbital period determined from astrometric measurements. 149592 2004 CU51 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 150398 2000 EC59 Originally Derm1e in Dermawan Ph.D. thesis. 152558 1990 SA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 152560 1991 BN Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 152563 1992 BF Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 152627 1997 DF Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 152637 1997 NC1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 152664 1998 FW4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 152679 1998 KU2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 152742 1998 XE12 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 152754 1999 GS6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 152756 1999 JV3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 152770 1999 RR28 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 152858 1999 XN35 Hills 2013b Several possible solutions for P_Orb, ranging from 11 to 36 h, if the deviations are due to a satellite. 152895 2000 CQ101 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 152931 2000 EA107 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 152964 2000 GP82 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 152978 2000 GJ147 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 153002 2000 JG5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 153201 2000 WO107 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 153219 2000 YM29 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 153591 2001 SN263 Becker 2008 Density (Primary): 1.2 ± 0.4 g/cm^3 Nolan 2008 Radar observations show three objects in the 2001 SN263 system. Estimated sizes are 2 km, 1 km, and 0.400 km. Becker 2015b Dp: 2.5 ± 0.3 km; Ds1: 0.77 ± 0.12 km; Ds2: 0.43 ± 0.14 km. Porb1: 16.464 ± 0.048; Porb2: 150 ± 3 h. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 153814 2001 WN5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 153842 2001 XT30 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 153953 2002 AD9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 153958 2002 AM31 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 154029 2002 CY46 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 154244 2002 KL6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 154276 2002 SY50 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 154278 2002 TB9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 154302 2002 UQ3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 154347 2002 XK4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 154453 2003 CJ11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 154555 2003 HA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 154634 2003 XX38 Pravec 2019b Paired with (7343) Ockeghem. 154715 2004 LB6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 154828 2004 RT8 Pravec 2019b Paired with (13284) 1998 QB52. 155140 2005 UD Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS Huang 2021 G is for G1. G2 = -0.006 ± 0.006 155334 2006 DZ169 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 156032 2001 RP142 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 156294 2001 WU66 Chang 2021 This note applies to all Chang 2021 (PSJ 2) entries. The observations were made in g and r2 bands. The photometric bands (for H) were assigned as SG and SR, respectively. The H_SR values were transformed to approximate V by using the LCDB V = SR+ 0.22. While not exact, this makes the values more compatible to H_V when plotting frequency-diameters. For diameter calculations, an albedo of 0.05 and G = 0.15 ± 0.2 was assumed for both bands. Only some of the 53 objects could be tied to an object in the MPC database. For those without ID, and where possible, the phase and phase angle bisector values were assumed to be the same as for an identified object in the same observing block. The entries are flagged as being from a Sparse Wide-field Survey (SWF). 157995 2000 LF26 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 158853 2004 NJ32 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 159111 2004 VG15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 159368 1979 QB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 159402 1999 AP10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 159493 2000 UA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 159533 2001 HH31 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 159609 2002 AQ3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 159635 2002 CZ46 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 159857 2004 LJ1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 159882 2004 RQ289 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 159898 2004 TO216 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 160091 2000 OL67 Marchis 2008a No lightcurve per se. Hubble observations show a binary system with the components separated by 0'.29, or about 7800 km. The secondary was about 0.6m fainter than the primary. 160092 2000 PL6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 160137 2001 BU41 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 160519 1995 CS3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 161989 Cacus Durech 2018a YORP detection. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 161998 1988 PA Franco 2011web Author gave P = 6.70 h for a monomodal solution. The amplitude virtually assures a bimodal curve and, therefore, double the reported period. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 162000 1990 OS Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 162011 Konnohmaru Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 162015 1994 TF2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 162038 1996 DH Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 162058 1997 AE12 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 162117 1998 SD15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 162142 1998 VR Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 162149 1998 YQ11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 162157 1999 CV8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 162173 Ryugu Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Watanabe 2019 Diameter is equatorial. Polar is 872 m. Spherical equivalent is D = 0.955 km. 162181 1999 LF6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 162186 1999 OP3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 162361 2000 AF6 Warner 2019m The solution for the secondary period (14.654 h) is very weak but its subtraction significantly lowers the RMS of the fit for the primary period. 162385 2000 BM19 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 162421 2000 ET70 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 162422 2000 EV70 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 162483 2000 PJ5 Polishook 2008a P_orb = 56.6 h is also possible. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 162510 2000 QW69 The albedo error given for Masiero 2017 is the maximum possible value when converting from albedo values from log space to value space. 162566 2000 RJ34 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 162567 2000 RW37 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 162581 2000 SA10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 162635 2000 SS164 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 162740 2000 WF6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 162781 2000 XL44 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 162785 2000 YA17 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 162900 2001 HG31 Pravec 2008web Pravec analysis based on data from Warner 2009f and from Lowell Observatory (unpublished). Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 162903 2001 JV2 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 162911 2001 LL5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 162998 2001 SK162 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 163000 2001 SW169 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 163001 2001 SE170 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 163014 2001 UA5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 163081 2002 AG29 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 163132 2002 CU11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 163191 2002 EQ9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 163243 2002 FB3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 163249 2002 GT Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 163250 2002 GH1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 163364 2002 OD20 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 163468 2002 RZ177 Warner 2023f Peirod derived from a best-fit of the half-period. 163692 2003 CY18 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS Warner 2022i Periods 2 and 3 are artifacts of additive multi-period analysis. 163693 Atira Rivera-Valentin 2017 Diameter is that estimated for the primary. The satellite diameter is 1.0 ±0.3 km Rondon 2022 The observation date is the first in the set of observations, which spanned more than a year. The phase angle range was 45.2-97.3 deg. The H_SR values are the linear extrapolation using the phase slope (beta_SR) of 0.03584. The lack of low phase angles prevented use of H-G or HG1,G2 modeling. 163697 2003 EF54 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 163732 2003 KP2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 163899 2003 SD220 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Bondarenko 2019b Diameter is for an effective spherical shape based on 2700x1100 m a/b axis estimates. 164121 2003 YT1 Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 164184 2004 BF68 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 164202 2004 EW Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 164206 2004 FN18 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 164211 2004 JA27 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 164214 2004 LZ11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 164222 2004 RN9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 164400 2005 GN59 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 164670 1996 XM6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 165389 2000 WC188 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2011 SE164. 165394 2000 XC15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 165548 2001 DO37 Pravec 2019b Paired with (42946) 1999 TU95. Observing Circumstances for when Sloan color measurements from Lowell Observatory were made. 167405 2003 WP118 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2012 TK84. 168315 1982 RA1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 168378 1997 ET30 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 168710 2000 HE41 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 168889 2000 WM95 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 169660 2002 JG66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 169675 2002 JM97 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 170086 2002 XR14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 170172 2003 HV7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 170502 2003 WM7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 170880 2004 PH85 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 170891 2004 TY16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 171677 2000 QG136 Masiero 2009 The asteroid appears to have been independently analyzed twice in the TALCS survey, each time under a different MPC designation. TALCS 224 = 2000 QG136. TALCS 1238 = 171677. 171730 2000 WX50 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 171784 2001 BV67 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 171839 2001 JM1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 172678 2003 YM137 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 173154 1996 ME Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 173689 2001 PK9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 173885 2001 UA61 Masiero 2009 The asteroid appears to have been independently analyzed twice in the TALCS survey, each time under a different MPC designation. TALCS 158 = 2001 UA61. TALCS 1699 = 173885. 173974 2001 XV127 Masiero 2009 The asteroid appears to have been independently analyzed twice in the TALCS survey, each time under a different MPC designation. TALCS 200 = 2001 VV127. TALCS 1054 = 173974. 173991 2001 XR170 Masiero 2009 The asteroid appears to have been independently analyzed twice in the TALCS survey, each time under a different MPC designation. TALCS 249 = 2001 XR170. TALCS 2205 = 173991. 174567 Varda Grundy 2015 Periods are based on Orbit1 solution. Diameters: Varda 722 ± 82; Ilmare 326 ± 38. 175047 2004 FK93 Masiero 2009 The asteroid appears to have been independently analyzed twice in the TALCS survey, each time under a different MPC designation. TALCS 152 = 2004 FK93. TALCS 1699 = 175047. 175706 1996 FG3 Scheirich 2009 Satellite:primary size ratio (D2/D1): 0.28 ± 0.02. Orbit:primary diameter ratio (a/A1): 3.1 ± 0.9. Mueller 2011a H and G taken from other sources. Wolters 2011 D_sat = 0.51 0.03, assuming the same albedo as the primary. Scheirich 2015 Data covered multipl apparitions from 1999-2013. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 175729 1998 BB10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 177255 2003 WC25 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 179806 2002 TD66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 180186 2003 QZ30 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 181563 2006 UQ329 For Yeh 2020, the amplitude error was found with max(0.01, 0.1*YehAmp) 181882 1999 RF14 The given period is for an obvious short-term period in the raw data, which - on the whole - show a steady brightening over the observations. This could either be a tumbler or a very wide binary. Skiff 2023 The given period is for an obvious short-term period in the raw data, which - on the whole - show a steady brightening over the observations. This could either be a tumbler or a very wide binary. 182259 2001 FZ185 Pravec 2019b Paired with (289y) Ole Romer. 184266 2004 VW14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 184990 2006 KE89 Warner 2020j The 2+ rating is a combination of a U=2 for the primary and U=3 for the secondary period. 185851 2000 DP107 The Schierich (2009) results use previous lightcurve data to model the satellite:primary size ratio (D2/D1), pole of the orbital plane, and sidereal period of the orbit. The spin axis pole of the primary is considered to be the same as that of the orbit, i.e., the orbit lies in the primary's equatorial plane. Margot 2000 Estimated diameters: 800 m and 300 m. Ostro 2000b Radar images show separations up to at least 1 km between components. Pravec 2000e Lightcurve observations confirmed binary nature discovered by radar. Scheirich 2009 Solution 1: Satellite:primary size ratio (D2/D1): 0.43 ± 0.3. Orbit:primary diameter ratio (a/A1): 5.0 ± 2.0. Orbit period (sidereal): 42.09 ± 0.13 Solution 2: Satellite:primary size ratio (D2/D1): 0.43 ± 0.2. Orbit:primary diameter ratio (a/A1): 4.9 ± 1.2. Orbit period (sidereal): 42.79 ± 0.11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 187026 2005 EK70 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 187737 2153 P-L Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 188452 2004 HE62 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 189040 2000 MU1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 189494 1999 YY3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 189552 2000 RL77 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 190208 2006 AQ Warner 2015g No events seen and not likely so because of the long second period. The long period is attributed to the primary body while the short period is presumed to be due to the rotation of the fully asynchronous satellite. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 190491 2000 FJ10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 192559 1998 VO Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 192563 1998 WZ6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 194006 2001 SG10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 194268 2001 UY4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 194386 2001 VG5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 196299 2003 FN1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 197994 2004 RG165 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 198856 2005 LR3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 199003 2005 WJ56 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 200754 2001 WA25 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 200840 2001 XN254 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 202079 2004 SR39 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 203015 1999 YF3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 203471 2002 AU4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 203489 2002 AL80 Pravec 2019b Paired with (17288) 2000 NZ10. 205231 2000 QY110 Pravec 2019b Paired with (30301) Kuditipudi. 205383 2001 BV47 Pravec 2019b Paired with (23998) 1999 RP29. 205640 2001 XQ4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 205698 Troiani Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 205744 2002 BK25 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 206910 2004 NL8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 207398 2006 AS2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 207408 2006 BY172 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 207945 1991 JW Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 207970 1996 BZ3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 208023 1999 AQ10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 210482 1996 RW1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 210904 2001 SR218 Pravec 2019b Paired with (139537) 2001 QE25. 213084 1999 TN169 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 213471 2002 ES90 Pravec 2019b Paired with (80218) 1999 VO123. 214088 2004 JN13 Warner 2015h Period forced to solution derived from 2014 December observations by Warner. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 214869 2007 PA8 Lin 2018 Additional observations in 2013 Jan were at much larger phase angles. Phase reddening may have affected the final result. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 214954 2007 WO58 Pravec 2019b Paired with (26416) 1999 XM84. 215188 2000 NM Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 216202 2006 UJ13 Popescu 2018b The original Popescu group/family was not used. Instead, one of the LCDB defaults was used based on the orbital elements 216722 2005 EC286 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 217390 2005 CW25 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 217796 2000 TO64 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 217807 2000 XK44 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 218099 2002 MH3 Pravec 2019b Paired with (60744) 2000 GB93. 218144 2002 RL66 Warner 2010e The short period, low amplitude component of the lightcurve may be due to a widely separated component of a binary that is a relatively small and irregularly shaped, or a larger but more regularly shaped body. If a binary, the period of the orbit cannot be determined from the observations but is probably long based on the absence of mutual events and asynchronous rotation of the two components. The low-amplitude component of the lightcurve is U = 1/1+. This applies not only to the quality of the solution for the component but to the probability of the asteroid being binary as well. Warner 2010m The assignment of primary and secondary in this system is arbitrary. 218863 2006 WO127 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 219071 1997 US9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 219523 2001 QS84 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 220124 2002 TE66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 221867 2008 GR90 Pravec 2019b Paired with (38184) 1999 KF. 222165 2000 AX93 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 224857 2006 YE45 Pravec 2019b Paired with (74096) 1998 QD115. 226268 2003 AN55 Pravec 2019b Paired with (409156) 2003 UW156. 228368 2000 WK10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 229007 2003 XF11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 229056 2004 FC126 Pravec 2019b Paired with (17198) Gorjup. 229401 2005 SU152 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2004 UY97. 229762 G||'homdima Grundy 2019a Effective diameter for primary body. Satellite diameter: 142 ± 8 km. 230111 2001 BE10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 230979 2005 AT42 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 231134 2005 TU45 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 231937 2001 FO32 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 232691 2004 AR1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 233401 2006 FF39 Pravec 2019b Paired with (180856) 2005 HX5. 234061 1999 HE1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 234145 2000 EW70 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 235756 2004 VC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 236716 2007 FV42 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 237442 1999 TA10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 238063 2003 EG Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 241662 2000 KO44 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 241676 2000 QW158 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 242187 2003 KR18 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 242643 2005 NZ6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 243025 2006 UM216 Warner 2020c A secondary period could not be found. 244977 2004 BE68 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 247517 2002 QY6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 248083 2004 QU24 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 248818 2006 SZ217 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 250112 2002 KY14 Also designated 2007 UL126. 250322 2003 SC7 Pravec 2019b Paired with (52852) 1998 RB75. 251346 2007 SJ Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 252399 2001 TX44 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 252793 2002 FW5 Warner 2017i Suspected very wide binary. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 253062 2002 TC70 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 253841 2003 YG118 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 256412 2007 BT2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 257744 2000 AD205 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 257838 2000 JQ66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 258640 2002 ER36 Pravec 2019b Paired with (1741) Giclas. 259585 2003 UG220 Pravec 2019b Paired with (122173) 2000 KC28. 260141 2004 QT24 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 261878 2006 GR49 Pravec 2019b Paired with (112249) 2002 LM9. 262623 2006 WY2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 263976 2009 KD5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 264308 1999 NA5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 264357 2000 AZ93 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 265187 2003 YS117 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 267182 2000 QX57 Popescu 2018b The original Popescu group/family was not used. Instead, one of the LCDB defaults was used based on the orbital elements 267494 2002 JB9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 267729 2003 FC5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 269690 1996 RG3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 274138 2008 FU6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 274855 2009 RB4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 275677 2000 RS11 Warner 2014i This entry is for the combined plot from 2014 March 16 and 17. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 275792 2001 QH142 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 276049 2002 CE26 Warner 2015g Using either P1 = 3.088 or 3.298 (found by Pravec et al., 2006) produces the same period and lightcurve for P2. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 276353 2002 UY20 Pravec 2019b Paired with (57202) 2001 QJ53. 276397 2002 XA40 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 276400 2002 XS45 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 276741 2004 EM66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 276770 2004 HC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 277127 2005 GW119 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 277475 2005 WK4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 278067 2006 YY40 Pravec 2019b Paired with (19289) 1996 HY12. 279230 2009 UX122 Pravec 2019b Paired with (97805) 2000 OJ15. 279744 1998 KM3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 279865 2001 HU24 Pravec 2019b Paired with (52773) 1998 QU12. 282206 2001 VN61 Pravec 2019b Paired with (165389) 2000 WC188. 283319 1992 WR4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 283377 2000 PO9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 283457 2001 MQ3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 283460 2001 PD1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 283827 2003 TP15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 285263 1998 QE2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 285540 2000 GU127 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 285631 2000 RB84 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 285637 2000 SS4 Pravec 2019b Paired with (84203) 2002 RD1333. 285838 2001 FA1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 289315 2005 AN26 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 291188 2006 AL54 Pravec 2019b Paired with (15107) Toepperwein. 293667 2007 PD19 Pravec 2019b Paired with (59184) 1999 AR15. 295745 2008 UH98 Pravec 2019b Paired with (44620) 1999 RS43. 297274 1996 SK Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 297418 2000 SP43 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 301844 1990 UA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 301964 2000 EJ37 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 302311 2002 AA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 302831 2003 FH Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 303174 2004 FH11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 303712 2005 PR21 Noll 2008d No lightcurve observations per se. Two components separated by 0'.123 ± 0'.009, or about 4000 km. Secondary component about 1.1 mag fainter than primary. 305693 2009 BB131 Pravec 2019b Paired with (55764) 1992 DG12. 306376 1983 TA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 306453 1999 BE8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 306459 1999 GS3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 306895 2001 TT127 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 307005 2001 XP1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 307070 2002 AV31 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 307161 2002 DY3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 307556 2003 EQ43 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 307566 2003 FK22 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 308020 2004 RM222 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 308127 2004 XM130 This note applies to all entries for Masiero et al. (2021; Plan. Sci. J. 2, A162). The albedo error is the listed maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file since the actual date of observation was not given. The value for H is the 'model-out' value, which may differ slightly from the value used in the NEATM modeling (the value given in Tables 1-4). This maintains full agreement with the listed albedo and diameter. No specific errors for H and G were given. Default values of H_err = 0.05 and G_err = 0.1 were used. 308635 2005 YU55 Bodewits 2011 H_V was derived from UV observations that gave H_UV = 25.6. Merline 2012 a = 337 ± 14 m; b = 326 ± 8 m; c = 263 ± 12 m. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 309214 2007 LL Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 309662 2008 EE Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 310226 2011 SU230 Masiero 2009 Also identified as 2005 ED209 during the TALCS survey. 310402 1999 EE5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 310429 1999 XP19 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 310442 2000 CH59 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 310560 2001 QL142 Pravec 2019web Attenuations seen but a consistent secondary period could not be found. 311066 2004 DC Taylor 2006 Ds ~ 0.060 km. 311925 2007 BF72 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 312473 2008 SX245 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 312497 2009 BR60 Pravec 2019b Paired with (3749) Balam. 313538 2002 YB12 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 313591 2003 MB7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 313701 2003 UN3 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2012 KL9. 316651 1990 OL Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 316720 1998 BE7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 316876 2000 RF43 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 316934 2001 AA52 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 320378 2007 UR3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 321651 2010 BY9 Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 322386 2011 QY34 Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 322652 1999 JO8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 322672 1999 TE221 Pravec 2019b Paired with (51609) 2001 HZ32. 322775 2001 HA8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 323879 2005 SA204 Pravec 2019b Paired with (46162) 2001 FM78. 325769 2010 LY63 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 326290 Akhenaten Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 326350 2000 SS217 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 326732 2003 HB6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 326894 2003 WV25 Pravec 2019b Paired with (51866) 2001 PH3. 329291 2000 JB6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 329338 2001 JW2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 329437 2002 OA22 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 329520 2002 SV Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 329614 2003 KU2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 330825 2008 XE3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 331471 1984 QY1 Warner 2016k P2 is not unique (Petr Pravec); it is not possible to attribute P1 specifically to the period of rotation and P2 to that of precession. 331933 2004 TV14 Pravec 2019b Paired with (63440) 2001 MD30. 332446 2008 AF4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Warner 2021h The results for this record are based on combining lightcurves from 2021 Jan 9-11. Additional records given the results using the data from only one of those nights. 332685 2009 HH36 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 333358 2001 WN1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 334527 2002 RG189 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 334916 2003 YK39 Pravec 2019b Paired with (21436) Chaoyichi. 337066 1998 BM10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 337075 1998 QC1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 337181 1999 VA117 Pravec 2019b Paired with (88259) 2001 HJ7. 337866 2001 WL15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 338049 2002 NY31 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 338176 2002 RC118 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 339492 2005 GQ21 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 340211 2006 AR61 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. Lo 2020 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. 341520 Mors-Somnus Sheppard 2011 R_orbit = 21000 ± 160 km. Sheppard 2012a Color index: g-i 1.49 ± 0.01. Delta mag between two object: 0.1 mag. Orbital parameters: a = 21000 ± 160 km; e = 0.1529 M 0.0028. 341843 2008 EV5 Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 342842 2008 YB3 Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 343098 2009 DV42 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 344074 1997 UH9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 344143 2000 JQ3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 345705 2006 VB14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 345853 2007 PU11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 347813 2002 NP1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 348018 2003 SF334 Pravec 2019b Paired with (9783) Tensho-kan. 348400 2005 JF21 Period for first entry from Oey 2016b (Date = 09/24/2015) is for the combined data set covering five months. Subsequent listings are for subsets within the overall span. Naidu 2015c Possible indications of a second satellite. No period for primary or orbital period of first satellite given. 348452 2005 RU20 Pravec 2019b Paired with (418312) 2008 FF88. 349068 2006 YT13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 350513 2000 BG19 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 350523 2000 EA14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 350716 2001 XO105 Pravec 2019b Paired with (4765) Wasserburg. 350751 2002 AW Pravec 2022a SR-SZ = 0.12 ± 0.05 350988 2003 GW Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 351549 2005 TJ73 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 352143 2007 LR32 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 353866 2012 WN2 The designation of 2006 SU210 originally assigned to this object was updated. The MPC has since designated this as (353866) 2012 WN2. 353938 1998 QR15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 354030 2001 RB18 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 354127 2002 BP26 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 354182 2002 DU3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 354652 2005 JY103 Pravec 2019b Paired with (76111) 2000 DK106. 354952 2006 FJ9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 356991 1998 QA1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 357022 1999 YG3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 357152 2002 CO15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 357439 2004 BL86 Radar Team 2015a D_primary: 0.325 km. D_satellite: 0.070 km. Discovey credit goes to Pollock et al. 357618 2005 EM30 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 359592 2010 VA1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 359995 2012 VA102 The original designation was 2006 SW275. This is now identified by the MPC as 2012 VA102. Masiero 2009 The original designation was 2006 SW275. This is now identified by the MPC as 2012 VA102. 360191 1988 TA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 360433 2002 JR9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 361071 2006 AO4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 362310 2009 UM3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 363067 2000 CO101 Taylor 2009 Estimated sizes: P = 0.525 km; S = 0.045 km. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 363075 2000 OG8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 363305 2002 NV16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 363505 2003 UC20 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 363599 2004 FG11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 363790 2005 JE46 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 363814 2005 ND7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 364171 2006 JZ81 Parker 2011 Satellite obrital period: 4.11 ± 0.15 years. 