Table A.1
Comparison of the three post-Rosetta ephemeris reconstructions of comet 67P.
| Ephemeris | K & L (2019) | Farnocchia et al. (2021) | Bologna (2024) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reconstruction strategy | Post-processing of ESOC ephemeris | Observation-based reconstruction with prediction-driven NGA model selection | Observation-constrained POD |
| NGA modelling approach | Empirical fit (exponentials and polynomials) to ESM residuals | RJM selected via prediction diagnostics | LSM with physical priors |
| Observational constraints | ESOC multi-arc ephemeris (Rosetta mission period) | Ground-based astrometry and Rosetta pseudo-range measurements (preand post-perihelion) | Ground-based astrometry and Rosetta radiometric tracking (continuous, including perihelion) |
| Perihelion straint | Yes, but indirectly from the ESOC ephemeris. | No | Yes |
| Time span | Rosetta mission period (post-processed ephemeris) | 2012–2018 (over a full orbital revolution) | 2014–2016 (Rosetta proximity phase) |
Notes. The table compares the reconstruction philosophy, NGA modelling approach, observational constraints, and temporal coverage of the three post-Rosetta ephemerides. Particular attention is given to whether the perihelion dynamics are directly constrained by high-precision observations.
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.