365071 2009 AV Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 365246 2009 NE Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 365424 2010 KX7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 366774 2004 TB18 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 366833 2005 MC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 367248 2007 MK13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 367251 2007 PN49 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 367922 2012 BG133 Pravec 2019b Paired with (453106) 2007 WR62. 367943 Duende Gary 2013a H, D, and pV assume a type S asteroid. A type V was also considered possible from spectrophotometric observations. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS Moskovitz 2020 Period is post-flyby. Analysis indicates pre-flyby period of 8.4 h. 368313 2002 PY103 Pravec 2019b Paired with (101065) 1998 RV11. 368664 2005 JA22 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 370037 2000 SV20 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 370061 2000 YO29 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 370866 2005 EB37 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 371660 2007 CN26 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 374158 2004 UL Warner 2015h Period is a best-fit single period. 374851 2006 VV2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 374855 2006 VQ13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 375103 2007 TD71 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 376169 2011 BH162 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 376713 1995 WQ5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 376848 2001 RY47 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 377732 2005 XJ8 Warner 2022j Suspect 'wide binary'. 380188 2000 WC67 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 380929 2006 HU30 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 381906 2010 CL19 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 382758 2003 GY Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 385186 1994 AW1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 385203 1999 SO15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 385343 2002 LV Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 385446 Manwe Grundy 2014 Color indexes are for primary. The satellite showed about ± 0.15 mag difference, or essentially the same color. Spin axis is for orbital pole with the primary pole presumed to be the same or very similar. Rabinowitz 2020 Period/amplitude are for combined system. Albedo is for primary. Orbital period for satellite is based on monomodal lightcurve. 386298 2008 SR7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 388838 2008 EZ5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Pravec 2019web Suspected, low amplitude secondary period: nature undetermined. 391151 2005 YY93 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 393274 2013 WJ82 Pravec 2019b Paired with (63047) 2000 WQ93. 393359 1998 ME3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 394066 2005 XU77 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 394130 2006 HY51 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 396593 2001 HC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 398188 Agni Warner 2023a Final soultion required P3 = 9.48 h, A3 = 0.23 mag. P2 and P3 are probably artifacts of using additive multi-period analysis on a tumbler. 399307 1991 RJ2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 399418 2001 VD77 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 399433 2001 YK4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 399497 2002 TV190 Masiero 2009 Maisero et al. identified TALCS 126 as 2006 SZ2. This is a newer designation for 2002 TV190, which is the one included in the MPCORB file. 399774 2005 NB7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 401857 2000 PG3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 402267 2005 QE166 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 403049 2008 AY36 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 405058 2001 TX16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 407656 2011 SL102 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 408792 2000 GF2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 409156 2003 UW156 Pravec 2019b Paired with (226268) 2003 AN55. 409204 2003 WX25 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 409995 2006 WV3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 410195 2007 RT147 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 410627 2008 RG1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 410650 2008 SQ1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 410778 2009 FG19 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 411280 2010 SL13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 412065 2013 ET86 Pravec 2019b Paired with (11677) 1998 DY4. 412976 1987 WC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 413038 2001 MF1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 413123 2001 XS1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 413563 2005 TG45 Rondon 2022 The observation date is the first in the set of observations, which spanned more than a year. The phase angle range was 90.5-64.4 deg. The H_SR values are the linear extrapolation using the phase slope (beta_SR) of 0.03259. The lack of low phase angles prevented use of H-G or HG1,G2 modeling. 413577 2005 UL5 Pravec 2015web Secondary period might be due to being binary. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 414166 2008 AU67 Pravec 2019b Paired with (56700) 2000 LL28. 414287 2008 OB9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 414586 2009 UV18 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 414990 2011 EM51 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 415711 1998 WT7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 415949 2001 XY10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 415992 2002 AT49 Pravec 2019b Paired with (87887) 2000 SS286. 416151 2002 RQ25 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 416186 2002 TD60 Warner 2015r Period analysis by Pravec (Czech Institute). Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 416195 2002 TR190 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 416231 2003 AJ73 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 416591 2004 LC2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 416680 2004 XD50 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 416694 2004 YR32 Warner 2021g Suspected very wide binary, which would make the 50-h period that of the primary's rotatation, not the orbital period of the satellite. 418312 2008 FF88 Pravec 2019b Paired with (348452) 2005 RU20. 418797 2008 VF Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 419464 2010 CC180 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 420187 2011 GA55 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 420738 2012 TS Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 421781 2014 QG22 Pravec 2019b Paired with (53576) 2000 CS47. 422686 2000 AC6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 423321 2005 ED318 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 428086 2006 NM Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 430439 2000 LF6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 430484 2001 ST246 Chang (2015) H values are based on H-G system. The G values are in R, not V. All lightcurves with a period were given U = 2 regardless of rating by Chang et al. 430804 2005 AD13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 433939 1995 DW1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 433953 1997 XR2 Pravec 2019web Second period in tumbling solution is not unique. 434096 2002 GO5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 436459 2011 CL97 Pravec 2019b Paired with (49791) 1999 XF31. 436551 2011 GD83 Pravec 2019b Paired with (16815) 1997 UA9. 437841 1998 HD14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 437844 1999 MN Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 437905 2001 XU30 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 438105 2005 GO22 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 440212 2004 OB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 441549 2008 TM68 Pravec 2019b Paired with (43008) 1999 UD31. 442523 2011 WU95 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 443103 2013 WT67 Warner 2015c Period is estimate for one of the two tumbling periods. 443837 2000 TJ1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 445775 2011 YA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 446085 2013 CW179 Pravec 2019b Paired with (66659) 1999 TJ1. 446791 1998 SJ70 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 446804 1999 VN6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 448003 2008 DE Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 448972 2011 YV15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 450293 2004 LV3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 450894 2008 BT18 Benner 2008a Arecibo and Goldstone observations show: D1: 0.6 km D2: >0.2 km Sep: 1.5 km. Warner 2018h No sign of primary rotatin of about 2.5 h. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 451124 2009 KC3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 451157 2009 SQ104 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 451397 2011 EZ78 Pravec 2011web Two suspect attentuations were seen but not confirmed. Skiff 2011web Data suggests possibility of tumbling or binary. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 452334 2001 LB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 452389 2002 NW16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 452561 2005 AB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 452773 2006 DM14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 452807 2006 KV89 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 453106 2007 WR62 Pravec 2019b Paired with (367922) 2012 BG133. 453563 2010 BB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 453818 2011 SJ109 Pravec 2019b Paired with (25021) Nischaykumar. 455157 1997 YM3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 455185 2000 EB107 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 455192 2000 QN130 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 455213 2001 OE84 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 455322 2002 NX18 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 455327 2002 OP28 Pravec 2019b Paired with (9068) 1993 OD. 455415 2003 GA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 455426 2003 MT9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 455578 2004 RA216 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 455594 2004 SV55 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 456301 2006 SV134 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 459200 2012 DK61 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 461501 2003 FT3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 461852 2006 GY2 Benner 2006b Secondary diameter estimated to be 0.08 km and orbital separation at least 0.5 km. 461912 2006 RG2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 462176 2007 TC334 Pravec 2019b Paired with (70511) 1999 TL103. 464797 2004 FZ1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 464798 2004 JX20 Skiff 2019web The solutions are not unique. 464815 2004 RV257 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 465402 2008 HW1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 465616 2009 EC Warner 2016m Suspected very wide binary. 467317 2000 QW7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Warner 2020c Two possibilities: single period with large zero-point offsets or tumbling with near zero offsets. 467336 2002 LT38 Warner 2023f P1 is dominant, though it may still be a multiple of the true frequency (1/P1). P2 is one of several solutions but it is the one that gave the best fit when subtracting from the raw data. 467460 2006 JF42 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Pravec 2022web Alternate solutions ampltides assumed to be the same as the adopted period. 468738 2010 TN54 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 469438 2002 GV31 Pal 2015b V-R assumed. 469446 2002 NL8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 469513 2003 QR79 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 469896 2005 WC1 Miles 2008b Given period based on 3 nights (Miles, private communications). JBAA publication gives period of 2.57 h base on one night. 470004 2006 MJ10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 470975 2009 SC15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 471240 2011 BT15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 474158 1999 FA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 474370 2002 RT157 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 475665 2006 VY13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Warner 2022j Secondary period is almost 3:1 with dominant period and may be a harmonic artifcat of the analysis. 477465 2009 XZ1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 477762 2010 XZ67 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 479358 2013 XN8 Pravec 2019b Asteroid pair with 5478 Wartburg. 480820 1998 VF32 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 480858 2001 PT9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 480883 2001 YE4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 481032 2004 YZ23 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 481085 2005 SA135 Pravec 2019b Paired with (21028) 1989 TO. 481090 2005 SY173 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 481532 2007 LE Brozovic 2012 Estimated sizes: Dp 0.5 km; Ds 0.18 km. Orbital separation > 0.8 km. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 481542 2007 RF5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 482250 2011 LL2 Pravec 2022web Seconary solution amplitude assumed to be the same as the primary amplitude. 482796 2013 QJ10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 483422 2000 CE59 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 483423 2000 DO1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 484757 2009 BL2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 484976 2009 UN3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 485051 2010 CM44 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 486958 Arrokoth Porter 2019 Diamter is volume of equivalent sphere based on the overall dimensions of the contact binary system. The individual volumes are 15.9 km and 12.9 km. Stern 2019 Effective diameter (from volume): Ultima: 13.88 km; Thule: 12.61 km. Phase angle is viewed from Earth. Hofgartner 2021 Viewing aspect is from Earth. 488453 1994 XD Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 488515 2001 FE90 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 489337 2006 UM Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 492143 2013 OE Warner 2020c A third period was found as well: P3 = 4.88 h. 495833 2000 SB8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 495858 2003 MJ4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 496001 2007 VR183 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 496028 2008 SC9 Pravec 2019b Paired with (14806) 1091 EV25. 496923 2001 UW57 Originally Derm3d in Dermawan Ph.D. thesis. 497676 2006 SR2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 500080 2011 WV134 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 501710 2014 UY23 Pravec 2019b Paired with (88666) 2001 RP79. 503861 1998 WZ1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 503871 2000 SL Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 503941 2003 UV11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 503955 2004 ED107 Pravec 2019b Paired with (53537) 2000 AZ239. 504025 2005 RQ6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 504887 2010 WL Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 505476 2013 UL15 Alexandersen 2018 Applies to all Alexandersen 2018: For those objects in their list that were found in MPCOrb, the Hv magnitude was nearly the same as their Hr (Pan-STARRS r). The original Hr is reported in the detail record _and_ used for H in the summary table if an MPCOrb value was not available. 506437 2000 WL10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 506459 2002 AL14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 508774 1999 JE1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 508908 2003 YX1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 510132 2010 UY57 Pravec 2019b Paired with (6369) 1983 UC. 514596 2003 FG Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 516398 2001 HW15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 516420 2003 FS2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 516435 2004 FJ29 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 518482 2005 TZ42 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 518507 2006 EE1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 518810 2010 CF19 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 523625 2008 DG17 Warner 2018h 2018 radar observations indicate a period of ~2.8 h, but a slightly longer period is possible. The photometric data do not allow formally excluding a solution near 7.3 h. 523775 2014 YB35 Naidu 2015b Ds: < 150 m. 523806 2002 WW17 Cutri 2019 The analysis used W1 and W2 NEOWISE data. Cutri 2019 The analysis used W1 and W2 NEOWISE data. 523855 1995 SK87 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 523856 1995 SL87 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 525939 2005 UY97 Pravec 2019b Paired with (229401) 2005 SU152. 528159 2008 HS3 Warner 2019p Single period analysis found several dominant periods. They are listed in the Ambiguous table. 528407 2008 TO52 This note applies to all Erasmus 2019 (2019ApJS..242...15E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 ONLY if PFlag was empty and pending individual review. Erasmus 2019 This note applies to all Erasmus 2019 (2019ApJS..242...15E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 only if PFlag was empty and pending individual review. Amplitude errors were given only when the AmpFlag was empty. 531119 2012 FF11 Pravec 2019b Paired with (69298) 1992 DR9. 531260 2012 KL9 Pravec 2019b Paired with (313701) 2003 UN3. 532037 2013 FY27 Sheppard 2018c Separation from primary about 9800 km. 537342 2015 KN120 Warner 2018a P3/A3: 7.448 ± 0.006, 0.12 ± 0.03 mag. P2 and P3 may be a single period corrupted by harmonics of P1, or P1 and the true P2 are tumble frequencies beating to produce a third apparent frequency. 541818 2012 AX10 Pravec 2019b Paired with (33325) 1998 RH3. 545135 2014 YE64 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 554099 2012 KU50 Chandler 2021 Binary discovery. Semi-major axis > 15000 km. 561272 2015 RV228 Pravec 2019b Paired with (98866) Giannabussolari. 575395 2011 SE164 Pravec 2019b Paired with (100440) 1996 PJ6. 576293 2012 LB9 This note applies to all Erasmus 2019 (2019ApJS..242...15E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 ONLY if PFlag was empty and pending individual review. Erasmus 2019 This note applies to all Erasmus 2019 (2019ApJS..242...15E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 only if PFlag was empty and pending individual review. Amplitude errors were given only when the AmpFlag was empty. 577283 2013 CT63 Pravec 2019b Paired with (63970) 2001 SG72. 590180 2011 SR158 Pravec 2019b Paired with (8306) Shoko. 606952 2019 WF6 The period is an approximaation of a short-term periood superimpoed on a longer period, or the dominant period of a tumbler. 611007 2006 QN54 This note applies to all Erasmus 2019 (2019ApJS..242...15E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 ONLY if PFlag was empty and pending individual review. 612023 1994 VX3 Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 612050 1997 GL3 Skiff 2023 The given period is for an apparent short-term component of the overall lightcurve. This may be an artifact or an element of a tumbler. 612147 2000 CF105 Parker 2011 Satellite orbital period: 10.92 ± 0.12 years. 612242 2001 QQ322 Noll 2008d No lightcurve observations per se. Two components of about equal size separated by 0'.1272 ± 0'.0015, or about 4000 km. 612687 2003 UN284 Parker 2011 Satellite orbital period: 8.73 ± 0.65 years. 612813 2004 RF84 Benner (2006a) observed with radar and found a dimension of at least 1.2 km based on echo delay range. However, the images indicate the possibility of a bifurcated body with an effective diameter of about 1.5 km. Based on the total information, we presumed a dark (C-type) asteroid and used the default albedo for that class and MPCORB H to derive a diameter. 612929 2005 CR37 Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 613512 2006 SK134 Warner 2019m The two periods given for this likely tumbler are best-fit single periods and not formal two-period analysis. 614473 2009 SZ67 Pravec 2019b Paired with (105247) 2000 QH3. 616600 2006 AN29 Erasmus 2019 This note applies to all Erasmus 2019 (2019ApJS..242...15E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 only if PFlag was empty and pending individual review. Amplitude errors were given only when the AmpFlag was empty. 620071 2011 WN15 Pravec 2019web Possible color variations during rotation. 0 103P/Hartley Harmon 2010 The diameter is based the long-axis dimension of a highly-elongated, bilobate object as observed by radar. The radar cross section was 0.04 km^2, which corresponds to a diameter of ~100 m. 0 10P/Tempel 2 A'Hearn 1989 Amplitude is for observations at 4845 Angstroms. Other amplitudes: 6840 A, 0.45 mag; 10100 A, 0.8 mag. 0 169P/NEAT Determined to be a comet (by Warner) after receiving an asteroid designation. Current MPC designation is P/2002 EX12. 0 1994 CJ1 Radar Team 2014b First estimate is two 100-m bodies about 500-m apart. 0 1994 ES2 Terai 2018 Entries for Terai 2017 in the Color Index table were derived from their Hg-r and Hr-i. The errors were found by adding the individual errors in quadrature. 0 1998 WV24 Benecchi 2008 The two components were separated by an angular distance of 0'.051 ± 0'.002, with the secondary fainter by 0.3 magnitude. The secondary was located at 0'.033 ± 0'.003 in R.A. and 0'.039 ± 0'.003 in Decl. relative to the primary. 0 1999 TE21 This note applies to all Erasmus 2019 (2019ApJS..242...15E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 ONLY if PFlag was empty and pending individual review. Erasmus 2019 This note applies to all Erasmus 2019 (2019ApJS..242...15E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 only if PFlag was empty and pending individual review. Amplitude errors were given only when the AmpFlag was empty. 0 2000 UK11 Nolan 2001 It appears that Nolan made a factor of 2 error in his reported period. The LCDB adopts the 0.025 h period based on the reported observational data of radar bandwidth and estimated size of 30 meters. 0 2001 QW322 Parker 2011 Satellite orbital period: 17.01 ± 1.55 years. 0 2001 RW17 Warner 2020a 8-hour solution unlikely but cannot be formally excluded. 0 2003 QY90 Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. Grundy 2011 Orbital period determined from astrometric measurements. 0 2005 GQ107 Pravec 2019b Paired with (55913) 1998 FL12. 0 2005 LW3 Naidu 2022 Primary-Seoncdary distance ~ 4 km. 0 2005 WW113 Pravec 2019b Paired with (5026) Martes. 0 2006 BR284 Parker 2011 Satellite orbital period: 4.11 ± 0.04 years. 0 2006 CH69 Parker 2011 Satellite orbital period: 3.89 ± 0.07 years. 0 2006 SF369 Noll 2008b No lightcurves per se. Hubble observations show a binary system of about the same size separated by 0'.109 ± 0'.003, or about 3200 km. 0 2007 TQ24 Warner 2020c Second period is ambiguous. Alternate solution: P_2B: 9.57 h. 0 2008 SD The geocentric phase angle and PAB in the Masiero 2020b details records were computed using the mean MJD given in the file. H-G are the values used for the model and appear only in details records. The MPCORB H-G at the time of import are used in the summary line. The albedo error is the larger linear error listed in the table. The diameter is the corrected value (see Masiero et al. 2020b). Masiero 2020b The geocentric phase angle and PAB in the Masiero 2020b details records were computed using the mean MJD given in the file. H-G are the values used for the model and appear only in details records. The MPCORB H-G at the time of import are used in the summary line. The albedo error is the larger linear error listed in the table. The diameter is the corrected value (see Masiero et al. 2020b). 0 2008 TC3 Aleshkina 2011 Periods of 18 m and 6.89 h were also reported. The LCDB authors believe these to be spurious, possibly because non-principal axis rotation was not taken into account. 0 2008 TT26 Ryan 2009 http://infohost.nmt.edu/~bryan/research/work/mro_images/k08t2 6t/k08t26t_081019.jpg 0 2008 UZ220 Pravec 2019b Paired with (103055) 1999 XR134. 0 2009 BD Mommert 2014c Diameter and albedo based on a rocky body. An equally likely solution assuming a collection of bare rock slabs gives D = 0.004 ± 0.001 km and pV = 0.45 ± 0.35. 0 2009 QZ66 This note applies to all Lo et al. (2020, AJ 159) entries. A suffix of 'Lo21-' has been added to the all-numeric internal IDs used by Lo et al. to avoid confusion with an MPC-assigned number. The astrometric data they provided was used to match each of their objects to one in the MPCOrb data set. In most cases, the cross-match was unambiguous. For the others, there will be an entry in the extended notes for that particular Lo et al. details record. This is particularly important for objects in the summary line that have only the Lo et al. reference and are flagged as uncertain. Here, the object listed may not be the correct one. The Date, PAB_L, PAB_B, and Phase entries in the details record are based on 1) the cross-matched ID and 2) the first date of observations, which usually spanned about three days. 0 2010 RC130 Skiff 2019b Analysis by P. Pravec. A single period of 8.687 h was initially found, but this is a beat period based on a 3:5 ratio of the periods found with 2-dimensional Fourier analysis. The periods could be a linear combination of the two actual periods (precession and rotation). 0 2010 WC9 Beniyama 2022 This applies to all Beniyama 2022 entries: the observations were made with a video camera taking multiple frams per second. 0 2011 CT4 Pravec 2020web A higher than normal albedo was used to calculate a revised diameter based on the new H-G values. 0 2011 FJ54 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. Lo 2020 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. 0 2011 HP Warner 2019p Period and amplitudes based on full data set. 0 2011 TG2 Warner 2023a Period of combined data set. 0 2011 UT239 Masiero 2009 At the time of the TALCS survey, this object had the desgination of 2006 SP242. The MPCORB file not identifies it as 2011 UT239. 0 2011 XA3 Urakawa 2014 H, D, and pV assume a type S asteroid. A type V was also considered possible from spectrophotometric observations. 0 2012 LZ1 Hicks 2012d Authors gave period as 5-16 hours. The two periods given are the approximae values based on their period spectrum from Fourier analysis. Howell 2012b The diameter is the approximate effecitve diameter based on a longest dimension of about 1 km. The albedo is the average of the range estimated based on H = 19.8. 0 2012 PG6 Warner 2023a Result of 2022 Sep 24+28. Warner 2023a Result of combined data set. Warner 2023a Result of 2022 Sep 26+28. Warner 2023a Result of 2022 Sep 24+26. 0 2012 TC4 Urakawa 2019 Period is for precession. NPAR P2 is rotation period. 0 2012 TK84 Pravec 2019b Paired with (167405) 2003 WP118. 0 2012 TS209 Pravec 2019b Paired with (26420) 1999 XL103. 0 2012 UX136 Pravec 2012web Based on data from Joe Pollock. 0 2014 AC The albedo error given for Masiero 2018a is the maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file; the actual date of observation was not given. Masiero 2018a The albedo error given for Masiero 2018a is the maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file; the actual date of observation was not given. 0 2014 AN51 The albedo error given for Masiero 2018a is the maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file; the actual date of observation was not given. Masiero 2018a The albedo error given for Masiero 2018a is the maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file; the actual date of observation was not given. 0 2014 CH9 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. Lo 2020 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. 0 2014 EX61 2016 UV197 may have been the designation at the time. Using the MPC MP Checker, the astrometric position from Lo et al. (2020), 2014 EX61 has the exact same position. Since 2016 UV197 is no longer an recognized designation, 2014 EX61 was assumed to be the actual object. Lo 2020 2016 UV197 may have been the designation at the time. Using the MPC MP Checker, the astrometric position from Lo et al. (2020), 2014 EX61 has the exact same position. Since 2016 UV197 is no longer an recognized designation, 2014 EX61 was assumed to be the actual object. 0 2014 ET121 Lo 2020 The designation at the time was likely 2016 UG159, which appears and shows the same position as 2014 ET121 in the MPC MPChecker. However, 2016 UG159 is no longer an assigned designation and so 2014 ET121 was used for this object. 0 2014 GN1 Hicks 2014d V-R = 0.40 assumed to give H = 24.1 0 2014 JO25 Aznar 2019b The primary record for Aznar 2019b gives the best-fit for the entire data set. The subsequent entires are based on subsets obtained by different observers throughout the runs of 2017 April 20 to May 17. Venkataramani 2019 The actual phange angle ranged from 61 to 50 degrees over the course of the observations. During that time, the B-V color index increased (bluer) from 0.61 to 0.98 while the V-R index remained nearly constant. 0 2014 MK6 Navarro-Meza 2019 This note applies to all Navarro-Meza 2019 color index entries. The paper gave r-i colors after substracting solar color but that value was not given. A value of r-i(sun) = 0.11(*) mag was added to the values in the paper for the listings in the color index tabel. http://classic.sdss.org/dr5/algorithms/sdssUBVRITransform.htm l 0 2014 SC324 Warner 2015h P2 in NPAR table is not unique. Low amplitude tumbler: A2/A1_secondharmonic ~ 0.21. 0 2014 VR4 Pravec 2019b Paired with (46829) McMahon. 0 2014 WK368 The albedo error given for Masiero 2018a is the maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file; the actual date of observation was not given. Masiero 2018a The albedo error given for Masiero 2018a is the maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file; the actual date of observation was not given. 0 2015 AH1 Pravec 2019b Paired with (16126) 1999 XQ86. 0 2015 OH Warner 2016c Ambiguous: P_alt: 2.630 cannot be formally excluded but is not likely. 0 2015 OS35 Ieva 2018 Computed phase angle significantly different from that in paper. Possible wrong date or object. 0 2015 RF36 Taylor 2015b Period estimated from spread of CW radar data 0 2016 AZ8 Virkki 2019 The periods are based on upper limits and accounting for the mutual orbit plane being inclined several tens of degrees from the line of sight. Warner 2019m The orbital period is based on the lightcurve having the expected mutual events. The primary period seems much too long compared to initial radar observations. 0 2016 BU13 Warner 2016m Suspected P3 = 16.46 ± 0.02, A3 = 0.04 ± 0.01 0 2016 CA138 Borisov 2023 Sidereal periods (h): Pole 1: 5.3137 Pole 2: 5.3141 Pole 3: 5.3139 Pole 3 mirror: 5.3139 0 2016 EV27 Warner 2016j Second period may be artificat of Fourier analysis. However, the two periods do not have a simple integral multiple ratio. 0 2016 UW187 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. Lo 2020 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. 0 2016 UZ215 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. Lo 2020 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. 0 2016 UC230 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. Lo 2020 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. 0 2017 BW Pravec 2017web Second period is no unique. First period could be rotation or precession. 0 2017 NH Warner 2018a Second NPA period is one of many possibilities. 0 2017 SL16 Borisov 2023 Sideral period for each pole: (190.4,34.3,0.3188) (183.7,-75.8,0.3190) (233.6,53.6,0.3192) (97.2,-41.2,0.3191) 0 2017 YH Rondon 2022 The observation date is the first in the set of observations, which spanned more than a year. The phase angle range was 87.1-90.3 deg. 0 2017 YE5 JPL 2018 Each body about 900 m, widely separated (~2500 m). 0 2018 AJ Warner 2018k Second period may be actual second period or linear combination of the two frequencies of NPA rotation with the main frequency. 0 2018 CB Birtwhistle 2021a The phase angle for the breakout entries was forced to the mid-phase angle of the observations. The phase angle bisector values are for 00:00h UT on 2018 Feb 9. 0 2018 JE1 Warner 2018m Secondary period is likely wrong, even spurious. It was needed to overcome an excessively large nightly zero point shift of 0.8 mag. 0 2018 KE3 Warner 2019b Possible very wide binary, in which case the primary period is the longer of the two. The shorter period is rated U=3; the secondary period is U=2. 0 2018 LK Warner 2018m Period is for combined data set from 2018 June 12-13. Individual results are reported seperatedly. 0 2018 TF3 Pravec 2018b The secondary period/amplitude given in the LC_BINARY table are for the synchronous satellite. Warner 2019f Orbital period derived from half-period analysis that allowed full coverage of the P_orb lightcurve. 0 2018 UQ1 Lopez-Oquendo 2019a Longer solution of 7.1 h is likely a double-period fit by exclusion. 0 2018 UD3 Beniyama 2022 Given the amplitude and assuming the original period is correct, the true period may be ~0.0165112 h. 0 2018 XV5 Pravec 2022web Amplitude for P2 (A2) not given so listed as the same as P1. Warner 2022i Periods 2 and 3 are artifacts of additive period analysis, which does not properly handle tumbling asteroids. 0 2019 FP2 Warner 2019p Extrmely noisy data with no discernible trends. 0 2019 KZ3 Warner 2019p A nearly as-good single period solution could also be found. The RMS scatter was higher by about 0.04 mag. 0 2019 SH6 Warner 2020c Two periods given were derived from subtracting an 8.22 h, 0.19 mag lightcurve. This may be a 'beat frquency' period. 0 2019 UC A super-short period (Pravec et al., 2019) is a possibility. 0 2020 AZ2 Pravec 2020b Satellite A = 0.07 mag, a/b = 1.23. 0 2020 BX12 Virkki 2020 Diameter of 180 m is for projected-area-equivalent. Primary/Second sizes: 165 m and 70 m. An orbital period of 15-16 not ruled out. 0 2020 HS7 Beniyama 2022 Two observations on same date: midtimes: 14:36:31 amd 16:24:21. 0 2020 KK7 Birtwhistle 2021a H-G were determined using the lightcurve peak instead of average. 0 2020 ST1 Warner 2021d Pravec found the strongest solutions to be 1.879, 2.879, and 5.407 h. Two are real, the third is related to the other two. Note that 1/2.879 = 1/1.879 - 1/5.407. 0 2020 TP1 Birtwhistle 2021e The stated period and secondary in the NPAR table are not secure but simply two dominant periods found using software that properly handles tumbling asteroids. 0 2021 DW1 Kwiatkowski 2021 SG-SI: 0.79 ± 0.01. The phase angle values are for 0h UT on the given date. They can be significantly different from the value at the actual time of observations. 0 2021 DX1 Warner 2021h The second period in the NPA table is one of several possibilities. 0 2021 KN2 Birtwhistle 2021c P3: 0.012516(2) h, A3: 0.27. 1/P1 = 2/P3 - 2/P2 0 2022 DA Period/amplitude could not be determined. Birtwhistle 2022b Period/amplitude could not be determined. 0 2022 LV Pravec 2022web Amplitude for P2 (A2) assumed to be the same as A1. 0 2022 NE Birtwhistle 2023a P3 = 0.01217 ± 0.00001 h; A3 = 0.4 ± 0.4 mag. 0 2022 QT7 Birtwhistle 2023a P3 = 0.0147778 ± 0.0000015 h; A3 = 0.7 ± 0.5 mag. 0 2023 HK Birtwhistle 2023d The phase angle ranged from 50.5 to 72.3 over the span of the observations. The full range of the tumbling amplitude is ~1.5 mag. 0 2023 HU4 Birtwhistle 2023d The second period is ambiguous. An alternate solution is P2 = 0.1714 (0.0003) h, A = 0.4 (0.2) mag. The phase angle ranged from 15.0-11.8 deg over the span of the observations. The full range of the tumbling amplitude is ~1.3 mag. 0 2023 HO18 Birtwhistle 2023d The phase angle ranged from 41.8 to 17.1 deg over the span of the observations. Using default G = 0.15 led to an offset of 0.44 mag between two night and significant deviation from the predicted magnitudes using G = 0.15.. 0 2023 KZ1 Birtwhistle 2023d Indications of a long secondary period. Based on the raw plot, a solution might be P2 ~ 0.24 h for a bimodal curve [LCDB authors]. 0 C/2003 WT42 Determined to be a comet after discovery and given asteroid designation. Current MPC designation is C/2003 WT42. 0 Derm0a Dermawan 2002b, Doctoral Thesis This paper included approximately 50 objects, named in this list as DermXx, with X being a number and x a letter. The paper used the following values, which were adopted in lieu of the defaults used in this publication that are based on the semi-major axis: SMA: 2.3 < a < 2.8, Type = C, V-R = 0.53±0.04, Pv = 0.21±0.05; SMA: 2.8 < a < 3.3, Type = C, V-R = 0.37±0.03, Pv = 0.06±0.02. The listed diameters are those listed by Dermawan as computed from these assumed values and his measured value of Hv. 0 Derm1c Dermawan 2011 Only 22 data points. 0 Derm2b Dermawan 2011 D flag applies to amplitude only. 0 Derm2h Dermawan 2011 D flag applies to amplitude only. 0 Derm2K Dermawan 2011 Only 18 data points. 0 Derm2O Dermawan 2011 Only 9 data points. 0 Derm3b Dermawan 2011 Any number of period solutions are possible. 0 Derm4m Dermawan 2011 Dermawan paper gave amplitude as A = 0.35. It should have been 0.035. The value was rounded up to 0.04 mag for entry. 0 Derm6e Dermawan 2011 R = 24. 0 Derm6j Dermawan 2011 R = 24. 0 FOSL01010327 Chang 2022b This applies to all Chang 2022b; Ap. J. Suppl. Ser. 259, id.7. The filter band was r2 for all observations other than Apr 10, 2019, which used the SG filter. 'r2' is not recognized in the LCDB, so SR (Sloan r') is given. The reported diameters do not always agree with the standard formula using H and albedo to find a diameter. The summary line uses the value of the standard formula. 0 FSAP04010083 This note applies to all Chang 2021 (PSJ 2) entries. The observations were made in g and r2 bands. The photometric bands (for H) were assigned as SG and SR, respectively. The H_SR values were transformed to approximate V by using the LCDB V = SR+ 0.22. While not exact, this makes the values more compatible to H_V when plotting frequency-diameters. For diameter calculations, an albedo of 0.05 and G = 0.15 ± 0.2 was assumed for both bands. Only some of the 53 objects could be tied to an object in the MPC database. For those without ID, and where possible, the phase and phase angle bisector values were assumed to be the same as for an identified object in the same observing block. The entries are flagged as being from a Sparse Wide-field Survey (SWF). 0 FSAP04010100 This applies only to Chang et al. (2021) Plan. Sci. J. 2, id.191. Many of the objects were not tied to known Hildas. As a result, the orbital parameters were not available and, therefore, the phase angle bisector and phase angles could not be calculated. Generally, the phase angle for any Hilda group member is <20 degrees. Chang 2022b This applies to all Chang et al. (2021) Plan. Sci. J. 2, id.191. Many of the objects were not tied to known Hildas. As a result, the orbital parameters were not available and, therefore, the phase angle bisector and phase angles could not be calculated. Generally, the phase angle for any Hilda group member is <20 degrees. 0 Himalia Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 0 P/2006 HR30 Determined to be a comet after initial discovery and asteroid designation (2006 HR30). Current MPC designation is P/2006 HR30. 0 P0007F Polishook 2012b Object could not be tied to one in the MPCORB file. 0 P00095 Polishook 2012b Object could not be tied to one in the MPCORB file. 0 P000DV Polishook 2012b Object could not be tied to one in MPCORB file. 0 P000K7 Polishook 2012b Object could not be tied to one in MPCORB file. 0 P000ZE Polishook 2012b Object could not be tied to one in MPCORB file. 0 P000ZL Polishook 2012b Object could not be tied to one in the MPCORB file. 1 Ceres Drummond 2014 D_equatorial: 967 ± 10 km; D_polar: 892 ± 10 km. AKARI This note applies to all 'AKARI' details records. The Usui (2011) paper (AKARI/IRC Survey) used H values from Lowell Observatory's ASTORB file and assumed ± 0.05 mag error. In some cases, using the stated values for albedo and diameter in the standard formulae to compute H (see LCDB README) does not give the ASTORB value of H, usually differing by 0.01-0.02 mag. 2 Pallas Carry 2010a Density = 3.4 ± 0.9 g/cc. Dimensions: a = 275 ± 4 km; b = 258 ± 3 km; c = 238 ± 3 km. Durech 2011a This applies to all entries for Durech 2011a. All but 14 of the spin axis values in Durech 2011a are assumed values taken from the literature. See the original paper for specifics. Hanus 2017b Hanus 2017b is based on combining photometric, adaptive optics, and occulation observations. 3 Juno Pravec 2012b This note applies to all Pravec 2012b entries. In almost all cases, the original Pravec values were H_R. The H_V values were derived using assumed V-R values from various sources based on known taxonomic class or orbital position. If a diameter and albedo are given, these are revised values based on the original WISE H, G, D, and pV, corrected using the new H-G values and Harris and Harris (1997). Pal 2020 This applies to all records from Pal 2019 Period and amplitude errors were not included in the original data set. During the mass import of their results table, the period error was set to five units of the last decimal place. The amplitude error was set to 20% of the reported amplitude. The errors are a general guide only and should not be considered valid for statisitcal studies unless after reviewing the original plots. These are available at: http://archive.konkoly.hu/pub/tssys/dr1/object_plots/ 4 Vesta Fornasier 2011b Observations made from Rosetta spacecraft. Hasegawa 2014b H_B: 3.96 ± 0.01, G_B: 0.30 ± 0.02; H_SZ: 3.08 ± 0.02, G_SZ: 0.25 ± 0.01. 5 Astraea Durech 2009 The pole (126, +40) agrees well with occultation profiles. Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 6 Hebe Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Marsset 2017 Marsset 2017 combined photometric, adaptive optics, and occultation data. Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 7 Iris Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 8 Flora Torppa 2003 The sidereal period is believed incorrect (see Durech entry from DAMIT web site). The pole solution is still in close agreement with other solutions. Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from occultation-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Colazo 2021d This applies to all Colazo 2021d entries. There are up to three details entries per object: 1) H-G using Gaia GR magnitudes, 2) H-G with GR magnitudes transformed to V and adding ground-based data to include phase angles < 10 deg, and 3) H-G1,G2 using the same magnitudes as in 2. Only results where there were valid numbers for H and HErr and the G or G1/G2 errors were <= 1.0 were included in the LCDB entries. H/HErr were rounded to two decimal places and G/GErr values were rounded to three decimal places. For a new summary record, the MPCOrb values are used for H and G for groups 1 and 3. This provides the necessary consitency for H when generating frequency-diameter plots from LCDB data, which have have been historically based on the H(V)-G system. For the Details record, the H Band is 'GR' for group 1 and 'V' for groups 2 and 3. To help convey that the V magnitudes were derived from GR and assumed V-R magnitudes, the H Method is 'D' (Derived). The G Method will be empty for groups 1 and 2 since, regardless Colazo 2021d This applies to all Colazo 2021d entries. There are up to three details entries per object: 1) H-G using Gaia GR magnitudes, 2) H-G with GR magnitudes transformed to V and adding ground-based data to include phase angles < 10 deg, and 3) H-G1,G2 using the same magnitudes as in 2. Only results where there were valid numbers for H and HErr and the G or G1/G2 errors were <= 1.0 were included in the LCDB entries. H/HErr were rounded to two decimal places and G/GErr values were rounded to three decimal places. For a new summary record, the MPCOrb values are used for H and G for groups 1 and 3. This provides the necessary consitency for H when generating frequency-diameter plots from LCDB data, which have have been historically based on the H(V)-G system. For the Details record, the H Band is 'GR' for group 1 and 'V' for groups 2 and 3. To help convey that the V magnitudes were derived from GR and assumed V-R magnitudes, the H Method is 'D' (Derived). The G Method will be empty for groups 1 and 2 since, regardless 9 Metis Durech 2011web Pole solution verified by Keck AO and occulation observations. Drummond 2012 Effective diameter derived from ellipsoid of 218x175x129 km. 10 Hygiea Durech 2011a Second pole solution (312,-42) gives a diameter of 443 ± 45 km. This is not the preferred solution. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 11 Parthenope Mahlke 2021 The errors for H, G1, G2 are the larger of the HDI 95% values given for each parameter. In many cases, there are two entries for each asteroid, one for the c(yan) and the other for the o(range) ATLAS filter. The taxonomic class is on the Bus-DeMeo system was taken from various references. This work did not determine class independently. 13 Egeria Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Masiero 2017 The albedo error given for Masiero 2017 is the maximum possible value when converting from albedo values from log space to value space. 14 Irene Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Colazo 2021d This applies to all Colazo 2021d entries. There are up to three details entries per object: 1) H-G using Gaia GR magnitudes, 2) H-G with GR magnitudes transformed to V and adding ground-based data to include phase angles < 10 deg, and 3) H-G1,G2 using the same magnitudes as in 2. Only results where there were valid numbers for H and HErr and the G or G1/G2 errors were <= 1.0 were included in the LCDB entries. H/HErr were rounded to two decimal places and G/GErr values were rounded to three decimal places. For a new summary record, the MPCOrb values are used for H and G for groups 1 and 3. This provides the necessary consitency for H when generating frequency-diameter plots from LCDB data, which have have been historically based on the H(V)-G system. For the Details record, the H Band is 'GR' for group 1 and 'V' for groups 2 and 3. To help convey that the V magnitudes were derived from GR and assumed V-R magnitudes, the H Method is 'D' (Derived). The G Method will be empty for groups 1 and 2 since, regardless Martikainen 2021 This applies to all Martikainen 2021 entries (A 649, A98). Of the 492 asteroids in their tables, only 312 were included in the LCDB: those where H_G, G1, and G2 were found. They found that H_G and H_V had a strong 1:1 correlation, i.e., in almost all cases, the two values were essentially the same. For the Details records, the taxonomic class given by Martikainen et al. has a suffix of '(T)' (Tholen) or '(BDM)' Bus-DeMeo. The phase angle is the average of the min/max phase angles. The PAB values could not be computed. No errors were given for G1/G2. They have been assumed to be 0.05. Since the results are based in part on dense lightcurves, the Survey flag was set to LCI-D even though sparse Gaia data were included. 15 Eunomia Hanus 2012a Diameter derived from combined LC inversion model and adaptive optics data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 16 Psyche Durech 2011a Second pole solution (213,1) has a slightly larger error bar (36 km) for the diameter. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from occultation-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 17 Thetis Behrend 2007web Originally reported P = 12.27 ± 0.05. Updated in 2011. Behrend 2011web Originally reported P = 12.259 ± 0.007 h. Updated in 2011 with additional data. 19 Fortuna Durech 2011web Pole confirmed by HST and occultation observations. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Veres 2015 Veres et al. (2015) from Pan-STARRS photometry. The value for G is G12, not G1, and so the G2 values are NULL. 21 Lutetia Belskaya 2010a The period given was adopted from work by Faury (2008). Carry 2010b Shape model is non-convex. Durech 2017 Durech 2017: Combined photometric and thermal data. 22 Kalliope Descamps 2008a Linus D = 28 ± 2 km. Kalliope a = 117.5, b = 82, c = 62 km. Marchis 2008c D(Linus) > 22 km Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Stephens 2022c Based on data set that combined two observing runs about 10 days apart. 23 Thalia Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 27 Euterpe Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 28 Bellona Behrend 2006web Originally reported as 16.3 h. Behrend 2007web Originally reported as 16.32 h. Behrend 2008web Originally reported as 16.623 h. Modified to fit period found with 2012 data. Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 29 Amphitrite Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 30 Urania Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 31 Euphrosyne Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 32 Pomona Behrend 2008web Originally reported with P = 7.1. Updated in 2011 to fit period found with 2011 data (11.7 h). Updated in 2016 to fit period found from 2016 data. Behrend 2011web Originally reported P = 7.1 h. Updated in 2011 to fit period found from 2011 data. Updated in 2016 to force fit to period found from 2016 data. Behrend 2012web Originally reported 11.7 h. Changed to force a fit to period found from 2016 data. 34 Circe Durech 2011a Second pole (275,51) gives a diameter of 107 ± 10 km. The two solutions are about equally likely. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 35 Leukothea Pilcher 2009d Pole solution was determined using 'amplitude-aspect' method. 36 Atalante Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 37 Fides Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 39 Laetitia Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 40 Harmonia Hanus 2012a Diameter derived from combined LC inversion model and adaptive optics data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 41 Daphne Conrad 2008b Discovey of S/2008 (41) 1. Matter 2011 The diameter is based on a non-convex model using lightcurves and AO images. A convex model gives an effective diameter of 194-209 km. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 42 Isis Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 45 Eugenia Merline 1999 Discovery of S/1998 (45) 1 Marchis 2006c Detection of known satellite. Marchis 2007 Discovery of second satellite. D ~ 6 km. Hanus 2012a Diameter derived from combined LC inversion model and adaptive optics data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 47 Aglaja Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 50 Virginia Fornasier 2011a The taxonomic classes given by Fornasier et al. are on the Tholen system. 52 Europa Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Merline 2013a Diameter and albedo based on a rocky body. An equally likely solution assuming a collection of bare rock slabs gives D = 0.004 ± 0.001 km and pV = 0.45 ± 0.35. 53 Kalypso Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 54 Alexandra Torppa 2008a Sidereal period is for (307, 20) solution. Durech 2011a The second pole solution (156,13) is the least preferred. It also gives a different diameter of 135 ± 20 km and sidereal period of 7.022641 h. Durech 2011web The pole solution (318, +23) has P_sidereal = 7.022649 h. Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from occultation-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 62 Erato Yeh 2020 For Yeh 2020, the amplitude error was found with max(0.01, 0.1*YehAmp) Jiang 2021 This note applies to all Jiang 2021 entries. The diameter error is the larger of a two, non-linear error values. 68 Leto Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 69 Hesperia Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 70 Panopaea Wilawer 2022 This applies to all Wilawer 2022 (MNRAS 513, 3242-3251): The observations for each asteroid spanned several months. The phase and PAB angles are for the first date of the observations (Zero phase). Period errors were not given and so assumed to be 2 units of the last decimal place. 72 Feronia Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 80 Sappho Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 81 Terpsichore Timerson 2010 The diameter was calculated from the a/b values for the best-fit ellipse. It represents a minimum value. Timerson 2010 The diameter was calculated from the a/b values for the best-fit ellipse. It represents a minimum value. 82 Alkmene Timerson 2015 Occultation profile gives ellipsoid of 62.8 ± 0.9 x 55.4 ± 0.9 km. Effecitve diameter is based on area of the ellipse. The shape supports model 146 on the DAMIT site (http://astro.troja.mff.cuni.cz/projects/asteroids3D/web.php) 83 Beatrix Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 85 Io Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 87 Sylvia Behrend 2012web Single lightcurve from data spanning two months. The amplitude, and possibly synodic period, seemed to have changed over the interval. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Carry 2021 Multiple lightcurves from 1978-08-30 to 2008-04-01. 88 Thisbe Durech 2011a The second pole solution (247,50) gives a slightly larger effective diameter: 220 ± 16 km. This is the least preferred solution. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from occultation-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 89 Julia Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 90 Antiope Merline 2000a Discovery of satellite. Bartczak 2014 D1: 80.8 ± 1.8 km. D2: 80.4 ± 1.8 km. Separation: 174 ± 4 km. 93 Minerva Torppa 2008a Sidereal period is for (49, -40) pole solution. Marchis 2009 Estimated sizes: S1 4km; S2 3 km. Behrend 2011web Originally reported as P = 5.98 ± 0.05 h. Forced in 2012 to agree with period found using 2012 data. Marchis 2011a D_MinervaI = 4 ± 2 km. D_MinervaII = 3 ± 1 km. P_Orb(MI) = 57.79 h. P_Orb(MII) = 26.74 h. 94 Aurora Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 97 Klotho Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 99 Dike Waszczak 2015 Waszczak (2016) H values are based on G12 system. The G12 value is given instead of G and carries 'G' for the source flag. The LCDB U value is based on the Waszczak et al. 'relflag' value, with relflag = 0 given U = 1 and relflag = 1 given U = 2 103 Hera Wang 2019 G2: 0.45(1) 105 Artemis Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 107 Camilla Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Marsset 2016 Discovery of second satellite. Pajuelo 2018a Orbital period in binaries table is for S1. S2 108 Hecuba Behrend 2005web Originally reported 19.8 h. Updated in 2016 to fit new period. 114 Kassandra Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 119 Althaea Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 121 Hermione Descamps 2009a Pole (4, +13) has P_sidereal = 5.550878 h and is based on non-convex model. 125 Liberatrix Durech 2007 The pole (280, +74) has P_sidereal = 3.968199 h. 126 Velleda Behrend 2011web Originally reported P = 5.36 ± 0.05 h, A = 0.05 ± 0.01 mag. Updated in 2011 after additional data obtained. 128 Nemesis Doubled period (~78 h) cannot be formally excluded. Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 129 Antigone Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 130 Elektra Behrend 2001web Originally reported P = 5.43 h. Data forced to fit period found in 2011. Behrend 2009web Period originally reported as 5.43 ± 0.01 h. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Yang 2014 S/2014 (130) 1. Second satellite. Projected separation from primary approx. 550 km. Berdeu 2021 Discovery of third satellite. 132 Aethra Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR This note applies to all Binzel 2019 (2019Icar..324...41B) detail records: For the MITHNEOS method, VIS indicates visible data only. NIR indicates near-infrared data only. VISNIR indicates both. eVISNIR indicates the visible portion of the spectrum is from the Eight-Color Asteroid Survey (ECAS, Zellner et al. 1985) sVis indicates the visible portion of the spectrum is from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS, Ivezic et al. 2001). TAXON indicates the type is reported in the literature; see the source listed in the 'Taxon' reference column of the original file. For visible data only (VIS), the taxonomic type is from the Bus classification system (Bus and Binzel 2002). For visible plus near-infrared data (VISNIR), the taxonomic type is from the Bus-DeMeo classification system (DeMeo et al. 2009). '-comp' refers to the broad taxonomic complex. When multiple taxonomic classes are listed, they are in subjective order of most likely type first. ':' indicates the assignment is 135 Hertha Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 136 Austria Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. Durech 2016 Models from Durech et al. (2016) are posted on the DAMIT web site. http://astro.troja.mff.cuni.cz/projects/asteroids3D/web.php 139 Juewa Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 145 Adeona Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Wang 2018 Sidereal period for pole (122, -3): 15.0733 h 146 Lucina Durech 2009 The pole (305, -41) has P_sidereal = 18.55390 h. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 152 Atala Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 153 Hilda Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html Warner 2021i Model axis ratios (c = 1.0): a/b = 1.14, a/c = 1.4839. 155 Scylla Hanus 2018b The Hanus 2018b entries include results only if they are revisions or rejections of previously reported pole solutions. 158 Koronis Erasmus 2020 This note applies to all Erasmus 2020 (2020ApJS..247...13E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 for a period probability >= 75 and U = 2- for < 75. The family class (C or S) was assigned based on which had the higher probability (if 50, CS was assigned). All family values of Nysa-Polana were assigned to Nysa family. SWF (Sparse Wide-field) was assigned to the Survey entry. 160 Una Marciniak 2009a Pole (308, -41) has P_sidereal = 11.03316 h. 161 Athor Pilcher 2010b Pole solution was determined using 'amplitude-aspect' method. 165 Loreley Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 167 Urda Durech 2011a The second pole solution (107,-69) gives a slightly larger effective diameter: 51 ± 15 km. This is the least preferred solution. 176 Iduna Wang 2018 Sideral period for pole solution (156,+73): 11.29382 h. 178 Belisana Yeh 2020 For Yeh 2020, the amplitude error was found with max(0.01, 0.1*YehAmp) 184 Dejopeja Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 194 Prokne Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 196 Philomela Durech 2007 Pole (276, -49) has P_sidereal = 8.332827 h. 198 Ampella Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 201 Penelope Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 202 Chryseis Behrend 2005web Originally reported P = 11.8 ± 0.5. Updated in 2011. 208 Lacrimosa Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 211 Isolda Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 216 Kleopatra Marchis 2008e AO observations show two satellites, ~5 km and ~3 km. Distances: 650 km and 380 km, respectively. Shepard 2018 DimensionsL 276 x 94 x 178 km 221 Eos Hanus 2018a Hanus 2018 combined optical photometric and IR (WISE) data for shape modeling. Shape modeling quality rating (QF) is from Hanus 2017c. 224 Oceana Behrend 2006web Originally reported P = 18.93 ± 0.05. Updated in 2011. 228 Agathe Szabo 2016 The plots for Szabo 2016a were made available off-line. They were not included in the original paper or in supplemental data. 230 Athamantis Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 238 Hypatia Behrend 2004web Originally reported 8.88 h. Updated in 2011. 239 Adrastea Behrend 2007web Originally reported as 19.846 h. Modified based on results from later observations. 250 Bettina Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 266 Aline Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 271 Penthesilea Podlewska-Gaca 2021 This note applies to all Podlewska-Gaca et al. (2021) Ap. J. Suppl. Ser. 2021, id. 4. The given observation date is the mid-date for runs C9a and C9b. Few lightcurves were published. By default, entries from Table 2 were assigned U = 2; entries from Table 3 were rated U = 2-. entries in Table 4 were also given U = 2- with the errors assumed to be 25% of the listed period. 275 Sapientia Dose 2022c G values in Dose 2022c were derived by finding the value for G that gave the lowest RMS fit to the Fourier curve. The value for G may or may not be consistent with the taxonomic classification. 276 Adelheid Durech 2011a The second pole solution (199,-20) gives a slightly smaller diameter: 117 ± 15 km. The two solutions are about equally likely. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Occultation-inversion gives D = 125 ± 15. 282 Clorinde Dose 2023a The values for G in Dose 2023 (MPB 50, 65-73) were found by minimizing the RMS scatter of a Fourier fit, not by strict calculation. 283 Emma Durech 2011web Pole (251, +22) has P_sidereal = 6.895222 h. 298 Baptistina Carvano 2010 H_R = 10.92 was directly measured value. The H = 11.30 is the result of using H_R and V-R = 0.38 measured by the authors. 302 Clarissa Durech 2011a The first pole solution (28,-72) is preferred. 306 Unitas Durech 2011a The second pole solution (253,-17) gives a slightly larger diameter: 53 ± 5. This is the least preferred solution. 308 Polyxo Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 312 Pierretta Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 317 Roxane Merline 2009 Estimated Ds/Dp: 0.26 (based on magnitude differences). 331 Etheridgea Warner 2010i Presuming the nightly calibrations were correct, the data provide any number of solutions. If the two sessions are forced to overlay, a number of solutions, less than 24 h, are still possible. 345 Tercidina Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 349 Dembowska Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 350 Ornamenta Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 352 Gisela Erasmus 2020 This note applies to all Erasmus 2020 (2020ApJS..247...13E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 for a period probability >= 75 and U = 2- for < 75. The family class (C or S) was assigned based on which had the higher probability (if 50, CS was assigned). All family values of Nysa-Polana were assigned to Nysa family. SWF (Sparse Wide-field) was assigned to the Survey entry. 354 Eleonora Behrend 2001web Originally reported P = 4.3 ± 0.1. Updated in 2011 to fit data to a period found with a different data set. Behrend 2002web Originally reported P = 4.282 ± 0.005, A = 0.52 ± 0.02. Updated in 2011. Behrend 2006web Originally reported P = 4.27750 ± 0.00003 h, A = 0.20 ± 0.01. Updated in 2011. Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 355 Gabriella Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 362 Havnia Wang 2015b Period for second pole is 16.918935 ± 0.000043 h. 370 Modestia Athanasopoulos 2022 The orginal paper reported a pole of (268, -92). |Latitude| > 90 deg is not allowed in LCDB. In such a case, 180 deg is added to or subtracted from the longitude and the complimentary latitude is used. In this case, that means latitude = -88 deg. 372 Palma Durech 2011a The second pole solution (44,17) gives a different diameter (198 ± 26 km) and sidereal period (8.58191 h). The two solutions are about as likely. 374 Burgundia Behrend 2018web Two halves of 13-h period are identical, leaving half-period a distinct possibility. 382 Dodona Behrend 2021web The two earliest observation runs were ignored in assigning the U code. They are what appear to be obvious outliers. 386 Siegena Behrend 2004web Period originally reported as 7.6 h. 390 Alma Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 391 Ingeborg Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 394 Arduina Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 409 Aspasia Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. Occultation-inversion gives D = 173 ± 17 km. 414 Liriope Chang 2015 Chang (2015) H values are based on H-G system. The G values are in R, not V. All lightcurves rated U=2-3 by Chang were reviewed and a formal U code was assigned by the LCDB authors. The objects in their U = 1 list were all given U = 1. 418 Alemannia Gorby 2018 Results table has incorrect period. 423 Diotima Hanus 2013b Diameter is derived from AO-inversion model for preferred pole solution, which was reported in a previous work. 433 Eros Trilling 2010 The Trilling (2010) results are based on using values for H taken from the JPL Horizons site. In Trilling (2010), there is often a significant disagreement among the albedo, diameter, and H values when they are applied to the standard formula that relates these three values (see LCDB README file), i.e., using the Trilling albedo and diameter values gives a differnt value for H than stated, sometimes by up to 0.1 mag. Mueller 2011a H and G taken from other sources. Thomas 2011b This note applies to all entries for Thomas 2011b. Warm Spitzer observations. The error is the larger of the + or - (which were not the same). Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 434 Hungaria Morrison 1979 Morrison values were based on V(1,0) magnitude system. They have been converte Lucas 2017 The Lucas 2017 taxonomic classifications are on the Bus-DeMeo system. Wang 2021 This applies to all Wang & Xu (2021). The pole coordinates and sidereal period uncertanties were not specified. Default errors for longitude and latitude of ± 10 deg were used while the default period error used was 2 units in the last decimal place. 435 Ella Chang 2016 Chang (2016) H values are based on H-G system. The G values are in R, not V. All lightcurves with a period were initially given U = 2 regardless of rating by Chang et al. The plots for the 352 lightcurves that did not have complete coverage were reviewed and the U codes revised. In many of those cases, it appears that the half-period was found. For those, if the summary line depended on the Chang et al. entry, the period on the summary line is double that found by Chang et al. and carries a 'D' (determined) flag in the NOTES field. No errors were given for amplitudes, which were often dramatically overstated. 437 Rhodia Behrend 2005web Originally reported 52.8 h. Updated to fit period found with 2016 data. 444 Gyptis Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 469 Argentina Wang 2003 BIN: Reported possibility of being binary. Considered unreliable. Wang 2005 NPA: Reported secondary period of 8.74 hr. Considered unreliable. 470 Kilia Pilcher 2020f Second period of 119.3 h in lc_npar is one of several possibilities. 471 Papagena Torppa 2008a Sidereal period is for (29, 41) solution. 475 Ocllo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 479 Caprera Behrend 2002web Originally reported P = 5.259 ± 0.002 h, A = 0.34 ± 0.09 h. Updated in 2011 to fit data to a new period found with a different data set. Behrend 2004web Originally reported P = 5.247 ± 0.006 h, A = 0.08 ± 0.01 mag. Updated in 2011 to fit to a new period found from a different data set. Behrend 2007web Originally reported P = 5.2491 ± 0.0002, A = 0.07 ± 0.01 mag. Updated in 2011 to fit data a new period found with a different data set. 488 Kreusa Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 506 Marion Wang 2015b Period for second pole solution is 16.549751 ± 0.000060 511 Davida Conrad 2007 Measured ellipsoid (a,b,c): 357±2, 294±2, 231±50 km. 512 Taurinensis Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 522 Helga Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 531 Zerlina Behrend 2002web Originally reported 7.2 h. Updated to fit period found with 2016 data. 540 Rosamunde Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 544 Jetta Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 550 Senta Behrend 2004web Originally reported 19.584 h. Updated to fit period found in 2016. Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 566 Stereoskopia Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 585 Bilkis Wang 2016 All lightcurves for Wang et al. 2016 were forced to sidereal period and were in intensity units of the inversion model curve, therefore there were no amplitudes in magnitude given. 588 Achilles Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 617 Patroclus Buie 2015 Volume equivalent diameters based on derived ellipsods are D_Patroclus: 113 km; D_Menoetius: 104 km Chatelain 2016 The B-V and V-R magnitudes for the Chatelain 2016 (Icarus 271) were derived from the data table in Appendix A. The median errors for these color indexes in the paper are given, not the actual values for the individual results. The B-R and V-I magnitudes are from Table 3. The B-V and V-R values may not yield the exact numbers of the stated B-R and V-I magnitudes. Berthier 2020 Area-equivalent diameter. 624 Hektor The objects under Sonnett 2015 were observed in the W3 (12 um) band by WISE. The amplitude given is the maximum range of values, not the range of a fitted lightcurve. No periods were given for the data. 636 Erika Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 654 Zelinda Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 676 Melitta Behrend 2002web Originally reported as 8.5734. Behrend 2006web Originally reported as 14.09 h. 694 Ekard Timerson 2010 A least squares fit to the irregular shape derived from the occultation observations and based on a shape model by Torppa et al. (2003) yields the stated diameter. Timerson 2010 A least squares fit to the irregular shape derived from the occultation observations and based on a shape model by Torppa et al. (2003) yields the stated diameter. 699 Hela Behrend 2003web Originally reported 4.765 h. Updated to fit period found with 2016 data. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 702 Alauda Rojo 2011 R_orbit = 1230 km. 704 Interamnia Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 719 Albert Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 727 Nipponia Baxter 2019 Baxter et al. (2019) also reported shape models for each asteroid in their paper, but did not give the sidereal period or pole solution. 728 Leonisis Galad 2010c The lightcurves from Galad 2010c are based on data from the SDSS Moving Object Catalog. 763 Cupido Pilcher 2018d Ambiguous second period. Other possibility is 121 h. 777 Gutemberga Polakis 2018d The ambiuous table includes the half-period for this work. However, given the amplitude and low phase angle, the LCDB authors chose not to include the 'A' flag in the Notes field of this record or the summary line. 786 Bredichina Dose 2021b The period/amplitude given in results table are significantly different from those in the plot. The latter were close to previous results and so adopted for this entry. 809 Lundia Marchis 2012 Hv assumed V-R = 0.54. Bartczak 2017 Reported pole is the pole of the orbit for the fully syncrhonous binary. Amplitudes are for out of eclipse lightcurve. 825 Tanina Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 853 Nansenia Behrend 2001web Originally reported P = 9.31 h. Update in 2011 based on a new period but the solution is still highly ambiguous. 854 Frostia Marchis 2012 Hv assumed V-R = 0.54. 887 Alinda Morrison 1974 Morrison gives D = 5. in his table as well as log(D). The latter results in a value of 5.2 km. We used the latter. Dunlap 1979 The authors give H_v(1,0) = 14.10 ± 0.08. For conversion to the current H-G system, we use Ho = H(1,0) - 0.34. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: eVISNIR Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 901 Brunsia Wisniewski 1997 A period of 3.139 h (with bimodal curve) was also found by Wisniewski but the final paper adopted the triply-periodic value of 4.872 h. 911 Agamemnon Timerson 2013 Ds = 3-10 km. Based on single video observation. 925 Alphonsina Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 939 Isberga Carry 2015 D1: 12.4 ± 2.5 km; Ds: 3.6 ± 0.7 km 951 Gaspra Thomas 1994 Diameter is mean radius of irregular object with principal diam Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 966 Muschi Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 987 Wallia Behrend 2008web Period originally reported as 7.0 h. 1011 Laodamia Apostolovska 2014 a/b: 0.83; b/c: 1.3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1016 Anitra Pilcher 2016f Orbital period an approximate estimate based on four possible mutual events. First entry (Date: Nov 8, 2015) is for full data set covering three months. Subsequent entries are based on subsets. 1036 Ganymed Velichko 2012 Obs date estimated from phase angle given in paper. Velichko 2013 Ellipsoid lengths: a = 960 km, b = 770 km, c = 495 km. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1052 Belgica Franco 2013b Ds/Dp >= 0.36 ± 0.02 Franco 2013c Ds/Dp = 0.36 ± 0.02 Franco 2020e The original paper gives Ds/Dp > 0.34. The 0.16 mag attenuation gives closer to 0.39. The latter is given in the lc_binaries table. 1055 Tynka Behrend 2012web Originally reported as P = 12.8 ± 0.5 h. Fornas 2023a Stepehens data (ALCDEF, 2012 Mar-May) included for analysis. 1061 Paeonia Pilcher 1987 Pilcher's notes for 1986 Dec. 4 show observations form 4:20-8:00 UT with fading by about 0.5 magnitude 5:10-7:00 UT, then brightening by 8:00. For 1986 Dec. 5, 1061 Paeonia was 'fairly easy at 5:20, 6:15, invisible at 7:20, dimly seen again 8:05 at lower altitude. 1065 Amundsenia Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 1069 Planckia Behrend 2006web Originally reported P = 11. h, A = 0.18. Updated in 2011 to fit data to new period. 1070 Tunica Waszczak (2015) H values are based on G12 system. The G12 value is given instead of G and carries 'G' for the source flag. The G2 value is NUL. The LCDB U value is based on the Waszczak et al. 'relflag' value, with relflag = 0 given U = 1 and relflag = 1 given U = 2 1082 Pirola Baker 2011a When using maximum light, H = 10.320 ± 0.013, G = 0.107 ± 0.016. 1089 Tama Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. Behrend 2011web Originally reported P = 16.45 ± 0.05, A = 0.12 ± 0.02 mag. Updated in 2011 with additional data. 1095 Tulipa Behrend 2005web Originally reported P = 2.78730 ± 0.00005 h, A = 0.20 ± 0.01 mag. Updated in 2011. 1100 Arnica Slivan 2008 A footnote to Table 2 in the Slivan et al. (2008) paper indicates that subsquent data (not included in the paper) show the period to be 14.535 h instead of the ~29 h reported in the paper. The 2007 data were not plotted in the paper. 1131 Porzia Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1134 Kepler Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 1139 Atami Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1152 Pawona Wang 2022 Sidereal period for (162, 58) and (323, 61): 3.41437 h. 1170 Siva Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 1183 Jutta Erasmus 2021 This note applies to all Erasmus et al. (2021, MNRAS). The Hv from JPL is generally within ±0.3 mag of the ATLAS H_c values reported in the paper. The C/S taxonomic class is dervived from the color indices and express as a probability. For the LCDB entries, objects >= 66% of C or S are assigned a single letter. Otherwise, C/S is listed. 1188 Gothlandia Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. Baker 2012a Using maximums of lightcurves, the authors found H = 11.425 ± 0.014 and G = 0.230 ± 0.015. Diameter and albedo are revisions to WISE values applying the author's H-G and Harris and Harris (1997) correction. 1198 Atlantis Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1204 Renzia Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1207 Ostenia Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 1268 Libya Warner 2023e Primary period (14.11) not ambiguous but there is a secondary period of 5.04 h that improves the primary lightcurve fit considerably but may not have a physical cause. 1270 Datura Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 1278 Kenya Oey 2012b The second tumbling period of 127 h is a likely but not definitive candidate. 1293 Sonja Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 1310 Villigera Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: eVISNIR 1313 Berna Marchis 2012 Hv assumed V-R = 0.54. 1316 Kasan Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 1333 Cevenola Marchis 2012 Hv assumed V-R = 0.54. 1346 Gotha Behrend 2006web Originally reported P = 2.6540 ± 0.0003 h. 1374 Isora Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1406 Komppa Behrend 2011web Authors reported P = 7.02 with 4 max/min. 1428 Mombasa Stephens 2012web A half-period of 8.38 h cannot be formally excluded. 1443 Ruppina Stephens 2020e axis ratios (c=1): a/b: 1.291, a/c: 1.210 1453 Fennia Warner 2016i To find the primary period, the satellite orbital period was forced to near previous results. 1468 Zomba Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1474 Beira Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 1489 Attila Chang 2019a This note applies to all Chang 2019 (ArXiv:1901.08719) detail records: The U code reported in Chang et al. is not necessarily the LCD value. Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 pending individual review. Amplitude errors were not given. A default of 10% of the amplitude was assigned pending individual review 1499 Pori Behrend 2008web Originally 3.36 h. Updated to fit period found in 2016. 1508 Kemi Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1509 Esclangona Merline 2003a Ds ~4 km. Distance from Primary: 140 km. Marchis 2012 Hv assumed V-R = 0.54. 1512 Oulu Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 1514 Ricouxa Durech 2009 Ambiguous pole solution. The longitude is unknown and the beta is an average of several solutions with the error being the dispersion. 1536 Pielinen Casalnuovo 2016 Secondary period P = 6.43 ± 0.01 h reported. Likely harmonic of main period. 1565 Lemaitre Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1566 Icarus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1580 Betulia Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 1593 Fagnes Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 1620 Geographos Durech 2008b Pole/period in spin axis table are for 1969 January 7.5. YORP acceleration found. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Durech 2022 YORP parameter: 1.14(03)*(10^-8 rad d^-2) 1627 Ivar Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Mueller 2011a H taken from another source. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1640 Nemo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1656 Suomi Franco 2022d Unexplained attenuation on 2022 May 18. 1667 Pels Stephens 2020e axis ratios (c=1): a/b:1.247m a/c: 1.135 1685 Toro Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Durech 2022 YORP Parameter: 0.33(3) * (10^-8 rad d^-2) 1723 Klemola Behrend 2005web Originally reported P = 6.22 h. Updated in 2011 to fit period found with 2011 data. 1727 Mette Behrend 2003web Period originally reported as 2.982 ± 0.002 h. Behrend 2006web Originally reported as P = 2.98141 ± 0.00005 h. Warner 2013i Ds/Dp: >= 0.20 ± 0.02. Unusual because primary is moderately elongated, a/b = 1.36:1 assuming equatorial view of triaxial ellipsoid. Warner 2013l Ds/Dp = 0.21 ± 0.02 Warner 2016l Orbital period forced to range near previous results. As stand-alone data set, insufficient evidence to suggest a satellite. 1741 Giclas Pravec 2019b Paired with (258640) 2002 ER36. This note applies to all Pravec 2019b: Albedos were not reported. They were calculated based on the H and Diameter given in the paper. This was done to allow comparing the albedo required to match the given values against the albedo given in the summary and/or other detail records. 1747 Wright Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1770 Schlesinger Pravec 2016web Orbital periods for 2016 have no real meaning. They were used to demonstrate behavior of lightcurve data beyond primary lightcurve. The 2015 secondary period could be independent rotation of the satellite or signs of a third member. 1777 Gehrels Pravec 1990web Reanalysis of the Wisniewski data. 1778 Alfven Chang 2014a This note applies to all entries from Chang et al. (2014, ApJ 788, A17) where they used 2nd order Fourier fits This produced amplitudes that didn't necessarily fit the data. The amplitudes in the LCDB were determined by the LCDB authors. In some cases, the precision of the period was considered too high and rounded to the nearest 0.1 h while in other cases, the stated period was converted to a >X h estimate. 1829 Dawson Galad 2010c Combined with data from Pray (2006a) 1830 Pogson Pravec 2012a D2/D1 = 0.28 ± 0.02. Value of D2/D1 = 0.30 ± 0.02 was adopted as mean of data from three apparitions. Pravec 2012a Asynchronous status assigned to satellite generating mutual events. Fauerbach 2019e The known secondary period of 3.2626 h was used to extact the primary rotation period. 1850 Kohoutek Chang (2016) H values are based on H-G system. The G values are in R, not V. All lightcurves with a period were initially given U = 2 regardless of rating by Chang et al. The plots for the 352 lightcurves that did not have complete coverage were reviewed and the U codes revised. In many of those cases, it appears that the half-period was found. For those, if the summary line depended on the Chang et al. entry, the period on the summary line is double that found by Chang et al. and carries a 'D' (determined) flag in the NOTES field. No errors were given for amplitudes, which were often dramatically overstated. 1862 Apollo Kaasalainen 2007 Period is for zero-epoch of November 13, 1980. Paper proved spin up due to YORP effect. Rozitis 2013 The authors assumed the pole and sidereal period from previous works to derive the required diameter and albedo to fit a thermophysical model that accuratly predicts Yarkovsky and YORP rates of change. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1863 Antinous Masiero 2017 The albedo error given for Masiero 2017 is the maximum possible value when converting from albedo values from log space to value space. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 1864 Daedalus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Masiero 2020a This note applies to all entries for Masiero et al. (2020a). The albedo error is the listed maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file since the actual date of observation was not given. The value for H is the 'model-out' value, which may differ slightly from the value used in the NEATM modeling (the value given in Tables 1-4). This maintains full agreement with the listed albedo and diameter. See Masiero et al. (2020a) for details about assumed errors in H and G. 1865 Cerberus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1866 Sisyphus Benner 1985 Ds/Dp ~ 0.1 Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1876 Napolitania Warner 2016b Suspected wide binary where primary has long period and large amplitude and the satellite has a short period and low amplitude. 1915 Quetzalcoatl Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 1916 Boreas Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1917 Cuyo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1937 Locarno Behrend 2019web Reported period 53.6 h but given amplitude and phase, the double period is more likely. 1943 Anteros Mueller 2011a H and G taken from other sources. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1947 Iso-Heikkila Galad 2010c For Galad 2010c entries, a compromise date of 2005 Oct 5 was used to compute phase and PAB for those objects based on SDSS data where no specific date information was provided. 1951 Lick Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1979 Sakharov Pravec 2011web Some suspected events seen but there was no consisetent solution for a secondary period. 1980 Tezcatlipoca Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 1981 Midas Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR McGlasson 2022 A shape was reported (4x2x2) with one lobe being 30% larger. The neck joining the two lobes is about 60% of the width of the lobes. 2006 Polonskaya Pray 2005c Second period due to 1) asynchronous single satelltie or 2) second satellite. 2020 Ukko Pilcher 2015i Alternation solutions with bimodal and trimodal solutions are considered unlikely. 2030 Belyaev The errors for H, G1, G2 are the larger of the HDI 95% values given for each parameter. In many cases, there are two entries for each asteroid, one for the c(yan) and the other for the o(range) ATLAS filter. The taxonomic class is on the Bus-DeMeo system was taken from various references. This work did not determine class independently. 2059 Baboquivari Masiero 2021 This note applies to all entries for Masiero et al. (2021; Plan. Sci. J. 2, A162). The albedo error is the listed maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file since the actual date of observation was not given. The value for H is the 'model-out' value, which may differ slightly from the value used in the NEATM modeling (the value given in Tables 1-4). This maintains full agreement with the listed albedo and diameter. No specific errors for H and G were given. Default values of H_err = 0.05 and G_err = 0.1 were used. 2060 Chiron Belskaya 2010b To derive H, used V-R=0.36 and phase coefficient (not G) of 0.06 mag/degree. Belskaya 2015 The Belskaya et al. (2015) provides updated color index values for TNOs based on numerous references. See that paper for the original references. Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 2061 Anza Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 2062 Aten Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 2063 Bacchus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2064 Thomsen Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2074 Shoemaker Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2077 Kiangsu Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 2078 Nanking Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2099 Opik Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2100 Ra-Shalom Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2102 Tantalus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Rozek 2022 Radar did not detect a satellite D > 75 m, which leaves earlier reports of a secondary period unexplained. 2110 Moore-Sitterly Pravec 2019b Paired with (44612) 1999 RP27. 2121 Sevastopol Sokova 2019 Orbital period for retrograde solution: 37.153 ± 0.001 h. 2178 Kazakhstania Benishek 2018m Secondary has lightcurve amplitude of 0.02 mag; 2201 Oljato Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2204 Lyyli Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 2207 Antenor Stephens 2018k Orbital period is Binaries table is one of several solutions. 2212 Hephaistos Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2242 Balaton Marchini 2016b Estimated Ds/Dp is a minimum. 2253 Espinette Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 2312 Duboshin Warner 2023e P = 51.72 has significant secondary period of P2 = 19.58 h, A2 = 0.30. The two may be harmonically related (3:8 ratio). 2320 Blarney Bennefeld 2009b The Pal et al. result of 5.99 h is considered highly secure. The periods are close to a 7:6 ratio and the data from Bennefield will fit 5.99 h. Behrend 2020web The Pal et al. result of 5.99 h is considered highly secure. The periods are close to a 14:13 ratio and the data from Behrend will fit 5.99 h. 2329 Orthos Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 2335 James Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2340 Hathor Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 2343 Siding Spring Pollock 2015b Secondary period in binary report attributed to third body. 2368 Beltrovata Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 2384 Schulhof Vokrouhlicky 2016b V-R = 0.49 ± 0.05 assumed. H_R = 11.64 ± 0.03. 2423 Ibarruri Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 2449 Kenos Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: eVISNIR 2453 Wabash Galad 2010c Combined with data from Pray (2006c) 2462 Nehalennia Szabo 2016 entries are based on Kepler 2 data. Most objects did not have a reported period/amplitude. 2483 Guinevere The objects under Sonnett 2015 were observed in the W3 (12 um) band by WISE. The amplitude given is the maximum range of values, not the range of a fitted lightcurve. No periods were given for the data. 2500 Alascattalo Bentz 2023 Period using V data. R data gave P = 2.786(0.050), A = 0.18(0.02). 2575 Bulgaria Athanasopoulos 2022 Paper gave Beta1 = 91, which is not allowed in LCDB, so a value of 90 was entered. 2577 Litva Warner 2009q P2 is assumed to be due to the rotation of the secondary. There is slight evidence that the secondary may be tidally locked and, therefore, P2 is due to the rotation of a third body in the system. Merline 2013b P_Orb(S2): 214 d (107 d). D(S2): 1.2 km. Merline 2013c P_Orb(S2): 214 d (107 d). D(S2): 1.2 km. D(S1): 1.4 km. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 2608 Seneca Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 2629 Rudra Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 2691 Sersic Oey 2016a No mutual events seen but second period found. See binary data table. 2712 Keaton This note applies to all Chang 2019 (ArXiv:1901.08719) detail records: The Chang et al. U codes are not necessarily those given in the LCDB. Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 pending individual review. 2744 Birgitta Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 2754 Efimov Pray 2006g Ds/Dp = 0.20 ± 0.03. 2760 Kacha Warner 2021b Weak secondary period of 15.63 h, 0.04 mag provided better fit but is likely an artifcat of the Fourier anlayis. 2802 Weisell Behrend 2006web Originally reported as P = 37.74 ± 0.06 h, A = 0.41 ± 0.03 mag. Data forced to fit period found in 2011. 2815 Soma Pollock 2011 Ds/Dp = 0.25 ± 0.02. 2847 Parvati Behrend 2018web Overlooked binary? 2867 Steins Jorda 2008 Lightcurve data obtained by OSIRIS/Rosetta spacecraft. The phase angle was 41.7 as seen from the craft, not the Earth. Lamy 2008a Axis ratios: a/b: 1.17; a/c: 1.25. Size: 5.73 ± 0.52, 4.95 ± 0.45, 4.58 ± 0.41 km Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 2881 Meiden Polakis 2017a The assignment of the primary and secondary periods may be reversed, i.e., the longer of the two periods may be the primary. The rotation of the satellite responsible for events is locked to the orbital period. 2897 Ole Romer Pravec 2019b Paired with (182259) 2001 FZ185. 2937 Gibbs Warner 2019r Second period found but cause not established. Could be a tumbler or binary without mutual events. Warner 2019r The U = 3- rating is for the primary period, which is clearly established (unless the object is a low-level tumbler). 2968 Iliya Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 3025 Higson Behrend 2010web Originally reported 10.8 h. Updated to fit to period found with 2016 data. 3040 Kozai Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3073 Kursk Skiff 2019b Lightcurve forced to near primary period of known binary and shows effects of satellite events. 3102 Krok Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3103 Eger Durech 2012 YORP acceleration: (1.4 ± 0.6) x 10^-8 rad d^-2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3122 Florence Benner 2017 P_ORB_Inner: ~8h. P_ORB_Outer: ~24h. Satellites are assumed to be tidally locked to orbital period. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3138 Ciney Hills 2014a Author reported P = 56.1 h with monomodal lightcurve but 0.56 mag amplitude virtually assures a bimodal curve and, therefore, double period. 3157 Novikov Marchini 2019c The period in the work was 9.952 h. However, analysis of the data by the LCDB authors found that 14.930 h was more likely correct. 3198 Wallonia Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3199 Nefertiti Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3200 Phaethon Ansdell 2014 Color index values are the average of three values derived over several years. The errors were added in quadrature. Radar Team 2017c Diameter based on high-res (75m/pixel) images. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Tabeshian 2019 H-G_B: 14.57(2), 0.00(1); H-G_R:13.28(2),-0.10(1); H-G_I: 13.07(2), -0.08(1). 3250 Martebo Alvarez 2014b Author found H_R = 10.84. A V-R = 0.38 was assumed to give H_V = 11.22 ± 0.06. 3255 Tholen Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3260 Vizbor Diameter and albedo taken from Warner 2012, which revised WISE diameter and albedo with new H-G and Harris and Harris (1997). 3267 Glo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3287 Olmstead Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3288 Seleucus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3309 Brorfelde Warner 2009i Ds/Dp: 0.26 ± 0.02 3343 Nedzel Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3352 McAuliffe Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3361 Orpheus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3362 Khufu Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3401 Vanphilos Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3402 Wisdom Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3443 Leetsungdao Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3481 Xianglupeak Pravec 2012web A single suspect attentuation was seen. 3494 Purple Mountain Cantu 2016 Authors adopted shorter (monomodal) period. However, the amplitude and phase angle dictated a bimodal solution at the longer period. 3548 Eurybates Noll 2020a Obs date is for first detection. 3551 Verenia Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 3552 Don Quixote Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3553 Mera Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 3554 Amun Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3581 Alvarez Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3623 Chaplin Marchis 2012 Hv assumed V-R = 0.54. 3635 Kreutz Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3669 Vertinskij Behrend 2020web Period matches orbital period of satellite (Christmann et al. 2020; CBET 4749). 3671 Dionysus Mueller 2011a H taken from another source. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3673 Levy Pravec 2007web Refinements on the original parameters reported by Pray et al in CBET 1165. 3674 Erbisbuhl Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3691 Bede Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3704 Gaoshiqi Pravec 2010web Systematic residuals seen, possibly due to another lightcurve component, but no good solution could be found. 3737 Beckman Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3749 Balam Merline 2002a Estimated size of satellite: 1.5 km. Marchis 2008b This is a trinary system, with a more distant satellite reported via AO observations (2002, IAUC 7827) Behrend 2014web Lightcurve shows mutual events (Amp_max = 0.46 ± 0.03) but rotation of primary not isolated. Pravec 2019b Paired with (312497) 2009 BR60. Pravec 2019b Binary information for this record is for the second satellite in (3749) Balam system. 3752 Camillo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3753 Cruithne Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3757 Anagolay Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 3761 Romanskaya Clark 2020 Results table gives P = 9.456 h. 3782 Celle Marchis 2012 Hv found using assumged V-I = 0.88. 3792 Preston Pravec 2016web The 23.8 h orbital period is based on a bimodal solution derived from a monomodal solution of 11.91 h. Possible, very shallow mutual events. Benishek 2017c If not binary, the two periods may indicate low-level tumbling. 3800 Karayusuf Warner 2008m Two possible mutual events. Insufficient data to calculate a period. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 3833 Calingasta Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3841 Dicicco Klinglesmith 2015d Ds/Dp in Binary table is a minimum. 3854 George Warner 2006f Suspicious attenutations but insufficient data for valid analysis. 3858 Dorchester Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3908 Nyx Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3912 Troja Benishek 2021h Lightcurves availalbe at http://www.asu.cas.cz/~asteroid/03912_2021a_p1.png http://www.asu.cas.cz/~asteroid/03912_2021a_porb.png 3920 Aubignan Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 3951 Zichichi Franco 2018c Some attenuations due to satellite observed. Period is based on single-period solution. 3982 Kastel' Pravec 2005b Second period in binary table may be 2.918 h. 3988 Huma Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4015 Wilson-Harrington Also know as 107P/Wilson-Harrington. It has been observed to exhibit a cometary appearance. Photometry of this object may be contaminated by unresolved coma and not represent net nucleus brightness. Urakawa 2011 The authors reported pole solutions. However, these are not considered reliable since they are based on data that are too limited for proper spin axis modeling. Urakawa 2012 The authors provided four possible solutions that involved either tumbling, a binary object, or a single body in PA rotation. The spin axis and period are for for the PA solution. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: eVISNIR 'Worked as' field is '1979 VA=165P' in original paper. 4022 Nonna Behrend 2013web Authors reported P = 1.31 h; this seems unlikely and so the double period was entered for the details record. 4034 Vishnu Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 4055 Magellan Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4142 Dersu-Uzala Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4162 SAF Dose 2022b Author gave 3.850 h for a monomodal lightcurve. There are indications that a doubled-period, with bimodal lightcurve, might be preferred. 4179 Toutatis Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4183 Cuno Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4197 Morpheus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4205 David Hughes Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 4225 Hobart Behrend 2023web Reported as P = 8.3202 h. This gives either a 3 or 6 maximum lightcurve (depending on the impretation of the maximums). The period given is 2/3 the reported period with a bimodal lightcurve. 4263 Abashiri Pravec 2012web A few deviations were see but nothing significant or convincing. 4276 Clifford Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 4336 Jasniewicz Owings 2018 The longer period is determined from data and based on removing one night from the lightcurve. 4337 Arecibo Gault 2022 Second, confirming occulation on 2021 June 9. Dp = 24.4 ± 0.6 km, Ds = 13.0 ± 1.5 (assuming circular shapes derived from occltation chords. 4341 Poseidon Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 4370 Dickens Benishek 2021j Secondary outside of events shows 0.04 mag lightcurve, a/b = 1.3 ± 0.1. Pravec 2021web Tenative lightcurves at http://www.asu.cas.cz/~asteroid/04370_2021a_p1.png http://www.asu.cas.cz/~asteroid/04370_2021a_porb.png 4401 Aditi Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 4435 Holt Stephens 2018c Mutual events not tied to orbital period seen: possible second satellite. Stephens 2018g Attenuations not tied to the orbital period may indicate a second satellite. See original paper for the evolution of the primary lightcurve and mutual events. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 4450 Pan Carbognani 2008b Values for G and Pv were assumed based on Wisniewski (1997). Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 4451 Grieve Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4486 Mithra The amplitude, A = 0.5, is an estimate based on the derived shape of the asteroid and an equatorial view. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4492 Debussy Marchis 2012 Hv found using V-R 0.54. 4495 Dassanowsky Ambiguity is for P1. Binary status not in doubt. Warner 2019i Ambiguity is for P1. Adopted period is favored because of estimated size ratio of system and binary modeling (Pravec et al., 2010) 4503 Cleobulus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 4524 Barklajdetolli Athanasopoulos 2022 The original paper reported Beta2 = 93 deg. Values |beta| > 90 are not allowed in the LCDB and so B2 = 90 was used. 4528 Berg Fornas 2023a Polakis data (ALCDEF, 2018 Feb) included in solution. 4541 Mizuno Pray 2015b Ds/Dp >= 0.24 4544 Xanthus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 4555 Josefaperez Pravec 2007web Variations in mean levels of the calibrated Ondrejov R data suggest that there may be a rotation of an unresolved satellite. 4558 Janesick Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4587 Rees Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4660 Nereus The pV = 0.3 is based on Pravec et al. (2021web) assumption of G = 0.43. Using the default pV = 0.2 gives a diameter of 0.516 km. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4666 Dietz Pravec 2015web One suspected event captured. Oey 2018a Data from 2011 and 2015 included in analysis. Possible third period seen in 2015 and 2018 data. Warner 2021g Alternate orbital solution is 33.4 h, which is near that found in 2018 and for which the mutual events were much better defined. 4688 1980 WF This note applies to all Binzel 2019 (2019Icar..324...41B) detail records: VIS indicates visible data only. NIR indicates near-infrared data only. VISNIR indicates both. eVISNIR indicates the visible portion of the spectrum is from the Eight-Color Asteroid Survey (ECAS, Zellner et al. 1985) sVis indicates the visible portion of the spectrum is from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS, Ivezic et al. 2001). TAXON indicates the type is reported in the literature; see the source listed in the 'Taxon' reference column of the original file. For visible data only (VIS), the taxonomic type is from the Bus classification system (Bus and Binzel 2002). For visible plus near-infrared data (VISNIR), the taxonomic type is from the Bus-DeMeo classification system (DeMeo et al. 2009). '-comp' refers to the broad taxonomic complex. When multiple taxonomic classes are listed, they are in subjective order of most likely type first. ':' indicates the assignment is uncertain. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4690 Strasbourg Warner 2011j Multiple solutions possible because of the limited data set. Analysis by Petr Pravec. 4708 Polydoros Stephens 2018i Period taken from plot. Results table and text each have a different period. 4718 Araki Pravec 2017web The nature of the two periods is uncertain. They could be the result of a binary or low level tumbling, thus this record carries both flags. 4729 Mikhailmil' Ruthroff 2012a Lightcurve has very unusual shape. The period could really lie between 15-30 h. 4765 Wasserburg Pravec 2019b Paired with (350716) 2001 XO105. 4775 Hansen Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 4788 Simpson Sogorb 2021 Third period (3.1506 h) may be due to eclipsing/occultating secondary or a third body. 4905 Hiromi Pravec 2019b Paired with (7813) Anderserikson. 4910 Kawasato Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 4947 Ninkasi Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 4953 1990 MU Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4954 Eric Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 4957 Brucemurray Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 4995 Griffin Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5003 Silvanominuto Waszczak (2016) H values are based on G12 system. The G12 value is given instead of G and carries 'G' for the source flag. The G2 value is NULL. The LCDB U value is based on the Waszczak et al. 'relflag' value, with relflag = 0 given U = 1 and relflag = 1 given U = 2 5011 Ptah Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5026 Martes Pravec 2019b Paired with 2005 WW113. 5066 Garradd Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 5076 Lebedev-Kumach The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 5104 Skripnichenko Behrend 2023web Reported as 5.56457 h. The amplitude and high degree of symmentry of the quadramodal lightcurve make this unlikely. 5131 1990 BG Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5143 Heracles Taylor 2012b Dp = 3.6 ± 1.2 km; Ds = 0.6 ± 0.3 km. Orbital period of 16 h is based on period 14-17 h. A period of 40-57 h cannot be excluded, but it is inconsistent with the assumption of a synchronously rotating secondary. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5145 Pholus Tegler 2005 Dimensions (diameters) determined by calculation to be 310 X 160 x 150 km. This gives an effective spheroidal diameter of ~190 km. Belskaya 2010b To derive H, used V-R=0.77 and phase coefficient (not G) of 0.083 mag/degree. 5230 Asahina Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5247 Krylov Lee 2020 P = 82.28 is the strongest apparent period, the conjunction of the period of rotation (368.7 h) and rotation (67.27 h). 5261 Eureka Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Skiff 2019b Raw plot shows total eclipse/occultation due to satellite. Skiff 2019b Raw plot shows mutual event due to satellite. 5275 Zdislava Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 5332 Davidaguilar Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 5349 Paulharris Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 5381 Sekhmet Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 5384 Changjiangcun The low WISE and AKARI albedos indicate that C-type is a better choice rather than the LCDB default of ES for Hungaria members. 5392 Parker Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5402 Kejosmith Benishek 2018j The ambiguity is for Porb. It may be 32.62 h instead of the adopted 16.31 h. 5407 1992 AX Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5425 Vojtech Vander Haagen 2012a Author reported a trimodal solution of 3.972 h. This is considered highly unlikely. 5496 1973 NA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 5510 1988 RF7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 5535 Annefrank Hillier 2011 Stardust and ground-based observations. 5573 Hilarydownes The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 5585 Parks Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 5587 1990 SB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5604 1992 FE Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5620 Jasonwheeler Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 5626 Melissabrucker Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5642 Bobbywilliams Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 5645 1990 SP Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5646 1990 TR Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5649 Donnashirley Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 5653 Camarillo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 5656 Oldfield The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 5660 1974 MA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5674 Wolff Aznar 2016b Ds/Dp >= 0.80 5693 1993 EA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: eVISNIR 5720 Halweaver Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 5732 1988 WC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 5751 Zao Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 5786 Talos Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5797 Bivoj Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 5817 Robertfrazer Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5828 1991 AM Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 5836 1993 MF Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 5867 1988 RE Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 5870 Baltimore Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 5899 Jedicke Warner 2010h The amplitude of the primary was too low to establish a period with certainty. The mutual events, however, were well-defined. Warner 2010n The amplitude of the primary was too low to establish a period with certainty. The mutual events, however, were well-defined. 5968 Trauger Warner 2014d Unexplained 'event' on Sep 5. Possible period solutions assuming a satellite are P_orb = 15.9 or 31.7 h. 6037 1988 EG Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 6041 Juterkilian Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 6042 Cheshirecat Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 6047 1991 TB1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 6053 1993 BW3 Warner 2015s Result of combining data sets from 2015 January and March. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 6063 Jason Warner 2017n Radar could not confirm long period. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 6070 Rheinland Vokrouhlicky 2011 H_R actually found. Authors used V-R = 0.49 ± 0.05 to convert to H. Vokrouhlicky 2017b See paper for discussion of pole solution uncertainties. Pravec 2019b Paired with (54827) Kurpfalz. 6084 Bascom Pravec 2012a Residual variations of 0.02 mag may indicate rotation of a satellite. 6170 Levasseur Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 6178 1986 DA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 6183 Viscome Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 6186 Zenon Benishek 2017b S1 has amplitude of 0.04 mag. 6239 Minos Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 6261 Chione Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 6369 1983 UC Pravec 2019b Paired with (510132) 2010 UY57. The Observing Circumstances are for lightcurves from 2013. 6386 Keithnoll Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 6411 Tamaga Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 6444 Ryuzin Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 6455 1992 HE Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 6456 Golombek The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a p_V = 0.18. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 6489 Golevka Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 6500 Kodaira Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 6523 Clube Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 6569 Ondaatje Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 6585 O'Keefe Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 6611 1993 VW Pravec 2005web The second period maybe the secondary's rotation or the orbtial period. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 6764 Kirillavrov Polakis 2022a Analysis of TESS data (Pal et al, 2020, Ap. J. 247, A26). 6809 Sakuma Pravec 2018web Suspected mutual events observed on two nights. 6847 Kunz-Hallstein Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 6909 Levison Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7002 Bronshten Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 7025 1993 QA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 7079 Baghdad Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 7088 Ishtar Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 7092 Cadmus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 7132 Casulli Franco 2020e The original gives Ds/Dp ~ 0.21. The 0.11 mag attenuation gives Ds/Dp ~ 0.33. The latter is used in the lc_binaries table. 7165 Pendleton Behrend 2023web Data show possible binary events. 7187 Isobe Warner 2011o Weak secondary period: P = 16.33 ± 0.04 h, A = 0.12 ± 0.01 mag. Warner 2011o Weak secondary period: P = 16.378 ± 0.05 h, A = 0.05 ± 0.01 mag. 7304 Namiki Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7307 Takei Benishek 2021e Secondary has lightcurve amplitude (in the combined primary plus secondary lightcurve) of 0.05 mag. 7335 1989 JA Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 7336 Saunders Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7341 1991 VK Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7343 Ockeghem Pravec 2019b Paired with (154634) 2003 XX38. 7350 1993 VA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 7358 Oze Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7393 Luginbuhl Warner 2019k Out of event satellite lightcurve indicates elongation of about 1.7:1 7474 1992 TC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 7480 Norwan Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 7482 1994 PC1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7488 Robertpaul Stephens 2022e P2 isn't a formal solution, just that one that, when subtracted, results in a U = 3- P1. 7517 Alisondoane The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 7560 Spudis Warner 2013d There is a weak secondary period of 22.6 h. The 2004 apparition showed a possible binary with orbital period of 23.4 h. 7604 Kridsadaporn Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 7722 Firneis This applies to all Colazo 2021d entries. There are up to three details entries per object: 1) H-G using Gaia GR magnitudes, 2) H-G with GR magnitudes transformed to V and adding ground-based data to include phase angles < 10 deg, and 3) H-G1,G2 using the same magnitudes as in 2. Only results where there were valid numbers for H and HErr and the G or G1/G2 errors were <= 1.0 were included in the LCDB entries. H/HErr were rounded to two decimal places and G/GErr values were rounded to three decimal places. For a new summary record, the MPCOrb values are used for H and G for groups 1 and 3. This provides the necessary consitency for H when generating frequency-diameter plots from LCDB data, which have have been historically based on the H(V)-G system. For the Details record, the H Band is 'GR' for group 1 and 'V' for groups 2 and 3. To help convey that the V magnitudes were derived from GR and assumed V-R magnitudes, the H Method is 'D' (Derived). The G Method will be empty for groups 1 and 2 since, regardless 7753 1988 XB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7757 Kameya Warner 2011web Data too noisy to give reasonable period or amplitude. 7758 Poulanderson Warner 2012m Only one event well seen, maybe a second. Several other orbital period solutions fit, ranging out to about 100 hours. 7760 1990 RW3 Galad 2010c Combined with data from Pray (2006f) 7813 Anderserikson Pravec 2019b Paired with (4905) Hiromi. 7818 Muirhead Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 7822 1991 CS Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7888 1993 UC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7889 1994 LX Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 7977 1977 QQ5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 8013 Gordonmoore Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 8014 1990 MF Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 8034 Akka Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 8037 1993 HO1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 8167 Ishii Pravec 2021web Two attenutions suspected on Feb 6 and 9. 8176 1991 WA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 8201 1994 AH2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 8306 Shoko Polishook 2014a Likely mutual events seen twice, but insufficient data to determine the orbital period for a satellite. Pravec 2014a Possible third body. Pravec 2019b Paired with 2011 SR158. 8345 Ulmerspatz The lightcurves from the 2011-2012 apparition give strong indications that this asteroid might be a tidally-locked binary of nearly equal sized components, similar to 90 Antiope. Klinglesmith 2012c When using the full data set, P = 17.1192 ± 0.0008 h. 8355 Masuo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 8356 Wadhwa Pravec 2008web http://www.asu.cas.cz:80/~asteroid/08356.png 8369 Miyata Warner 2011s Subtracting a weak secondary period of 49.24 h improves the RMS fit of the 2.73 h period noticeably. 8373 Stephengould Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 8444 Popovich Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 8566 1996 EN Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 8567 1996 HW1 Magri 2011 Authors give ellipsoid of 3.8x1.6x1.5 km, which gives an effective spheroidal diameter of about 2 km. Composite lightcurves were not provided, only overlays of the lightcurve data over the model curve. The U=3 rating refers to the overall quality of the data set used to find the pole, shape, and sidereal period. Trilling 2016 This applies to all Trilling 2016 (AJ 152): the listed errors for the diameter and albedo are the larger of the ± values, which were not the same. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 8651 Alineraynal Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 8828 1988 RC7 The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 8861 Jenskandler Hayes-Gehrke 2023c P = 4.500 is a trimodal solution. 8864 1991 VU The albedo error given for Masiero 2017 is the maximum possible value when converting from albedo values from log space to value space. 9068 1993 OD Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Pravec 2019b Paired with (455327) 2002 OP28. Pravec 2019b Paired with (455327) 2002 OP28. 9069 Hovland Marchis 2012 Hv assumed V-R = 0.54. 9082 Leonardmartin Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 9162 Kwiila Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 9202 1993 PB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 9400 1994 TW1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 9671 Hemera Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 9783 Tensho-kan Pravec 2019b Paired with (348018) 2003 SF334. 9856 1991 EE Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 9881 Sampson Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 9950 ESA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 9969 Braille Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 9992 1997 TG19 Higgins 2006f Incorrectly referenced in text as 1997 TH19. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 10051 Albee Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 10115 1992 SK Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR Durech 2022 YORP Parameter: 8.3(6) * (10^8 rad d^-2) 10123 Fideoja Pravec 2019b Paired with (117306) 2004 VF21. 10132 Lummelunda Benishek 2018f See original paper for evolution of the primary lightcurve and attenuation events. Salvaggio 2018b Shorter period in ambiguous table comes from lightcurve plot while longer period in detail record comes from text. 10145 1994 CK1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 10150 1994 PN Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 10165 1995 BL2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 10199 Chariklo Belskaya 2010b To derive H, used V-R=0.48 and phase coefficient (not G) of 0.06 mag/degree. 10247 Amphiaraos McNeill 2021 This note applies to all entries for McNeill et al. (2021; Plan. Sci. J. 2, A6). The H-G (Bowell) model was used for finidng Hc/Ho and, from all appearances, Go not Gv. Table 1 lists Hv values taken from the JPL database and not Ho (the orange data being far more prevalent) or Hc. The error for Hv was presumed to be 0.05 mag 10261 Nikdollezhal' The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 10295 Hippolyta Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 10296 Rominadisisto The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 10302 1989 ML Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Warner 2022i Final solution when using additive period anlaysis required P3 = 18.90, A3=0.15. 10502 Armaghobs Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 10563 Izhdubar Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 10779 1991 LW Warner 2011o One-night stand. Period is based on a half-period analysis. 11001 Andrewulff Pravec 2012web Partial attenuations seen but not enough to confirm binary status. 11054 1991 FA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 11066 Sigurd Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 11284 Belenus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 11286 1990 RO8 Pravec 2019b Paired with (59394) 1999 FZ23. 11311 Peleus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 11351 Leucus Mottola 2020 V-SR: 0.313 ± 0.021 11398 1998 YP11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 11405 1999 CV3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 11500 Tomaiyowit Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 11677 1998 DY4 Pravec 2019b Paired with (412065) 2013 ET86. Pravec 2019b Paired with (412065) 2013 ET86. 11836 Eileen Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 11842 Kap'bos Ye 2011 Asteroid pair with (228747) 2002 VH3, for which Ye found B-V = 0.704 ± 0.154, V-R = 0.480 ± 0.057, and V-I = 0.829 ± 0.111. 11885 Summanus Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 12016 Green The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 12326 Shirasaki Pray 2017a Secondary period may be due to rotation of the satellite or a third body. If the former, the system would be fully-asynchronous and not singly-asychronous. 12376 Cochabamba The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 12538 1998 OH Vaduvescu 2017 Sloan g magnitudes Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Warner 2019h Two close solutions that are not harmonically related. See the binaries file. The two periods could also be the result of tumbling. Both possibilties fit the data. Warner 2019p The split-halves plot for 5.16 h essentially duplicates the two halves. In this case, the shorter period was adopted. 12711 Tukmit Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 12923 Zephyr Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 13123 Tyson Pravec 2022web No lightcurve for suspected secondary period. 13186 1996 UM Wang 2021 Sideral period for (38, +35): 4.29828 h 13284 1998 QB52 Pravec 2019b Paired with (154828) 2004 RT8. Pravec 2019b Paired with (154828) 2004 RT8. 13331 1998 SU52 Warner 2011k A weak secondary period of ~15.1 h was observed but could not be explained. 13355 1998 TP17 Pravec 2023web Second period is well-established. It could be due to tumbling or a satellite, therefore, the asteroid is listed as both types. 13553 Masaakikoyama Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Warner 2019b Single period found 39 h, very similar to Pravec et al. 2005. 13651 1997 BR Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 13732 Woodall Ye 2011 Asteroid pair with (1979) Sakharov, for which Ye found B-V = 1.086 and V-R = 0.409. 13819 1999 SX5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 14017 1994 NS Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 14222 1999 WS1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 14309 Defoy Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 14395 Tommorgan Warner 2013d Second period of 40.4 provided by P. Pravec. The second solution is not unique. Others are possible. 14402 1991 DB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 14581 1998 RT4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 14806 1981 EV25 Pravec 2019b Paired with (496028) 2008 SC9. 14827 Hypnos Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 14868 1990 RA7 The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 14875 1990 WZ1 For Yeh 2020, the amplitude error was found with max(0.01, 0.1*YehAmp) 14923 1994 TU3 Warner 2009b Recalibration of comp star mags led to different period. 14982 1997 TH19 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 15107 Toepperwein Pravec 2019b Paired with (291188) 2006 AL54. Pravec 2021b Asteroid pair with (291188) 2006 AL54. 15350 Naganuma Pravec 2010web Period taken from 2005 observations. 15430 1998 UR31 Pravec 2010web Brightness drops by >0.10 mag seen on 2010-05-06 and 07, but period not established. 15607 2000 GA124 The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 15609 Kosmaczewski Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 15700 1987 QD Durkee 2010c Two possible periods for the orbit were 50.3 and 62.9 h. Neither could be conclusively established. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 15745 Yuliya Warner 2018m The primary and orbital period were found by forcing the data to fit near the periods found by Aznar et al. (2018). The listed primary period is one of dozens of possible solutions. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 15778 1993 NH Warner 2015e Possible wide binary. The long period is the rotation of the primary. 15817 Lucianotesi Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 15822 Genefahnestock Warner 2011c Suspected events seen on three nights in 2010 mid-June. None seen in 2010 late June or early July. 16064 Davidharvey Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 16126 1999 XQ86 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2015 AH1. 16142 Leung Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 16426 1988 EC Diameter and albedo based on H from Warner (2012) and application of Harris and Harris (1997) correction to WISE diameter and albedo. 16635 1993 QO Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 16636 1993 QP Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 16657 1993 UB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 16815 1997 UA9 Pravec 2019b Paired with (436551) 2011 GD83. 16816 1997 UF9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 16834 1997 WU22 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 16868 1998 AK8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 16960 1998 QS52 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 17188 1999 WC2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 17198 Gorjup Pravec 2019b Paired with (229056) 2004 FC126. 17274 2000 LC16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 17288 2000 NZ10 Pravec 2019b Paired with (203489) 2002 AL80. 17435 di Giovanni Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 17511 1992 QN Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 17700 Oleksiygolubov Pray 2018a Additional attenuations of 0.14-0.18 mag are not tied to orbital period and may indicate a third body. 18106 Blume Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 18109 2000 NG11 The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 18172 2000 QL7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 18181 2000 QD34 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 18514 1996 TE11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 18620 1998 DS10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 18736 1998 NU Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Warner 2019m Despite the low amplitude of the secondary period, the period spectrum clearly favors 11.95 h or 23.9 h. The low amplitude and nearly Earth day period of the secondary lightcurve make a weak case for being binary. 18882 1999 YN4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 18916 2000 OG44 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 19127 Olegefremov Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 19204 Joshuatree Stephens 2016h Main period forced to solution from 2016 data. 19261 1995 MB Behrend 2021web Period was reported by Behrend as 9.130 h. However, that solution is based on only two nights and at significant phase angle, ~19 deg, while the 2010 curves from Cabognani and Owings are at a considerably lower phase angle, 5-6 deg. The latter, along with fairly large amplitude, would make a double period, quad extrema, curve very unlikely, bordering on impossible. On the other hand, the Behrend curve could be essentially monomodal, with just a very muted secondary maximum. Also troubling is the very sharp maxima of the Behrend fit. Sharp minima are expected and can be even more extreme due to shadowing, but very narrow maxima (broadside view) are much less expected. 19289 1996 HY12 Pravec 2019b Paired with (278067) 2006 YY40. 19309 1996 UK1 Galad 2008c Several bimodal solutions possible in the range of 4.16-5.91 h. 19356 1997 GH3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 19388 1998 DQ3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 19764 2000 NF5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Warner 2021a P3/A3 11.931 h/0.08 mag produces much cleaner P1/P2 lightcurves. It doesn't have a physical nature but filters the effects of near-Earth day commensurate observations. 20062 1993 QB3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 20086 1994 LW Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 20236 1998 BZ7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 20255 1998 FX2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 20384 1998 KW51 Clark 2021 4 uneven maximums for given period. 20425 1998 VD35 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 20429 1998 YN1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 20446 1999 JB80 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 20452 1999 KG4 The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 20691 1999 VY72 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 20749 2000 AD199 The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 20790 2000 SE45 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 20826 2000 UV13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 20882 Paulsanchez Warner 2019n Data split into two sets to show evolution of the mutual events. 20958 A900 MA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 21028 1989 TO Pravec 2019b Paired with (481085) 2005 SA135. 21088 Chelyabinsk Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 21149 Kenmitchell Warner 2024 2015 Results: A third period, P3 = 60.4 ± 0.1 h, A3 = 0.16 ± 0.02 mag, was required to get P1/P2 similar to 2023. 21436 Chaoyichi Pravec 2019b Paired with (334916) 2003 YK39. 21601 1998 XO89 French 2013 Authors confirmed that the period in paper's table and not the one in the lightcurve plot is the correct value. 21709 Sethmurray Yeh 2020 For Yeh 2020, the amplitude error was found with max(0.01, 0.1*YehAmp) 21966 Hamadori Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 22099 2000 EX106 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 22449 Ottijeff Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 22753 1998 WT Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: eVISNIR 22771 1999 CU3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 22807 1999 RK7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 22891 1999 SO11 For Yeh 2020, the amplitude error was found with max(0.01, 0.1*YehAmp) 23183 2000 OY21 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 23186 2000 PO8 Warner 2021i Model dimensions (c = 1): a/b = 1.2, a/c = 2.3. 23187 2000 PN9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 23548 1994 EF2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 23615 1996 FK12 Warner 2015l A suspected 'wide binary'. The long period is the primary. The short period (U = 3) is for the fully asynchronous satellite. 23621 1996 PA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 23692 Nandatianwenners Clark 2020 Result of combining data from 2015 and 2019. The DateObs is the mid-date for the 2015 data set. Clark 2020 Results table gives P = 9.315 h. 23714 1998 EC3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 23971 1998 YU9 The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a netural spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 23983 1999 NS11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 23998 1999 RP29 Pravec 2019b Paired with (205383) 2001 BV47. 24077 1999 TD233 Warner 2014f Given periods may not be actual values, but linear combinations of the true NPAR periods. 24445 2000 PM8 Monteiro 2018b For all Monteiro 2018b: if the table date, period, and/or amplitude disagreed with the lightcurve, the value(s) in the plot were used. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 24475 2000 VN2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 24693 1990 SB2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 24761 Ahau Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 24814 1994 VW1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 25021 Nischaykumar Pravec 2019b Paired with (453818) 2011 SJ109. 25037 1998 QC37 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 25143 Itokawa Mueller 2011a H and G taken from other sources. Nishihara 2018 Using all data from 2001-2004, P = 12.1324 h Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 25330 1999 KV4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 25332 1999 KK6 Warner 2013b Alternate suspected P2: 16.18 h. 25362 1999 TH24 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 25884 Asai Pravec 2019b Paired with (48527) 1993 LC1. 25916 2001 CP44 Warner 2018m Period revised based on 2018 data/analysis. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 26093 1987 UA1 Pravec 2012web Double period not formally excluded. 26166 1995 QN3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 26209 1997 RD1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 26308 1998 SM165 Brown 2002 Sep ~ 6000 km 26416 1999 XM84 Pravec 2019b Paired with (214954) 2007 WO58. 26420 1999 XL103 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2012 TS209. 26737 Adambradley Stephens 2020c Weak secondary period of 20-40 h noticeably improved the RMS for the 2.7 h solution. 26760 2001 KP41 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 26858 Misterrogers Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 26879 Haines Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 27002 1998 DV9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 27346 2000 DN8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 28736 2000 GE133 The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 28913 2000 OT Behrend 2003web Period originally reported as 15.30 h. 29075 1950 DA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 29292 Conniewalker Pravec 2011web Several possible tumbling solutions. 29407 1996 UW Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 30105 2000 FO3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 30301 Kuditipudi Pravec 2019b Paired with (205231) 2000 QY110. 30717 1937 UD Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 30786 Karkoschka Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 30825 1990 TG1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 31210 1998 BX7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 31221 1998 BP26 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 31345 1998 PG Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 31346 1998 PB1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 31367 1998 WB9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 31415 1999 AK23 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 31669 1999 JT6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 31832 2000 AP59 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 31843 2000 CQ80 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 31869 2000 EF101 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 32122 2000 LD10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 32575 2001 QY78 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 32827 1992 DF1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 32897 Curtharris Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 32906 1994 RH Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 32957 1996 HX20 Pravec 2019b Paired with (38707) 2000 QK89. 33046 1997 UF2 Pravec 2014web P2 not determined. One attenuations seen, but unexplained. 33325 1998 RH3 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2012 AX10. 33342 1998 WT24 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 33881 2000 JK66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 34048 2000 OR35 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 34613 2000 UR13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 34755 2001 QW120 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 35107 1991 VH Merline 2008 AO observations separated primary and satellite. Angular separation of 0.08' (~3.1 km). Satellite ~2.0 mag fainter. Separation and size agree with Pravec (IAUC 6607). Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 35368 1997 UB8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 35396 1997 XF11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 35432 1998 BG9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 35670 1998 SU27 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 35783 1999 JU20 Warner 2022g Some suspicious secondary periods between 2-5 h, but the lightcurve amplitude and noise are about the same. 36017 1999 ND43 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 36183 1999 TX16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 36284 2000 DM8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 37336 2001 RM Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 37384 2001 WU1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 37424 2001 YA3 Benishek 2021k An unexplained attenuation may be due to third body. 38071 1999 GU3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 38079 1999 HF Pravec 2020web The amplitudes for the Pravec 2020web observation subsets are for outside the mutual events. 38086 Beowulf Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 38184 1999 KF Pravec 2019b Paired with (221867) 2008 GR80. 38707 2000 QK89 Pravec 2019b Paired with (32957) 1996 HX20. 39235 2000 YH55 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 39489 1981 EU6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 39565 1992 SL Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 39572 1993 DQ1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 39702 1996 TZ10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 40267 1999 GJ4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 40310 1999 KU4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 40366 1999 NF27 Pravec 2019b Paired with (78024) 2002 JO70. 42355 Typhon Noll 2006a Ds/Dp: ~0.5, assuming same albedo for both bodies. Grundy 2008 Orbit SMA: 1628 ± 29 km. Ds: 84 ± 16 km. Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. 42887 1999 RV155 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 42946 1999 TU95 Pravec 2019b Paired with (165548) 2001 DO37. 43008 1999 UD31 Pravec 2019b Paired with (441549) 2008 TM68. 43017 1999 VA2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 44200 1998 MJ25 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 44534 1998 YZ9 Polishook 2012b Authors gave P=22.5 h but with monomodal solution. The amplitude virtually assures a bimodal lightcurve with a period about double the stated value. 44612 1999 RP27 Pravec 2012web Period assumed from work in 2010. Pravec 2012web Period assumed from work in 2010. Pravec 2019b Paired with (2210) Moore-Sitterly. 44619 1999 RO42 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 44620 1999 RS43 Pravec 2019b Paired with (295745) 2008 UH98. 45251 1999 YN Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 45991 2001 BQ70 The Masi et al. paper gave this as a C-type on the basis of a neutral spectrum. However, given its location in the inner main belt, we adopted class X and a Pv = 0.18. 46162 2001 FM78 Pravec 2019b Paired with (323879) 2004 SA204. 46829 McMahon Pravec 2019b Paired with 2014 VR4. Observing Circumstances are for lightcurves from 2015 Feb. 47035 1998 WS Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 47171 Lempo Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. 47581 2000 AN178 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 47648 2000 CA40 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 48468 1991 SS1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 48527 1993 LC1 Pravec 2019b Paired with (25884) Asai. 48603 1995 BC2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 48621 1995 OC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 48652 1995 VB Pravec 2019b Paired with (139156) 2001 FP106. 49791 1999 XF31 Pravec 2019b Paired with (436459) 2011 CL97. 50000 Quaoar Fraser 2013 Period is for a non-zero eccentric orbit. A solution near 298.3 h is possible assuming a zero eccentricity. 50867 2000 GM4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 51157 2000 HB57 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 51609 2001 HZ32 Pravec 2019b Paired with (322672) 1999 TE221. 51866 2001 PH3 Pravec 2019b Paired with (326894) 2003 WV25. 52340 1992 SY Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 52387 Huitzilopochtli Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 52750 1998 KK17 Warner 2017c Suspected very wide binary. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 52760 1998 ML14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: eVISNIR 52762 1998 MT24 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: eVISNIR 52768 1998 OR2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 52773 1998 QU12 Pravec 2019b Paired with (279865) 2001 HU24. 52852 1998 RB75 Pravec 2019b Paired with (250322) 2003 SC7. 53319 1999 JM8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR Skiff 2019b Mid-date is approximate. Additional data from October also available. 53430 1999 TY16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 53431 1999 UQ10 Warner 2010k A weak signal with a period of 38.4 h was found. If this is subtracted from the data, the scatter in the data was reduced significantly. There was insufficent evidence to attribute the signal to a specific cause. 53435 1999 VM40 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 53537 Zhangyun Pravec 2019b Paired with (503955) 2004 ED107. 53576 2000 CS47 Pravec 2019b Paired with ((421781) 2014 QG22. 53789 2000 ED104 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 54041 2000 GQ113 Pravec 2019b Paired with (220143) 2002 TO134. 54071 2000 GQ146 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 54509 YORP Lowry 2007a Date for phase is end of period: Jul 28, 2001 - Jul 27, 2002. Paper proved spin up due to YORP effect. Lowry 2007a Date for phase is end of period: Aug. 12, 2004 - Aug. 31, 2005. Paper proved spin up due to YORP effect. Lowry 2007a Date for phase is end of period: Jul 27, 2002 - Aug. 27, 2003. Paper proved spin up due to YORP effect. Lowry 2007a Date for phase is end of period: Jul. 29, 2003 - Sep. 11, 2004. Paper proved spin up due to YORP effect. Taylor 2007 Date for phase is for beginning of observations that spanned from 2001 - 2005. Diameter and spin axis were determined from radar observations. Paper proved spin up due to YORP effect. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 54660 2000 UJ1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 54686 2001 DU8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 54690 2001 EB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 54789 2001 MZ7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Warner 2023a Secondary period lightcurve resembles one for a slightly elongated body, i.e., there is a possiblity that this is a 'very wide binary.' 54827 Kurpfalz Pravec 2010a Paired with (6070) Rheinland. Pravec 2019b Paired with (6070) Rheinland. 55532 2001 WG2 Stephens 2014e Unique solution not possible. Second period for NPAR table is one of several contenders. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 55576 Amycus Thirouin 2010 Number given as 55567, which is 2002 CS6. The LCDB authors presumed the name/designation were correct. 55764 1992 DG12 Pravec 2019b Unspecified other possible periods. Paried with (305693) 2009 BB131. 55913 1998 FL12 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2005 GQ107. 56048 1998 XV39 Pravec 2019b Paired with (76148) 2000 EP17. 56150 1999 CT103 Originally Derm4l in Dermawan Ph.D. thesis. 56232 1999 JM31 Pravec 2019b Paired with (115978) 2003 WQ56. 56700 2000 LL28 Pravec 2019b Paired with (414166) 2008 AU67. 57047 2001 LG1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 57202 2001 QJ53 Pravec 2019b Paired with (276353) 2002 UY20. 58046 2002 XA14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 59184 1999 AR15 Pravec 2019b Paired with (293667) 2007 PD19. 59394 1999 FZ23 Pravec 2019b Paired with (11286) 1990 RO8. 60458 2000 CM114 Grundy 2019b For Grundy 2019b, the spin axis values are for the orbital pole. The primary's pole will be the same or similar. 60546 2000 EE85 Pravec 2019b Paired with (88604) 2001 QH293. 60677 2000 GO18 Pravec 2019b Paired with (142131) 2002 RV11. 60735 2000 GF82 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 60744 2000 GB93 Pravec 2019b Paired with (218099) 2002 MH3. 60924 2000 JF44 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 61461 2000 QA31 Warner 2011o One-night stand. Solution is based on a half-period analysis. 61799 2000 QC184 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 63047 2000 WQ93 Pravec 2019b Paired with (393274) 2013 WJ82. 63095 2000 WS142 Popescu 2018b The original Popescu group/family was not used. Instead, one of the LCDB defaults was used based on the orbital elements 63160 2000 YN8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 63164 2000 YU14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 63291 2001 DU87 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 63341 2001 FD77 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 63440 Rozek Pravec 2019b Paired with (331933) 2004 TV14. 63583 2001 QP31 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 63970 2001 SG72 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2013 CT63. 65489 Ceto Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. 65679 1989 UQ Mueller 2011a H taken from another source. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 65706 1992 NA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 65733 1993 PC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 65784 Naderayama Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 65803 Didymos The Schierich (2009) results use previous lightcurve data to model the satellite:primary size ratio (D2/D1), pole of the orbital plane, and sidereal period of the orbit. The spin axis pole of the primary is considered to be the same as that of the orbit, i.e., the orbit lies in the primary's equatorial plane. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 65996 1998 MX5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 66008 1998 QH2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 66063 1998 RO1 The Schierich (2009) results use previous lightcurve data to model the satellite:primary size ratio (D2/D1), pole of the orbital plane, and sidereal period of the orbit. The spin axis pole of the primary is considered to be the same as that of the orbit, i.e., the orbit lies in the primary's equatorial plane. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 66146 1998 TU3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 66251 1999 GJ2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 66272 1999 JW6 Warner 2021d A third period of P3 = 15.99 h is likely due to diurnal systematics. It has no effect on the P1/P2 solutions save to remove some noise from each lightcurve. 66358 1999 JW87 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 66391 Moshup The Schierich (2009) results use previous lightcurve data to model the satellite:primary size ratio (D2/D1), pole of the orbital plane, and sidereal period of the orbit. The spin axis pole of the primary is considered to be the same as that of the orbit, i.e., the orbit lies in the primary's equatorial plane. Behrend 2018web Apparent mutual event on 2018 June 7 (UT) but not mentioned. Behrend 2018web No signs of known satellite. Behrend 2019web Phased curve shows known satellite mutual events. No secondary period reported. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 66419 1999 NR13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 66652 Borasisi Noll 2004 Alternate solution: P = 1109.6 ± 1.6 h. Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. Grundy 2011 Orbital period determined from astrometric measurements. 66659 1999 TJ1 Pravec 2019b Paired with (446085) 2013 CW179. 66959 1999 XO35 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 67399 2000 PJ6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 67502 2000 RE44 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 67729 2000 UQ23 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 67865 2000 WG23 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 68063 2000 YJ66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Warner 2022b An additional period of 5.73 h suggests a third body in the system. 68216 2001 CV26 Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Stephens 2015g No satellite found with radar observations in 2009. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 68278 2001 FC7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS Pravec 2019web Unexplained deviations on 2018 Jan 14, 20, and 24. 68346 2001 KZ66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Zegmott 2021 Original raw optical data available at https://cdsarc.cds.unistra.fr/ftp/J/MNRAS/507/4914/ Zegmott 2021 YORP detection: (8.43 ± 0.69)*10^-8 rad/day/day. Combinded optical and radar data. Original optical raw data available at https://cdsarc.cds.unistra.fr/ftp/J/MNRAS/507/4914/. Zegmott 2021 Original raw optical data available at https://cdsarc.cds.unistra.fr/ftp/J/MNRAS/507/4914/ Zegmott 2021 Original raw lightcurve data available at https://cdsarc.cds.unistra.fr/ftp/J/MNRAS/507/4914/ Zegmott 2021 Original raw optical data available at https://cdsarc.cds.unistra.fr/ftp/J/MNRAS/507/4914/ 68350 2001 MK3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 68359 2001 OZ13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 68372 2001 PM9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 68548 2001 XR31 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 68950 2002 QF15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 69142 2003 FL115 Pravec 2019b Paired with (127502) 2002 TP59. 69230 Hermes Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 69298 1992 DR9 Paired with 2012 FF11. 69311 Russ Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 69406 Martz-Kohl Warner 2011k If the shorter period is correct, this makes the asteroid a good binary candidate. 70030 Margaretmiller Warner 2012b No mutual events seen but independent observations from two locations show a secondary period of either 15.8 or 11.5 h. 70511 1999 TL103 Pravec 2019b Paired with (462176) 2007 TC334. 71997 2000 WD178 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 72204 2000 YV133 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 72748 2001 FR126 Popescu 2018b The original Popescu group/family was not used. Instead, one of the LCDB defaults was used based on the orbital elements 73735 1993 QE3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 74096 1998 QD15 Pravec 2019b Paired with (224857) 2006 YE45. 74789 1999 SY5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 76111 2000 DK106 Pravec 2019b Paired with (354652) 2005 JY103. 76148 2000 EP17 Pravec 2019b Paired with (56048) 1998 XV39. 76978 2001 BY60 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 77971 Donnolo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 78024 2002 JO70 Pravec 2019b Paired with (40366) 1999 NF 27. 78085 2002 LV23 Pravec 2023web Probably binary. The solution for the two periods appears unique (but it is not clear which of them is the primary period). 78587 2002 SZ12 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 79340 1996 TO41 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 79360 Sila-Nunam Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. 79576 1998 QG98 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 80218 1999 VO123 Pravec 2019b Paired with (213471) 2002 ES90. 80806 2000 CM105 Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. In this case, V-I is for the combined light since the binary pair could not be resolved. 82075 2000 YW134 Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. In this case, V-I is for the combined light since the binary pair could not be resolved. 82105 2001 FG26 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 82676 2001 PV23 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 84203 2002 RD133 Pravec 2019b Paired with (285637) 2000 SS4. 85182 1991 AQ Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 85185 Lederman Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 85236 1993 KH Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 85274 1994 GH Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 85275 1994 LY Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Masiero 2020b The geocentric phase angle and PAB in the Masiero 2020b details records were computed using the mean MJD given in the file. H-G are the values used for the model and appear only in details records. The MPCORB H-G at the time of import are used in the summary line. The albedo error is the larger linear error listed in the table. The diameter is the corrected value (see Masiero et al. 2020b). 85490 1997 SE5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 85585 Mjolnir Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 85709 1998 SG36 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 85713 1998 SS49 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 85770 1998 UP1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 85774 1998 UT18 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 85804 1998 WQ5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 85818 1998 XM4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 85839 1998 YO4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 85848 1998 YP29 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 85867 1999 BY9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 85938 1999 DJ4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 85953 1999 FK21 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 85989 1999 JD6 Aznar 2018b Published lightcurve is inverted, i.e., faintest when at top. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 85990 1999 JV6 Giorgini 2016 Yarkovsky detection. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Giorgini 2019 Yarkovsky detection. Replaces text in CBET 4279. Rozek 2019b Model is based on lightcurve/radar combination for a bilobed shape without a narrow 'neck.' 86039 1999 NC43 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 86067 1999 RM28 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 86212 1999 TG21 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 86324 1999 WA2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 86326 1999 WK13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 86450 2000 CK33 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 86626 2000 EV124 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 86667 2000 FO10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 86819 2000 GK137 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 86829 2000 GR146 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 87024 2000 JS66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Pravec 2021web A2 amplitude assumed to be same as A1. Warner 2022c Third period: 39.46 ± 0.01, A = 0.13 ± 0.02. See Pravec et al. (2021web). 87311 2000 QJ1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 87510 2000 QJ183 Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 87684 2000 SY2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Warner 2021a P2 is not a rotational alias of P1 and so the ambiguity lies in explaining the two periods. The low amplitudes and nearly the same periods precludes these being periods of a tumbler. 87887 2000 SS286 Pravec 2019b Paried with (415992) 2002 AT49. 88188 2000 XH44 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Warner 2021g Very wide binary candidate, but solution is very tenuous. 88254 2001 FM129 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 88259 2001 HJ7 Pravec 2019b Paired with (337181) 1999 VA117. 88604 2001 QH293 Pravec 2019b Paired with (60546) 2000 EE85. 88611 Teharonhiawako Osip 2003 Diameter is for primary if assuming density = 1.0 gcm^-3. Secondary diameter: 136 ± 10 km. 88666 2001 RP79 Pravec 2019b Paired with (501710) 2014 UY23. 88710 2001 SL9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 88938 2001 TR33 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 89136 2001 US16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 89355 2001 VS78 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 89766 2002 AO62 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 89830 2002 CE Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 89958 2002 LY45 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 90075 2002 VU94 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 90367 2003 LC5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 90403 2003 YE45 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 90416 2003 YK118 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 90482 Orcus Brown 2010 The stated diameter is the effecitve size of the Orcus-Vanth system. Individual diameters are 900 and 280 km, assuming the desnities and albedos are the same. If Vanth's albedo is 0.5 that of Orcus, the diameters are 860 and 380 km. The semi-major axis of the satellite orbit is 8980 ± 20 km. Sickafoose 2019 Diameter assumes a spherical shape. 92336 2000 GY81 Pravec 2019b Paired with (143662) 2003 SP84. 92359 2000 HC24 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 93040 2000 SG Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 93751 2000 WH1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 94210 2001 BK33 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 95626 2002 GZ32 Santos-Sanz 2020 Volume-equivalent diameter from 366x306x120 km. 95711 2003 AK Pravec 2007web Period > 10h. 100 hr is one of several possible solutions. 96011 2004 PD6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 96189 Pygmalion Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 96315 1997 AP10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 96562 1998 SZ138 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 96590 1998 XB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 97805 2000 OJ15 Pravec 2019b Paired with (279230) 2009 UX122. 98866 Giannabussolari Pravec 2019b Paired with 2015 RV228. 98891 2001 BK41 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 98943 2001 CC21 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Warner 2023e P1 = 5.0159 h is secure but requires subtracting two periods of unknown origin: P2 = 15.82(0.01), A2 = 1.30(0.03), P3 = 11.26(0.02), A3 = 0.21(0.05) 99248 2001 KY66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 99799 2002 LJ3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 99869 2002 PF46 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 99907 1989 VA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 99913 1997 CZ5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 99935 2002 AV4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 99942 Apophis Licandro 2016b Diameter and albedo are the averages of the min/max values. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 100004 1983 VA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 100017 1989 TN2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 100085 1992 UY4 Mueller 2011a H taken from another source. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 100316 1995 MM2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 100440 1996 PJ6 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2011 SE164. 100480 1996 UK Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 100553 Dariofo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 100756 1998 FM5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS Warner 2022i Final solution required P3=2.54 h, A=0.08 mag. Periods 2 and 3 are artifacts of additive multi-period analysis. 100926 1998 MQ Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 101027 1998 QL71 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 101065 1998 RV11 Pravec 2019b Paired with (368313) 2002 PY103. 101402 1998 VG1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 101429 1998 VF31 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 101554 1999 AL4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 101703 1999 CA150 Pravec 2019b Paired with (142694) 2002 TW243. 101742 1999 FO7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 101811 1999 JQ6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 101818 1999 JD13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 101952 1999 RY31 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 101955 Bennu Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 102528 1999 US3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 102803 1999 VA169 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 103055 1999 XR134 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2008 UZ220. 103067 1999 XA143 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 103501 2000 AT245 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 103506 2000 BD1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 103732 2000 CO103 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 104444 2000 GR3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 105155 2000 NG26 Warner 2012g Many possible periods. 105158 2000 OL Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 105247 2000 QH3 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2009 SZ67. 105943 2000 SY233 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 106589 2000 WN107 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 108182 2001 HY13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 108410 2001 KG32 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 108519 2001 LF Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 108522 2001 LQ Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 108663 2001 NE21 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 109077 2001 QR25 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 109226 2001 QH91 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 112221 2002 KH4 Warner 2019p The binaries table gives P1 = 2.479 h and Ds/Dp >= 0.22. The P1 solution is extremely weak. 112249 2002 LM9 Pravec 2019b Paired with (261878) 2006 GR49. 112985 2002 RS28 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 114553 2003 BH42 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 114924 2003 QL41 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 115978 2003 WQ56 Pravec 2019b Paired with (56232) 1999 JM31. 117306 2004 VF21 Pravec 2019b Paired with (10123) Fideoja. 118112 2665 T-3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 119067 2001 KP76 Marchis 2008a No lightcurves per se. Hubble observations show a binary system with components about the same size separated by 0'.29, or about 8200 km. 119979 2002 WC19 Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. In this case, V-I is the combined light since the binary pair could not be resolved. 120347 Salacia Noll 2006e Satellite 2.3 mag fainter. Stansberry 2012 SMAxis of orbit: 5619 ± 87 km. Individual diameters: Primary: 905 ± 103 km; Secondary: 303 ± 35 km. 120352 Gordonwong Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 120450 1982 SV Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 120578 1995 QV12 Warner 2014f Large zero-point offsets required to get period. Could be signs of tumbling. 121210 1999 QG2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 122011 2000 GL28 Originally Derm8f in Dermawan Ph.D. thesis. 122173 2000 KC28 Pravec 2019b Paired with (259585) 2003 UG220. 122421 2000 QZ101 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 124146 2001 MQ12 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 124200 2001 OM81 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 125475 2001 WA15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 129493 1995 BM2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 129541 1996 PQ9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 129737 1999 AA9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 130778 2000 SX369 Pravec 2015web Possible second period. 131045 2000 YH32 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 133027 2002 XJ4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 133090 2003 MS9 Michimani 2023 Result using two data sets: 2021 Oct an 2021 Dec. 133531 2003 TJ5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 134340 Pluto Tholen 1997 The diameter of 2700 km is the effective diameter of the Pluto/Charon system based on Pv and H. Pluto: D = 2350 ± 50 km. Charon (primary satellite): D = 1250 ± 50 km Nix (S/2005 P1): Sep: 48700 km. D ~ 46 km Hydra (S/2005 P2): Sep 64800 km. D ~ 61 km. 134371 1995 RH Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 134422 1998 QM3 Warner 2015d The periods are two of several sets of solutions. 134509 1999 FC8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 134860 2000 OJ67 Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. 136108 Haumea Lellouch 2010 Visible and Thermal observations. Lockwood 2014 Ellipsoid lengths: a = 960 km, b = 770 km, c = 495 km. Dunham 2019 Diameter computed from volume of ellipsoid with (abc) = (1050,840,537) km. 136472 Makemake Lim 2010 A dark area has 0.02 < p_v < 0.12 and 310 < D_eff < 380 km. 136564 1977 VA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 136582 1992 BA This note applies to all entries for Masiero et al. (2020a). The albedo error is the listed maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file since the actual date of observation was not given. The value for H is the 'model-out' value, which may differ slightly from the value used in the NEATM modeling (the value given in Tables 1-4). This maintains full agreement with the listed albedo and diameter. See Masiero et al. (2020a) for details about assumed errors in H and G. 136617 1994 CC Brozovic 2009b Estimated sizes: S1 > 100 m; S2 > 5 m. Brozovic 2011 Inner satellite: D = 113 ± 30 m. P = 26 ± 12 h. P_orb = 29.832 ± 2.400 h. Outer satellite: D = 80 ± 30m. P = 14 ± 7h. P_orb = 201.024 ± 12.0 h. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 136618 1994 CN2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 136745 1995 WL8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 136770 1996 PC1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 136793 1997 AQ18 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 136795 Tatsunokingo Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 136818 Selqet Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 136839 1997 WT22 The geocentric phase angle and PAB in the Masiero 2020b details records were computed using the mean MJD given in the file. H-G are the values used for the model and appear only in details records. The MPCORB H-G at the time of import are used in the summary line. The albedo error is the larger linear error listed in the table. The diameter is the corrected value (see Masiero et al. 2020b). 136849 1998 CS1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 136923 1998 JH2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 136993 1998 ST49 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 137032 1998 UO1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 137052 Tjelvar Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 137062 1998 WM Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 137064 1998 WP5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 137069 1998 WQ15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 137084 1998 XS16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 137125 1999 CT3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 137126 1999 CF9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 137158 1999 FB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 137170 1999 HF1 Warner 2016n No indications of known satellite. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 137199 1999 KX4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 137230 1999 RG22 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 137427 1999 TF211 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 137671 1999 XP35 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 137799 1999 YB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 137805 1999 YK5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 137924 2000 BD19 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 137925 2000 BJ19 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 138013 2000 CN101 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 138127 2000 EE14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 138131 2000 ES20 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 138155 2000 ES70 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 138175 2000 EE104 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 138205 2000 EZ148 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 138258 2000 GD2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 138325 2000 GO82 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 138404 2000 HA24 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 138524 2000 OJ8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 138846 2000 VJ61 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 138852 2000 WN10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 138883 2000 YL29 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Skiff 2019b Lightcurve shape is similar to one produced by a satellite with mutual events. If so, Ds/Dp ~ 0.38. 138893 2000 YH66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 138911 2001 AE2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 138937 2001 BK16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 138947 2001 BA40 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 138971 2001 CB21 Period from Warner/Stephens is based on the combined data set. See independent entries in details tables for the two dates. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS Pravec 2022web Longer period is not formally excluded but is less likely. Warner 2022f Based on data from 2022 Feb 27 and 28 139056 2001 FY Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 139156 2001 FP106 Pravec 2019b Paired with (48652) 1995 VB. 139345 2001 KA67 Stephens 2018j Suspected very wide binary. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 139359 2001 ME1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 139537 2001 QE25 Pravec 2019b Paired with (210904) 2001 SR218. 139622 2001 QQ142 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 139775 2001 QG298 Lacerda 2011 The paper presumes a 'contact binary.' However, the lightcurves presented do not show the obvious indicators of 'shoulders' in the descending and ascending branches. The lightcurve can be equally explained by a simple, highly-elongated body. 140039 2001 SO73 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 141018 2001 WC47 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 141052 2001 XR1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 141079 2001 XS30 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 141354 2002 AJ29 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 141424 2002 CD Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 141432 2002 CQ11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 141484 2002 DB4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 141498 2002 EZ16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 141593 2002 HK12 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 141670 2002 JS100 Warner 2018a Period of 4.719 h cannot be formally excluded, but is not likely. 142040 2002 QE15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 142131 2002 RV11 Pravec 2019b Paired with (60677) 2000 GO18. 142348 2002 RX211 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 142464 2002 TC9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 142555 2002 TB58 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 142561 2002 TX68 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 142694 2002 TW243 Pravec 2019b Paired with (101703) 1999 CA150. 142781 2002 UM11 Warner 2014e Multiple solutions possible due to the nearly flat lightcurve. 143381 2003 BC21 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 143487 2003 CR20 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 143624 2003 HM16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 143651 2003 QO104 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 143662 2003 SP84 Pravec 2019b Paired with (92336) 2000 GY81. 143947 2003 YQ117 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 144411 2004 EW9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 144898 2004 VD17 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 144900 2004 VG64 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 144901 2004 WG1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 144922 2005 CK38 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 145656 4788 P-L Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 145720 1993 OX7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 147431 2003 JA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 148480 2001 FE155 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 148780 Altjira Grundy 2011 Orbital period determined from astrometric measurements. 149592 2004 CU51 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 150398 2000 EC59 Originally Derm1e in Dermawan Ph.D. thesis. 152558 1990 SA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 152560 1991 BN Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 152563 1992 BF Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 152627 1997 DF Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 152637 1997 NC1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 152664 1998 FW4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 152679 1998 KU2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 152742 1998 XE12 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 152754 1999 GS6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 152756 1999 JV3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 152770 1999 RR28 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 152858 1999 XN35 Hills 2013b Several possible solutions for P_Orb, ranging from 11 to 36 h, if the deviations are due to a satellite. 152895 2000 CQ101 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 152931 2000 EA107 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 152964 2000 GP82 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 152978 2000 GJ147 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 153002 2000 JG5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 153201 2000 WO107 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 153219 2000 YM29 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 153591 2001 SN263 Becker 2008 Density (Primary): 1.2 ± 0.4 g/cm^3 Nolan 2008 Radar observations show three objects in the 2001 SN263 system. Estimated sizes are 2 km, 1 km, and 0.400 km. Becker 2015b Dp: 2.5 ± 0.3 km; Ds1: 0.77 ± 0.12 km; Ds2: 0.43 ± 0.14 km. Porb1: 16.464 ± 0.048; Porb2: 150 ± 3 h. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 153814 2001 WN5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 153842 2001 XT30 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 153953 2002 AD9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 153958 2002 AM31 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 154029 2002 CY46 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 154244 2002 KL6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 154276 2002 SY50 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 154278 2002 TB9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 154302 2002 UQ3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 154347 2002 XK4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 154453 2003 CJ11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 154555 2003 HA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 154634 2003 XX38 Pravec 2019b Paired with (7343) Ockeghem. 154715 2004 LB6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 154828 2004 RT8 Pravec 2019b Paired with (13284) 1998 QB52. 155140 2005 UD Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS Huang 2021 G is for G1. G2 = -0.006 ± 0.006 155334 2006 DZ169 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 156032 2001 RP142 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 156294 2001 WU66 Chang 2021 This note applies to all Chang 2021 (PSJ 2) entries. The observations were made in g and r2 bands. The photometric bands (for H) were assigned as SG and SR, respectively. The H_SR values were transformed to approximate V by using the LCDB V = SR+ 0.22. While not exact, this makes the values more compatible to H_V when plotting frequency-diameters. For diameter calculations, an albedo of 0.05 and G = 0.15 ± 0.2 was assumed for both bands. Only some of the 53 objects could be tied to an object in the MPC database. For those without ID, and where possible, the phase and phase angle bisector values were assumed to be the same as for an identified object in the same observing block. The entries are flagged as being from a Sparse Wide-field Survey (SWF). 157995 2000 LF26 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 158853 2004 NJ32 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 159111 2004 VG15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 159368 1979 QB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 159402 1999 AP10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 159493 2000 UA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 159533 2001 HH31 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 159609 2002 AQ3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 159635 2002 CZ46 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 159857 2004 LJ1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 159882 2004 RQ289 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 159898 2004 TO216 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 160091 2000 OL67 Marchis 2008a No lightcurve per se. Hubble observations show a binary system with the components separated by 0'.29, or about 7800 km. The secondary was about 0.6m fainter than the primary. 160092 2000 PL6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 160137 2001 BU41 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 160519 1995 CS3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 161989 Cacus Durech 2018a YORP detection. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 161998 1988 PA Franco 2011web Author gave P = 6.70 h for a monomodal solution. The amplitude virtually assures a bimodal curve and, therefore, double the reported period. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 162000 1990 OS Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 162011 Konnohmaru Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 162015 1994 TF2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 162038 1996 DH Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 162058 1997 AE12 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 162117 1998 SD15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 162142 1998 VR Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 162149 1998 YQ11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 162157 1999 CV8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 162173 Ryugu Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR Watanabe 2019 Diameter is equatorial. Polar is 872 m. Spherical equivalent is D = 0.955 km. 162181 1999 LF6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 162186 1999 OP3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 162361 2000 AF6 Warner 2019m The solution for the secondary period (14.654 h) is very weak but its subtraction significantly lowers the RMS of the fit for the primary period. 162385 2000 BM19 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 162421 2000 ET70 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 162422 2000 EV70 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 162483 2000 PJ5 Polishook 2008a P_orb = 56.6 h is also possible. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 162510 2000 QW69 The albedo error given for Masiero 2017 is the maximum possible value when converting from albedo values from log space to value space. 162566 2000 RJ34 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 162567 2000 RW37 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 162581 2000 SA10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 162635 2000 SS164 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 162740 2000 WF6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 162781 2000 XL44 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 162785 2000 YA17 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 162900 2001 HG31 Pravec 2008web Pravec analysis based on data from Warner 2009f and from Lowell Observatory (unpublished). Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 162903 2001 JV2 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 162911 2001 LL5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 162998 2001 SK162 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 163000 2001 SW169 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 163001 2001 SE170 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 163014 2001 UA5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 163081 2002 AG29 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 163132 2002 CU11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 163191 2002 EQ9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 163243 2002 FB3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 163249 2002 GT Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 163250 2002 GH1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 163364 2002 OD20 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 163468 2002 RZ177 Warner 2023f Peirod derived from a best-fit of the half-period. 163692 2003 CY18 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS Warner 2022i Periods 2 and 3 are artifacts of additive multi-period analysis. 163693 Atira Rivera-Valentin 2017 Diameter is that estimated for the primary. The satellite diameter is 1.0 ±0.3 km Rondon 2022 The observation date is the first in the set of observations, which spanned more than a year. The phase angle range was 45.2-97.3 deg. The H_SR values are the linear extrapolation using the phase slope (beta_SR) of 0.03584. The lack of low phase angles prevented use of H-G or HG1,G2 modeling. 163697 2003 EF54 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 163732 2003 KP2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 163899 2003 SD220 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Bondarenko 2019b Diameter is for an effective spherical shape based on 2700x1100 m a/b axis estimates. 164121 2003 YT1 Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 164184 2004 BF68 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 164202 2004 EW Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 164206 2004 FN18 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 164211 2004 JA27 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 164214 2004 LZ11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 164222 2004 RN9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 164400 2005 GN59 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 164670 1996 XM6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 165389 2000 WC188 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2011 SE164. 165394 2000 XC15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 165548 2001 DO37 Pravec 2019b Paired with (42946) 1999 TU95. Observing Circumstances for when Sloan color measurements from Lowell Observatory were made. 167405 2003 WP118 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2012 TK84. 168315 1982 RA1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 168378 1997 ET30 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 168710 2000 HE41 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 168889 2000 WM95 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 169660 2002 JG66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 169675 2002 JM97 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 170086 2002 XR14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 170172 2003 HV7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 170502 2003 WM7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 170880 2004 PH85 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 170891 2004 TY16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 171677 2000 QG136 Masiero 2009 The asteroid appears to have been independently analyzed twice in the TALCS survey, each time under a different MPC designation. TALCS 224 = 2000 QG136. TALCS 1238 = 171677. 171730 2000 WX50 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 171784 2001 BV67 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 171839 2001 JM1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 172678 2003 YM137 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 173154 1996 ME Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 173689 2001 PK9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 173885 2001 UA61 Masiero 2009 The asteroid appears to have been independently analyzed twice in the TALCS survey, each time under a different MPC designation. TALCS 158 = 2001 UA61. TALCS 1699 = 173885. 173974 2001 XV127 Masiero 2009 The asteroid appears to have been independently analyzed twice in the TALCS survey, each time under a different MPC designation. TALCS 200 = 2001 VV127. TALCS 1054 = 173974. 173991 2001 XR170 Masiero 2009 The asteroid appears to have been independently analyzed twice in the TALCS survey, each time under a different MPC designation. TALCS 249 = 2001 XR170. TALCS 2205 = 173991. 174567 Varda Grundy 2015 Periods are based on Orbit1 solution. Diameters: Varda 722 ± 82; Ilmare 326 ± 38. 175047 2004 FK93 Masiero 2009 The asteroid appears to have been independently analyzed twice in the TALCS survey, each time under a different MPC designation. TALCS 152 = 2004 FK93. TALCS 1699 = 175047. 175706 1996 FG3 Scheirich 2009 Satellite:primary size ratio (D2/D1): 0.28 ± 0.02. Orbit:primary diameter ratio (a/A1): 3.1 ± 0.9. Mueller 2011a H and G taken from other sources. Wolters 2011 D_sat = 0.51 0.03, assuming the same albedo as the primary. Scheirich 2015 Data covered multipl apparitions from 1999-2013. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 175729 1998 BB10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 177255 2003 WC25 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 179806 2002 TD66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 180186 2003 QZ30 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 181563 2006 UQ329 For Yeh 2020, the amplitude error was found with max(0.01, 0.1*YehAmp) 181882 1999 RF14 The given period is for an obvious short-term period in the raw data, which - on the whole - show a steady brightening over the observations. This could either be a tumbler or a very wide binary. Skiff 2023 The given period is for an obvious short-term period in the raw data, which - on the whole - show a steady brightening over the observations. This could either be a tumbler or a very wide binary. 182259 2001 FZ185 Pravec 2019b Paired with (289y) Ole Romer. 184266 2004 VW14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 184990 2006 KE89 Warner 2020j The 2+ rating is a combination of a U=2 for the primary and U=3 for the secondary period. 185851 2000 DP107 The Schierich (2009) results use previous lightcurve data to model the satellite:primary size ratio (D2/D1), pole of the orbital plane, and sidereal period of the orbit. The spin axis pole of the primary is considered to be the same as that of the orbit, i.e., the orbit lies in the primary's equatorial plane. Margot 2000 Estimated diameters: 800 m and 300 m. Ostro 2000b Radar images show separations up to at least 1 km between components. Pravec 2000e Lightcurve observations confirmed binary nature discovered by radar. Scheirich 2009 Solution 1: Satellite:primary size ratio (D2/D1): 0.43 ± 0.3. Orbit:primary diameter ratio (a/A1): 5.0 ± 2.0. Orbit period (sidereal): 42.09 ± 0.13 Solution 2: Satellite:primary size ratio (D2/D1): 0.43 ± 0.2. Orbit:primary diameter ratio (a/A1): 4.9 ± 1.2. Orbit period (sidereal): 42.79 ± 0.11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 187026 2005 EK70 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 187737 2153 P-L Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 188452 2004 HE62 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 189040 2000 MU1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 189494 1999 YY3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 189552 2000 RL77 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 190208 2006 AQ Warner 2015g No events seen and not likely so because of the long second period. The long period is attributed to the primary body while the short period is presumed to be due to the rotation of the fully asynchronous satellite. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 190491 2000 FJ10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 192559 1998 VO Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 192563 1998 WZ6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 194006 2001 SG10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 194268 2001 UY4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 194386 2001 VG5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 196299 2003 FN1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 197994 2004 RG165 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 198856 2005 LR3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 199003 2005 WJ56 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 200754 2001 WA25 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 200840 2001 XN254 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 202079 2004 SR39 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 203015 1999 YF3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 203471 2002 AU4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 203489 2002 AL80 Pravec 2019b Paired with (17288) 2000 NZ10. 205231 2000 QY110 Pravec 2019b Paired with (30301) Kuditipudi. 205383 2001 BV47 Pravec 2019b Paired with (23998) 1999 RP29. 205640 2001 XQ4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 205698 Troiani Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 205744 2002 BK25 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 206910 2004 NL8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 207398 2006 AS2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 207408 2006 BY172 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 207945 1991 JW Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 207970 1996 BZ3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 208023 1999 AQ10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 210482 1996 RW1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 210904 2001 SR218 Pravec 2019b Paired with (139537) 2001 QE25. 213084 1999 TN169 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 213471 2002 ES90 Pravec 2019b Paired with (80218) 1999 VO123. 214088 2004 JN13 Warner 2015h Period forced to solution derived from 2014 December observations by Warner. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 214869 2007 PA8 Lin 2018 Additional observations in 2013 Jan were at much larger phase angles. Phase reddening may have affected the final result. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 214954 2007 WO58 Pravec 2019b Paired with (26416) 1999 XM84. 215188 2000 NM Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 216202 2006 UJ13 Popescu 2018b The original Popescu group/family was not used. Instead, one of the LCDB defaults was used based on the orbital elements 216722 2005 EC286 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 217390 2005 CW25 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 217796 2000 TO64 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 217807 2000 XK44 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 218099 2002 MH3 Pravec 2019b Paired with (60744) 2000 GB93. 218144 2002 RL66 Warner 2010e The short period, low amplitude component of the lightcurve may be due to a widely separated component of a binary that is a relatively small and irregularly shaped, or a larger but more regularly shaped body. If a binary, the period of the orbit cannot be determined from the observations but is probably long based on the absence of mutual events and asynchronous rotation of the two components. The low-amplitude component of the lightcurve is U = 1/1+. This applies not only to the quality of the solution for the component but to the probability of the asteroid being binary as well. Warner 2010m The assignment of primary and secondary in this system is arbitrary. 218863 2006 WO127 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 219071 1997 US9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 219523 2001 QS84 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 220124 2002 TE66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 221867 2008 GR90 Pravec 2019b Paired with (38184) 1999 KF. 222165 2000 AX93 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 224857 2006 YE45 Pravec 2019b Paired with (74096) 1998 QD115. 226268 2003 AN55 Pravec 2019b Paired with (409156) 2003 UW156. 228368 2000 WK10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 229007 2003 XF11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 229056 2004 FC126 Pravec 2019b Paired with (17198) Gorjup. 229401 2005 SU152 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2004 UY97. 229762 G||'homdima Grundy 2019a Effective diameter for primary body. Satellite diameter: 142 ± 8 km. 230111 2001 BE10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 230979 2005 AT42 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 231134 2005 TU45 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 231937 2001 FO32 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 232691 2004 AR1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 233401 2006 FF39 Pravec 2019b Paired with (180856) 2005 HX5. 234061 1999 HE1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 234145 2000 EW70 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 235756 2004 VC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 236716 2007 FV42 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 237442 1999 TA10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 238063 2003 EG Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 241662 2000 KO44 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 241676 2000 QW158 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 242187 2003 KR18 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 242643 2005 NZ6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 243025 2006 UM216 Warner 2020c A secondary period could not be found. 244977 2004 BE68 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 247517 2002 QY6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 248083 2004 QU24 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 248818 2006 SZ217 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 250112 2002 KY14 Also designated 2007 UL126. 250322 2003 SC7 Pravec 2019b Paired with (52852) 1998 RB75. 251346 2007 SJ Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 252399 2001 TX44 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 252793 2002 FW5 Warner 2017i Suspected very wide binary. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 253062 2002 TC70 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 253841 2003 YG118 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 256412 2007 BT2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 257744 2000 AD205 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 257838 2000 JQ66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 258640 2002 ER36 Pravec 2019b Paired with (1741) Giclas. 259585 2003 UG220 Pravec 2019b Paired with (122173) 2000 KC28. 260141 2004 QT24 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 261878 2006 GR49 Pravec 2019b Paired with (112249) 2002 LM9. 262623 2006 WY2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 263976 2009 KD5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 264308 1999 NA5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 264357 2000 AZ93 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 265187 2003 YS117 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 267182 2000 QX57 Popescu 2018b The original Popescu group/family was not used. Instead, one of the LCDB defaults was used based on the orbital elements 267494 2002 JB9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 267729 2003 FC5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 269690 1996 RG3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 274138 2008 FU6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 274855 2009 RB4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 275677 2000 RS11 Warner 2014i This entry is for the combined plot from 2014 March 16 and 17. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 275792 2001 QH142 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 276049 2002 CE26 Warner 2015g Using either P1 = 3.088 or 3.298 (found by Pravec et al., 2006) produces the same period and lightcurve for P2. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 276353 2002 UY20 Pravec 2019b Paired with (57202) 2001 QJ53. 276397 2002 XA40 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 276400 2002 XS45 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 276741 2004 EM66 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 276770 2004 HC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 277127 2005 GW119 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 277475 2005 WK4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 278067 2006 YY40 Pravec 2019b Paired with (19289) 1996 HY12. 279230 2009 UX122 Pravec 2019b Paired with (97805) 2000 OJ15. 279744 1998 KM3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 279865 2001 HU24 Pravec 2019b Paired with (52773) 1998 QU12. 282206 2001 VN61 Pravec 2019b Paired with (165389) 2000 WC188. 283319 1992 WR4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 283377 2000 PO9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 283457 2001 MQ3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 283460 2001 PD1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 283827 2003 TP15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 285263 1998 QE2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 285540 2000 GU127 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 285631 2000 RB84 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 285637 2000 SS4 Pravec 2019b Paired with (84203) 2002 RD1333. 285838 2001 FA1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 289315 2005 AN26 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 291188 2006 AL54 Pravec 2019b Paired with (15107) Toepperwein. 293667 2007 PD19 Pravec 2019b Paired with (59184) 1999 AR15. 295745 2008 UH98 Pravec 2019b Paired with (44620) 1999 RS43. 297274 1996 SK Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 297418 2000 SP43 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 301844 1990 UA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 301964 2000 EJ37 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 302311 2002 AA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 302831 2003 FH Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 303174 2004 FH11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 303712 2005 PR21 Noll 2008d No lightcurve observations per se. Two components separated by 0'.123 ± 0'.009, or about 4000 km. Secondary component about 1.1 mag fainter than primary. 305693 2009 BB131 Pravec 2019b Paired with (55764) 1992 DG12. 306376 1983 TA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 306453 1999 BE8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 306459 1999 GS3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 306895 2001 TT127 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 307005 2001 XP1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 307070 2002 AV31 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 307161 2002 DY3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 307556 2003 EQ43 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 307566 2003 FK22 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 308020 2004 RM222 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 308127 2004 XM130 This note applies to all entries for Masiero et al. (2021; Plan. Sci. J. 2, A162). The albedo error is the listed maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file since the actual date of observation was not given. The value for H is the 'model-out' value, which may differ slightly from the value used in the NEATM modeling (the value given in Tables 1-4). This maintains full agreement with the listed albedo and diameter. No specific errors for H and G were given. Default values of H_err = 0.05 and G_err = 0.1 were used. 308635 2005 YU55 Bodewits 2011 H_V was derived from UV observations that gave H_UV = 25.6. Merline 2012 a = 337 ± 14 m; b = 326 ± 8 m; c = 263 ± 12 m. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 309214 2007 LL Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 309662 2008 EE Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 310226 2011 SU230 Masiero 2009 Also identified as 2005 ED209 during the TALCS survey. 310402 1999 EE5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 310429 1999 XP19 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 310442 2000 CH59 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 310560 2001 QL142 Pravec 2019web Attenuations seen but a consistent secondary period could not be found. 311066 2004 DC Taylor 2006 Ds ~ 0.060 km. 311925 2007 BF72 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 312473 2008 SX245 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 312497 2009 BR60 Pravec 2019b Paired with (3749) Balam. 313538 2002 YB12 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 313591 2003 MB7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 313701 2003 UN3 Pravec 2019b Paired with 2012 KL9. 316651 1990 OL Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 316720 1998 BE7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 316876 2000 RF43 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 316934 2001 AA52 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 320378 2007 UR3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 321651 2010 BY9 Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 322386 2011 QY34 Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 322652 1999 JO8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 322672 1999 TE221 Pravec 2019b Paired with (51609) 2001 HZ32. 322775 2001 HA8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 323879 2005 SA204 Pravec 2019b Paired with (46162) 2001 FM78. 325769 2010 LY63 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 326290 Akhenaten Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 326350 2000 SS217 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 326732 2003 HB6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 326894 2003 WV25 Pravec 2019b Paired with (51866) 2001 PH3. 329291 2000 JB6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 329338 2001 JW2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 329437 2002 OA22 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 329520 2002 SV Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 329614 2003 KU2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 330825 2008 XE3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 331471 1984 QY1 Warner 2016k P2 is not unique (Petr Pravec); it is not possible to attribute P1 specifically to the period of rotation and P2 to that of precession. 331933 2004 TV14 Pravec 2019b Paired with (63440) 2001 MD30. 332446 2008 AF4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Warner 2021h The results for this record are based on combining lightcurves from 2021 Jan 9-11. Additional records given the results using the data from only one of those nights. 332685 2009 HH36 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 333358 2001 WN1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 334527 2002 RG189 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 334916 2003 YK39 Pravec 2019b Paired with (21436) Chaoyichi. 337066 1998 BM10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 337075 1998 QC1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 337181 1999 VA117 Pravec 2019b Paired with (88259) 2001 HJ7. 337866 2001 WL15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 338049 2002 NY31 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 338176 2002 RC118 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 339492 2005 GQ21 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 340211 2006 AR61 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. Lo 2020 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. 341520 Mors-Somnus Sheppard 2011 R_orbit = 21000 ± 160 km. Sheppard 2012a Color index: g-i 1.49 ± 0.01. Delta mag between two object: 0.1 mag. Orbital parameters: a = 21000 ± 160 km; e = 0.1529 M 0.0028. 341843 2008 EV5 Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 342842 2008 YB3 Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 343098 2009 DV42 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 344074 1997 UH9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 344143 2000 JQ3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 345705 2006 VB14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 345853 2007 PU11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 347813 2002 NP1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 348018 2003 SF334 Pravec 2019b Paired with (9783) Tensho-kan. 348400 2005 JF21 Period for first entry from Oey 2016b (Date = 09/24/2015) is for the combined data set covering five months. Subsequent listings are for subsets within the overall span. Naidu 2015c Possible indications of a second satellite. No period for primary or orbital period of first satellite given. 348452 2005 RU20 Pravec 2019b Paired with (418312) 2008 FF88. 349068 2006 YT13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 350513 2000 BG19 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 350523 2000 EA14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 350716 2001 XO105 Pravec 2019b Paired with (4765) Wasserburg. 350751 2002 AW Pravec 2022a SR-SZ = 0.12 ± 0.05 350988 2003 GW Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 351549 2005 TJ73 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 352143 2007 LR32 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 353866 2012 WN2 The designation of 2006 SU210 originally assigned to this object was updated. The MPC has since designated this as (353866) 2012 WN2. 353938 1998 QR15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 354030 2001 RB18 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 354127 2002 BP26 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 354182 2002 DU3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 354652 2005 JY103 Pravec 2019b Paired with (76111) 2000 DK106. 354952 2006 FJ9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 356991 1998 QA1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 357022 1999 YG3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 357152 2002 CO15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 357439 2004 BL86 Radar Team 2015a D_primary: 0.325 km. D_satellite: 0.070 km. Discovey credit goes to Pollock et al. 357618 2005 EM30 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 359592 2010 VA1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 359995 2012 VA102 The original designation was 2006 SW275. This is now identified by the MPC as 2012 VA102. Masiero 2009 The original designation was 2006 SW275. This is now identified by the MPC as 2012 VA102. 360191 1988 TA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 360433 2002 JR9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 361071 2006 AO4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 362310 2009 UM3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 363067 2000 CO101 Taylor 2009 Estimated sizes: P = 0.525 km; S = 0.045 km. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 363075 2000 OG8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 363305 2002 NV16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 363505 2003 UC20 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 363599 2004 FG11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 363790 2005 JE46 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 363814 2005 ND7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 364171 2006 JZ81 Parker 2011 Satellite obrital period: 4.11 ± 0.15 years. 365071 2009 AV Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 365246 2009 NE Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 365424 2010 KX7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 366774 2004 TB18 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 366833 2005 MC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 367248 2007 MK13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 367251 2007 PN49 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 367922 2012 BG133 Pravec 2019b Paired with (453106) 2007 WR62. 367943 Duende Gary 2013a H, D, and pV assume a type S asteroid. A type V was also considered possible from spectrophotometric observations. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS Moskovitz 2020 Period is post-flyby. Analysis indicates pre-flyby period of 8.4 h. 368313 2002 PY103 Pravec 2019b Paired with (101065) 1998 RV11. 368664 2005 JA22 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 370037 2000 SV20 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 370061 2000 YO29 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 370866 2005 EB37 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 371660 2007 CN26 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 374158 2004 UL Warner 2015h Period is a best-fit single period. 374851 2006 VV2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 374855 2006 VQ13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 375103 2007 TD71 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 376169 2011 BH162 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 376713 1995 WQ5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 376848 2001 RY47 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 377732 2005 XJ8 Warner 2022j Suspect 'wide binary'. 380188 2000 WC67 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 380929 2006 HU30 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 381906 2010 CL19 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 382758 2003 GY Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 385186 1994 AW1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 385203 1999 SO15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 385343 2002 LV Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 385446 Manwe Grundy 2014 Color indexes are for primary. The satellite showed about ± 0.15 mag difference, or essentially the same color. Spin axis is for orbital pole with the primary pole presumed to be the same or very similar. Rabinowitz 2020 Period/amplitude are for combined system. Albedo is for primary. Orbital period for satellite is based on monomodal lightcurve. 386298 2008 SR7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 388838 2008 EZ5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Pravec 2019web Suspected, low amplitude secondary period: nature undetermined. 391151 2005 YY93 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 393274 2013 WJ82 Pravec 2019b Paired with (63047) 2000 WQ93. 393359 1998 ME3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 394066 2005 XU77 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 394130 2006 HY51 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 396593 2001 HC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 398188 Agni Warner 2023a Final soultion required P3 = 9.48 h, A3 = 0.23 mag. P2 and P3 are probably artifacts of using additive multi-period analysis on a tumbler. 399307 1991 RJ2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 399418 2001 VD77 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 399433 2001 YK4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 399497 2002 TV190 Masiero 2009 Maisero et al. identified TALCS 126 as 2006 SZ2. This is a newer designation for 2002 TV190, which is the one included in the MPCORB file. 399774 2005 NB7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 401857 2000 PG3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 402267 2005 QE166 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 403049 2008 AY36 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 405058 2001 TX16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 407656 2011 SL102 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 408792 2000 GF2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 409156 2003 UW156 Pravec 2019b Paired with (226268) 2003 AN55. 409204 2003 WX25 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 409995 2006 WV3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 410195 2007 RT147 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 410627 2008 RG1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 410650 2008 SQ1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 410778 2009 FG19 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 411280 2010 SL13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 412065 2013 ET86 Pravec 2019b Paired with (11677) 1998 DY4. 412976 1987 WC Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 413038 2001 MF1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 413123 2001 XS1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 413563 2005 TG45 Rondon 2022 The observation date is the first in the set of observations, which spanned more than a year. The phase angle range was 90.5-64.4 deg. The H_SR values are the linear extrapolation using the phase slope (beta_SR) of 0.03259. The lack of low phase angles prevented use of H-G or HG1,G2 modeling. 413577 2005 UL5 Pravec 2015web Secondary period might be due to being binary. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 414166 2008 AU67 Pravec 2019b Paired with (56700) 2000 LL28. 414287 2008 OB9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 414586 2009 UV18 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 414990 2011 EM51 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 415711 1998 WT7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 415949 2001 XY10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 415992 2002 AT49 Pravec 2019b Paired with (87887) 2000 SS286. 416151 2002 RQ25 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 416186 2002 TD60 Warner 2015r Period analysis by Pravec (Czech Institute). Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 416195 2002 TR190 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 416231 2003 AJ73 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 416591 2004 LC2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 416680 2004 XD50 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 416694 2004 YR32 Warner 2021g Suspected very wide binary, which would make the 50-h period that of the primary's rotatation, not the orbital period of the satellite. 418312 2008 FF88 Pravec 2019b Paired with (348452) 2005 RU20. 418797 2008 VF Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 419464 2010 CC180 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 420187 2011 GA55 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 420738 2012 TS Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 421781 2014 QG22 Pravec 2019b Paired with (53576) 2000 CS47. 422686 2000 AC6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 423321 2005 ED318 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 428086 2006 NM Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 430439 2000 LF6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 430484 2001 ST246 Chang (2015) H values are based on H-G system. The G values are in R, not V. All lightcurves with a period were given U = 2 regardless of rating by Chang et al. 430804 2005 AD13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 433939 1995 DW1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 433953 1997 XR2 Pravec 2019web Second period in tumbling solution is not unique. 434096 2002 GO5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 436459 2011 CL97 Pravec 2019b Paired with (49791) 1999 XF31. 436551 2011 GD83 Pravec 2019b Paired with (16815) 1997 UA9. 437841 1998 HD14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 437844 1999 MN Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 437905 2001 XU30 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 438105 2005 GO22 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 440212 2004 OB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 441549 2008 TM68 Pravec 2019b Paired with (43008) 1999 UD31. 442523 2011 WU95 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 443103 2013 WT67 Warner 2015c Period is estimate for one of the two tumbling periods. 443837 2000 TJ1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 445775 2011 YA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 446085 2013 CW179 Pravec 2019b Paired with (66659) 1999 TJ1. 446791 1998 SJ70 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 446804 1999 VN6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 448003 2008 DE Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 448972 2011 YV15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 450293 2004 LV3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 450894 2008 BT18 Benner 2008a Arecibo and Goldstone observations show: D1: 0.6 km D2: >0.2 km Sep: 1.5 km. Warner 2018h No sign of primary rotatin of about 2.5 h. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 451124 2009 KC3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 451157 2009 SQ104 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 451397 2011 EZ78 Pravec 2011web Two suspect attentuations were seen but not confirmed. Skiff 2011web Data suggests possibility of tumbling or binary. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 452334 2001 LB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 452389 2002 NW16 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 452561 2005 AB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 452773 2006 DM14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 452807 2006 KV89 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 453106 2007 WR62 Pravec 2019b Paired with (367922) 2012 BG133. 453563 2010 BB Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 453818 2011 SJ109 Pravec 2019b Paired with (25021) Nischaykumar. 455157 1997 YM3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 455185 2000 EB107 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 455192 2000 QN130 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 455213 2001 OE84 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 455322 2002 NX18 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 455327 2002 OP28 Pravec 2019b Paired with (9068) 1993 OD. 455415 2003 GA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 455426 2003 MT9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 455578 2004 RA216 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 455594 2004 SV55 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 456301 2006 SV134 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 459200 2012 DK61 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 461501 2003 FT3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 461852 2006 GY2 Benner 2006b Secondary diameter estimated to be 0.08 km and orbital separation at least 0.5 km. 461912 2006 RG2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 462176 2007 TC334 Pravec 2019b Paired with (70511) 1999 TL103. 464797 2004 FZ1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 464798 2004 JX20 Skiff 2019web The solutions are not unique. 464815 2004 RV257 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 465402 2008 HW1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 465616 2009 EC Warner 2016m Suspected very wide binary. 467317 2000 QW7 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Warner 2020c Two possibilities: single period with large zero-point offsets or tumbling with near zero offsets. 467336 2002 LT38 Warner 2023f P1 is dominant, though it may still be a multiple of the true frequency (1/P1). P2 is one of several solutions but it is the one that gave the best fit when subtracting from the raw data. 467460 2006 JF42 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Pravec 2022web Alternate solutions ampltides assumed to be the same as the adopted period. 468738 2010 TN54 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 469438 2002 GV31 Pal 2015b V-R assumed. 469446 2002 NL8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 469513 2003 QR79 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 469896 2005 WC1 Miles 2008b Given period based on 3 nights (Miles, private communications). JBAA publication gives period of 2.57 h base on one night. 470004 2006 MJ10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 470975 2009 SC15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 471240 2011 BT15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 474158 1999 FA Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 474370 2002 RT157 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 475665 2006 VY13 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR Warner 2022j Secondary period is almost 3:1 with dominant period and may be a harmonic artifcat of the analysis. 477465 2009 XZ1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 477762 2010 XZ67 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 479358 2013 XN8 Pravec 2019b Asteroid pair with 5478 Wartburg. 480820 1998 VF32 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 480858 2001 PT9 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 480883 2001 YE4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 481032 2004 YZ23 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 481085 2005 SA135 Pravec 2019b Paired with (21028) 1989 TO. 481090 2005 SY173 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 481532 2007 LE Brozovic 2012 Estimated sizes: Dp 0.5 km; Ds 0.18 km. Orbital separation > 0.8 km. Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 481542 2007 RF5 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 482250 2011 LL2 Pravec 2022web Seconary solution amplitude assumed to be the same as the primary amplitude. 482796 2013 QJ10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 483422 2000 CE59 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 483423 2000 DO1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 484757 2009 BL2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 484976 2009 UN3 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 485051 2010 CM44 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 486958 Arrokoth Porter 2019 Diamter is volume of equivalent sphere based on the overall dimensions of the contact binary system. The individual volumes are 15.9 km and 12.9 km. Stern 2019 Effective diameter (from volume): Ultima: 13.88 km; Thule: 12.61 km. Phase angle is viewed from Earth. Hofgartner 2021 Viewing aspect is from Earth. 488453 1994 XD Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 488515 2001 FE90 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 489337 2006 UM Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 492143 2013 OE Warner 2020c A third period was found as well: P3 = 4.88 h. 495833 2000 SB8 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 495858 2003 MJ4 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 496001 2007 VR183 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 496028 2008 SC9 Pravec 2019b Paired with (14806) 1091 EV25. 496923 2001 UW57 Originally Derm3d in Dermawan Ph.D. thesis. 497676 2006 SR2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 500080 2011 WV134 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 501710 2014 UY23 Pravec 2019b Paired with (88666) 2001 RP79. 503861 1998 WZ1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: TAXON 503871 2000 SL Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVISNIR 503941 2003 UV11 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 503955 2004 ED107 Pravec 2019b Paired with (53537) 2000 AZ239. 504025 2005 RQ6 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 504887 2010 WL Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 505476 2013 UL15 Alexandersen 2018 Applies to all Alexandersen 2018: For those objects in their list that were found in MPCOrb, the Hv magnitude was nearly the same as their Hr (Pan-STARRS r). The original Hr is reported in the detail record _and_ used for H in the summary table if an MPCOrb value was not available. 506437 2000 WL10 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 506459 2002 AL14 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VISNIR 508774 1999 JE1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 508908 2003 YX1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 510132 2010 UY57 Pravec 2019b Paired with (6369) 1983 UC. 514596 2003 FG Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 516398 2001 HW15 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 516420 2003 FS2 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: VIS 516435 2004 FJ29 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 518482 2005 TZ42 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 518507 2006 EE1 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 518810 2010 CF19 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: NIR 523625 2008 DG17 Warner 2018h 2018 radar observations indicate a period of ~2.8 h, but a slightly longer period is possible. The photometric data do not allow formally excluding a solution near 7.3 h. 523775 2014 YB35 Naidu 2015b Ds: < 150 m. 523806 2002 WW17 Cutri 2019 The analysis used W1 and W2 NEOWISE data. Cutri 2019 The analysis used W1 and W2 NEOWISE data. 523855 1995 SK87 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 523856 1995 SL87 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 525939 2005 UY97 Pravec 2019b Paired with (229401) 2005 SU152. 528159 2008 HS3 Warner 2019p Single period analysis found several dominant periods. They are listed in the Ambiguous table. 528407 2008 TO52 This note applies to all Erasmus 2019 (2019ApJS..242...15E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 ONLY if PFlag was empty and pending individual review. Erasmus 2019 This note applies to all Erasmus 2019 (2019ApJS..242...15E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 only if PFlag was empty and pending individual review. Amplitude errors were given only when the AmpFlag was empty. 531119 2012 FF11 Pravec 2019b Paired with (69298) 1992 DR9. 531260 2012 KL9 Pravec 2019b Paired with (313701) 2003 UN3. 532037 2013 FY27 Sheppard 2018c Separation from primary about 9800 km. 537342 2015 KN120 Warner 2018a P3/A3: 7.448 ± 0.006, 0.12 ± 0.03 mag. P2 and P3 may be a single period corrupted by harmonics of P1, or P1 and the true P2 are tumble frequencies beating to produce a third apparent frequency. 541818 2012 AX10 Pravec 2019b Paired with (33325) 1998 RH3. 545135 2014 YE64 Binzel 2019 MITHNEOS Method: sVIS 554099 2012 KU50 Chandler 2021 Binary discovery. Semi-major axis > 15000 km. 561272 2015 RV228 Pravec 2019b Paired with (98866) Giannabussolari. 575395 2011 SE164 Pravec 2019b Paired with (100440) 1996 PJ6. 576293 2012 LB9 This note applies to all Erasmus 2019 (2019ApJS..242...15E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 ONLY if PFlag was empty and pending individual review. Erasmus 2019 This note applies to all Erasmus 2019 (2019ApJS..242...15E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 only if PFlag was empty and pending individual review. Amplitude errors were given only when the AmpFlag was empty. 577283 2013 CT63 Pravec 2019b Paired with (63970) 2001 SG72. 590180 2011 SR158 Pravec 2019b Paired with (8306) Shoko. 606952 2019 WF6 The period is an approximaation of a short-term periood superimpoed on a longer period, or the dominant period of a tumbler. 611007 2006 QN54 This note applies to all Erasmus 2019 (2019ApJS..242...15E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 ONLY if PFlag was empty and pending individual review. 612023 1994 VX3 Mainzer 2019 The phase angle and PAB in the details record were computed using the mean JD given in the file. H-G are from MPCORB or custom MPC values. See the documentation in the PDS4 documentation at https://sbn.psi.edu/pds/resource/neowisediam.html 612050 1997 GL3 Skiff 2023 The given period is for an apparent short-term component of the overall lightcurve. This may be an artifact or an element of a tumbler. 612147 2000 CF105 Parker 2011 Satellite orbital period: 10.92 ± 0.12 years. 612242 2001 QQ322 Noll 2008d No lightcurve observations per se. Two components of about equal size separated by 0'.1272 ± 0'.0015, or about 4000 km. 612687 2003 UN284 Parker 2011 Satellite orbital period: 8.73 ± 0.65 years. 612813 2004 RF84 Benner (2006a) observed with radar and found a dimension of at least 1.2 km based on echo delay range. However, the images indicate the possibility of a bifurcated body with an effective diameter of about 1.5 km. Based on the total information, we presumed a dark (C-type) asteroid and used the default albedo for that class and MPCORB H to derive a diameter. 612929 2005 CR37 Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 613512 2006 SK134 Warner 2019m The two periods given for this likely tumbler are best-fit single periods and not formal two-period analysis. 614473 2009 SZ67 Pravec 2019b Paired with (105247) 2000 QH3. 616600 2006 AN29 Erasmus 2019 This note applies to all Erasmus 2019 (2019ApJS..242...15E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 only if PFlag was empty and pending individual review. Amplitude errors were given only when the AmpFlag was empty. 620071 2011 WN15 Pravec 2019web Possible color variations during rotation. 0 103P/Hartley Harmon 2010 The diameter is based the long-axis dimension of a highly-elongated, bilobate object as observed by radar. The radar cross section was 0.04 km^2, which corresponds to a diameter of ~100 m. 0 10P/Tempel 2 A'Hearn 1989 Amplitude is for observations at 4845 Angstroms. Other amplitudes: 6840 A, 0.45 mag; 10100 A, 0.8 mag. 0 169P/NEAT Determined to be a comet (by Warner) after receiving an asteroid designation. Current MPC designation is P/2002 EX12. 0 1994 CJ1 Radar Team 2014b First estimate is two 100-m bodies about 500-m apart. 0 1994 ES2 Terai 2018 Entries for Terai 2017 in the Color Index table were derived from their Hg-r and Hr-i. The errors were found by adding the individual errors in quadrature. 0 1998 WV24 Benecchi 2008 The two components were separated by an angular distance of 0'.051 ± 0'.002, with the secondary fainter by 0.3 magnitude. The secondary was located at 0'.033 ± 0'.003 in R.A. and 0'.039 ± 0'.003 in Decl. relative to the primary. 0 1999 TE21 This note applies to all Erasmus 2019 (2019ApJS..242...15E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 ONLY if PFlag was empty and pending individual review. Erasmus 2019 This note applies to all Erasmus 2019 (2019ApJS..242...15E) detail records: Initial bulk data entry assigned U = 2 only if PFlag was empty and pending individual review. Amplitude errors were given only when the AmpFlag was empty. 0 2000 UK11 Nolan 2001 It appears that Nolan made a factor of 2 error in his reported period. The LCDB adopts the 0.025 h period based on the reported observational data of radar bandwidth and estimated size of 30 meters. 0 2001 QW322 Parker 2011 Satellite orbital period: 17.01 ± 1.55 years. 0 2001 RW17 Warner 2020a 8-hour solution unlikely but cannot be formally excluded. 0 2003 QY90 Benecchi 2009 See note under 2001 QC298. Grundy 2011 Orbital period determined from astrometric measurements. 0 2005 GQ107 Pravec 2019b Paired with (55913) 1998 FL12. 0 2005 LW3 Naidu 2022 Primary-Seoncdary distance ~ 4 km. 0 2005 WW113 Pravec 2019b Paired with (5026) Martes. 0 2006 BR284 Parker 2011 Satellite orbital period: 4.11 ± 0.04 years. 0 2006 CH69 Parker 2011 Satellite orbital period: 3.89 ± 0.07 years. 0 2006 SF369 Noll 2008b No lightcurves per se. Hubble observations show a binary system of about the same size separated by 0'.109 ± 0'.003, or about 3200 km. 0 2007 TQ24 Warner 2020c Second period is ambiguous. Alternate solution: P_2B: 9.57 h. 0 2008 SD The geocentric phase angle and PAB in the Masiero 2020b details records were computed using the mean MJD given in the file. H-G are the values used for the model and appear only in details records. The MPCORB H-G at the time of import are used in the summary line. The albedo error is the larger linear error listed in the table. The diameter is the corrected value (see Masiero et al. 2020b). Masiero 2020b The geocentric phase angle and PAB in the Masiero 2020b details records were computed using the mean MJD given in the file. H-G are the values used for the model and appear only in details records. The MPCORB H-G at the time of import are used in the summary line. The albedo error is the larger linear error listed in the table. The diameter is the corrected value (see Masiero et al. 2020b). 0 2008 TC3 Aleshkina 2011 Periods of 18 m and 6.89 h were also reported. The LCDB authors believe these to be spurious, possibly because non-principal axis rotation was not taken into account. 0 2008 TT26 Ryan 2009 http://infohost.nmt.edu/~bryan/research/work/mro_images/k08t2 6t/k08t26t_081019.jpg 0 2008 UZ220 Pravec 2019b Paired with (103055) 1999 XR134. 0 2009 BD Mommert 2014c Diameter and albedo based on a rocky body. An equally likely solution assuming a collection of bare rock slabs gives D = 0.004 ± 0.001 km and pV = 0.45 ± 0.35. 0 2009 QZ66 This note applies to all Lo et al. (2020, AJ 159) entries. A suffix of 'Lo21-' has been added to the all-numeric internal IDs used by Lo et al. to avoid confusion with an MPC-assigned number. The astrometric data they provided was used to match each of their objects to one in the MPCOrb data set. In most cases, the cross-match was unambiguous. For the others, there will be an entry in the extended notes for that particular Lo et al. details record. This is particularly important for objects in the summary line that have only the Lo et al. reference and are flagged as uncertain. Here, the object listed may not be the correct one. The Date, PAB_L, PAB_B, and Phase entries in the details record are based on 1) the cross-matched ID and 2) the first date of observations, which usually spanned about three days. 0 2010 RC130 Skiff 2019b Analysis by P. Pravec. A single period of 8.687 h was initially found, but this is a beat period based on a 3:5 ratio of the periods found with 2-dimensional Fourier analysis. The periods could be a linear combination of the two actual periods (precession and rotation). 0 2010 WC9 Beniyama 2022 This applies to all Beniyama 2022 entries: the observations were made with a video camera taking multiple frams per second. 0 2011 CT4 Pravec 2020web A higher than normal albedo was used to calculate a revised diameter based on the new H-G values. 0 2011 FJ54 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. Lo 2020 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. 0 2011 HP Warner 2019p Period and amplitudes based on full data set. 0 2011 TG2 Warner 2023a Period of combined data set. 0 2011 UT239 Masiero 2009 At the time of the TALCS survey, this object had the desgination of 2006 SP242. The MPCORB file not identifies it as 2011 UT239. 0 2011 XA3 Urakawa 2014 H, D, and pV assume a type S asteroid. A type V was also considered possible from spectrophotometric observations. 0 2012 LZ1 Hicks 2012d Authors gave period as 5-16 hours. The two periods given are the approximae values based on their period spectrum from Fourier analysis. Howell 2012b The diameter is the approximate effecitve diameter based on a longest dimension of about 1 km. The albedo is the average of the range estimated based on H = 19.8. 0 2012 PG6 Warner 2023a Result of 2022 Sep 24+28. Warner 2023a Result of combined data set. Warner 2023a Result of 2022 Sep 26+28. Warner 2023a Result of 2022 Sep 24+26. 0 2012 TC4 Urakawa 2019 Period is for precession. NPAR P2 is rotation period. 0 2012 TK84 Pravec 2019b Paired with (167405) 2003 WP118. 0 2012 TS209 Pravec 2019b Paired with (26420) 1999 XL103. 0 2012 UX136 Pravec 2012web Based on data from Joe Pollock. 0 2014 AC The albedo error given for Masiero 2018a is the maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file; the actual date of observation was not given. Masiero 2018a The albedo error given for Masiero 2018a is the maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file; the actual date of observation was not given. 0 2014 AN51 The albedo error given for Masiero 2018a is the maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file; the actual date of observation was not given. Masiero 2018a The albedo error given for Masiero 2018a is the maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file; the actual date of observation was not given. 0 2014 CH9 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. Lo 2020 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. 0 2014 EX61 2016 UV197 may have been the designation at the time. Using the MPC MP Checker, the astrometric position from Lo et al. (2020), 2014 EX61 has the exact same position. Since 2016 UV197 is no longer an recognized designation, 2014 EX61 was assumed to be the actual object. Lo 2020 2016 UV197 may have been the designation at the time. Using the MPC MP Checker, the astrometric position from Lo et al. (2020), 2014 EX61 has the exact same position. Since 2016 UV197 is no longer an recognized designation, 2014 EX61 was assumed to be the actual object. 0 2014 ET121 Lo 2020 The designation at the time was likely 2016 UG159, which appears and shows the same position as 2014 ET121 in the MPC MPChecker. However, 2016 UG159 is no longer an assigned designation and so 2014 ET121 was used for this object. 0 2014 GN1 Hicks 2014d V-R = 0.40 assumed to give H = 24.1 0 2014 JO25 Aznar 2019b The primary record for Aznar 2019b gives the best-fit for the entire data set. The subsequent entires are based on subsets obtained by different observers throughout the runs of 2017 April 20 to May 17. Venkataramani 2019 The actual phange angle ranged from 61 to 50 degrees over the course of the observations. During that time, the B-V color index increased (bluer) from 0.61 to 0.98 while the V-R index remained nearly constant. 0 2014 MK6 Navarro-Meza 2019 This note applies to all Navarro-Meza 2019 color index entries. The paper gave r-i colors after substracting solar color but that value was not given. A value of r-i(sun) = 0.11(*) mag was added to the values in the paper for the listings in the color index tabel. http://classic.sdss.org/dr5/algorithms/sdssUBVRITransform.htm l 0 2014 SC324 Warner 2015h P2 in NPAR table is not unique. Low amplitude tumbler: A2/A1_secondharmonic ~ 0.21. 0 2014 VR4 Pravec 2019b Paired with (46829) McMahon. 0 2014 WK368 The albedo error given for Masiero 2018a is the maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file; the actual date of observation was not given. Masiero 2018a The albedo error given for Masiero 2018a is the maximum possible value when converting albedo values from log space to value space. The phase angle in the details record is from the file; the actual date of observation was not given. 0 2015 AH1 Pravec 2019b Paired with (16126) 1999 XQ86. 0 2015 OH Warner 2016c Ambiguous: P_alt: 2.630 cannot be formally excluded but is not likely. 0 2015 OS35 Ieva 2018 Computed phase angle significantly different from that in paper. Possible wrong date or object. 0 2015 RF36 Taylor 2015b Period estimated from spread of CW radar data 0 2016 AZ8 Virkki 2019 The periods are based on upper limits and accounting for the mutual orbit plane being inclined several tens of degrees from the line of sight. Warner 2019m The orbital period is based on the lightcurve having the expected mutual events. The primary period seems much too long compared to initial radar observations. 0 2016 BU13 Warner 2016m Suspected P3 = 16.46 ± 0.02, A3 = 0.04 ± 0.01 0 2016 CA138 Borisov 2023 Sidereal periods (h): Pole 1: 5.3137 Pole 2: 5.3141 Pole 3: 5.3139 Pole 3 mirror: 5.3139 0 2016 EV27 Warner 2016j Second period may be artificat of Fourier analysis. However, the two periods do not have a simple integral multiple ratio. 0 2016 UW187 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. Lo 2020 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. 0 2016 UZ215 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. Lo 2020 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. 0 2016 UC230 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. Lo 2020 The object was determined using astrometric positions from Lo et al. (2020). However, because of significant deviation from given position and that found in the MPC MPChecker, this may not be the actual object that was observed. 0 2017 BW Pravec 2017web Second period is no unique. First period could be rotation or precession. 0 2017 NH Warner 2018a Second NPA period is one of many possibilities. 0 2017 SL16 Borisov 2023 Sideral period for each pole: (190.4,34.3,0.3188) (183.7,-75.8,0.3190) (233.6,53.6,0.3192) (97.2,-41.2,0.3191) 0 2017 YH Rondon 2022 The observation date is the first in the set of observations, which spanned more than a year. The phase angle range was 87.1-90.3 deg. 0 2017 YE5 JPL 2018 Each body about 900 m, widely separated (~2500 m). 0 2018 AJ Warner 2018k Second period may be actual second period or linear combination of the two frequencies of NPA rotation with the main frequency. 0 2018 CB Birtwhistle 2021a The phase angle for the breakout entries was forced to the mid-phase angle of the observations. The phase angle bisector values are for 00:00h UT on 2018 Feb 9. 0 2018 JE1 Warner 2018m Secondary period is likely wrong, even spurious. It was needed to overcome an excessively large nightly zero point shift of 0.8 mag. 0 2018 KE3 Warner 2019b Possible very wide binary, in which case the primary period is the longer of the two. The shorter period is rated U=3; the secondary period is U=2. 0 2018 LK Warner 2018m Period is for combined data set from 2018 June 12-13. Individual results are reported seperatedly. 0 2018 TF3 Pravec 2018b The secondary period/amplitude given in the LC_BINARY table are for the synchronous satellite. Warner 2019f Orbital period derived from half-period analysis that allowed full coverage of the P_orb lightcurve. 0 2018 UQ1 Lopez-Oquendo 2019a Longer solution of 7.1 h is likely a double-period fit by exclusion. 0 2018 UD3 Beniyama 2022 Given the amplitude and assuming the original period is correct, the true period may be ~0.0165112 h. 0 2018 XV5 Pravec 2022web Amplitude for P2 (A2) not given so listed as the same as P1. Warner 2022i Periods 2 and 3 are artifacts of additive period analysis, which does not properly handle tumbling asteroids. 0 2019 FP2 Warner 2019p Extrmely noisy data with no discernible trends. 0 2019 KZ3 Warner 2019p A nearly as-good single period solution could also be found. The RMS scatter was higher by about 0.04 mag. 0 2019 SH6 Warner 2020c Two periods given were derived from subtracting an 8.22 h, 0.19 mag lightcurve. This may be a 'beat frquency' period. 0 2019 UC A super-short period (Pravec et al., 2019) is a possibility. 0 2020 AZ2 Pravec 2020b Satellite A = 0.07 mag, a/b = 1.23. 0 2020 BX12 Virkki 2020 Diameter of 180 m is for projected-area-equivalent. Primary/Second sizes: 165 m and 70 m. An orbital period of 15-16 not ruled out. 0 2020 HS7 Beniyama 2022 Two observations on same date: midtimes: 14:36:31 amd 16:24:21. 0 2020 KK7 Birtwhistle 2021a H-G were determined using the lightcurve peak instead of average. 0 2020 ST1 Warner 2021d Pravec found the strongest solutions to be 1.879, 2.879, and 5.407 h. Two are real, the third is related to the other two. Note that 1/2.879 = 1/1.879 - 1/5.407. 0 2020 TP1 Birtwhistle 2021e The stated period and secondary in the NPAR table are not secure but simply two dominant periods found using software that properly handles tumbling asteroids. 0 2021 DW1 Kwiatkowski 2021 SG-SI: 0.79 ± 0.01. The phase angle values are for 0h UT on the given date. They can be significantly different from the value at the actual time of observations. 0 2021 DX1 Warner 2021h The second period in the NPA table is one of several possibilities. 0 2021 KN2 Birtwhistle 2021c P3: 0.012516(2) h, A3: 0.27. 1/P1 = 2/P3 - 2/P2 0 2022 DA Period/amplitude could not be determined. Birtwhistle 2022b Period/amplitude could not be determined. 0 2022 LV Pravec 2022web Amplitude for P2 (A2) assumed to be the same as A1. 0 2022 NE Birtwhistle 2023a P3 = 0.01217 ± 0.00001 h; A3 = 0.4 ± 0.4 mag. 0 2022 QT7 Birtwhistle 2023a P3 = 0.0147778 ± 0.0000015 h; A3 = 0.7 ± 0.5 mag. 0 2023 HK Birtwhistle 2023d The phase angle ranged from 50.5 to 72.3 over the span of the observations. The full range of the tumbling amplitude is ~1.5 mag. 0 2023 HU4 Birtwhistle 2023d The second period is ambiguous. An alternate solution is P2 = 0.1714 (0.0003) h, A = 0.4 (0.2) mag. The phase angle ranged from 15.0-11.8 deg over the span of the observations. The full range of the tumbling amplitude is ~1.3 mag. 0 2023 HO18 Birtwhistle 2023d The phase angle ranged from 41.8 to 17.1 deg over the span of the observations. Using default G = 0.15 led to an offset of 0.44 mag between two night and significant deviation from the predicted magnitudes using G = 0.15.. 0 2023 KZ1 Birtwhistle 2023d Indications of a long secondary period. Based on the raw plot, a solution might be P2 ~ 0.24 h for a bimodal curve [LCDB authors]. 0 C/2003 WT42 Determined to be a comet after discovery and given asteroid designation. Current MPC designation is C/2003 WT42. 0 Derm0a Dermawan 2002b, Doctoral Thesis This paper included approximately 50 objects, named in this list as DermXx, with X being a number and x a letter. The paper used the following values, which were adopted in lieu of the defaults used in this publication that are based on the semi-major axis: SMA: 2.3 < a < 2.8, Type = C, V-R = 0.53±0.04, Pv = 0.21±0.05; SMA: 2.8 < a < 3.3, Type = C, V-R = 0.37±0.03, Pv = 0.06±0.02. The listed diameters are those listed by Dermawan as computed from these assumed values and his measured value of Hv. 0 Derm1c Dermawan 2011 Only 22 data points. 0 Derm2b Dermawan 2011 D flag applies to amplitude only. 0 Derm2h Dermawan 2011 D flag applies to amplitude only. 0 Derm2K Dermawan 2011 Only 18 data points. 0 Derm2O Dermawan 2011 Only 9 data points. 0 Derm3b Dermawan 2011 Any number of period solutions are possible. 0 Derm4m Dermawan 2011 Dermawan paper gave amplitude as A = 0.35. It should have been 0.035. The value was rounded up to 0.04 mag for entry. 0 Derm6e Dermawan 2011 R = 24. 0 Derm6j Dermawan 2011 R = 24. 0 FOSL01010327 Chang 2022b This applies to all Chang 2022b; Ap. J. Suppl. Ser. 259, id.7. The filter band was r2 for all observations other than Apr 10, 2019, which used the SG filter. 'r2' is not recognized in the LCDB, so SR (Sloan r') is given. The reported diameters do not always agree with the standard formula using H and albedo to find a diameter. The summary line uses the value of the standard formula. 0 FSAP04010083 This note applies to all Chang 2021 (PSJ 2) entries. The observations were made in g and r2 bands. The photometric bands (for H) were assigned as SG and SR, respectively. The H_SR values were transformed to approximate V by using the LCDB V = SR+ 0.22. While not exact, this makes the values more compatible to H_V when plotting frequency-diameters. For diameter calculations, an albedo of 0.05 and G = 0.15 ± 0.2 was assumed for both bands. Only some of the 53 objects could be tied to an object in the MPC database. For those without ID, and where possible, the phase and phase angle bisector values were assumed to be the same as for an identified object in the same observing block. The entries are flagged as being from a Sparse Wide-field Survey (SWF). 0 FSAP04010100 This applies only to Chang et al. (2021) Plan. Sci. J. 2, id.191. Many of the objects were not tied to known Hildas. As a result, the orbital parameters were not available and, therefore, the phase angle bisector and phase angles could not be calculated. Generally, the phase angle for any Hilda group member is <20 degrees. Chang 2022b This applies to all Chang et al. (2021) Plan. Sci. J. 2, id.191. Many of the objects were not tied to known Hildas. As a result, the orbital parameters were not available and, therefore, the phase angle bisector and phase angles could not be calculated. Generally, the phase angle for any Hilda group member is <20 degrees. 0 Himalia Mainzer 2011 The diameters and H values were taken from other sources and then used to calibrate expected errors in diameters and albedo derived from WISE data. 0 P/2006 HR30 Determined to be a comet after initial discovery and asteroid designation (2006 HR30). Current MPC designation is P/2006 HR30. 0 P0007F Polishook 2012b Object could not be tied to one in the MPCORB file. 0 P00095 Polishook 2012b Object could not be tied to one in the MPCORB file. 0 P000DV Polishook 2012b Object could not be tied to one in MPCORB file. 0 P000K7 Polishook 2012b Object could not be tied to one in MPCORB file. 0 P000ZE Polishook 2012b Object could not be tied to one in MPCORB file. 0 P000ZL Polishook 2012b Object could not be tied to one in the MPCORB file.