Planetary and Space Science 193 (2020) 105083

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Planetary and Space Science

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/pss

Spin pairs in the Koronis asteroid family

Fazenda c, W. Barletta a, A. Lucchini a, B. Martins a, P. Furlaneto a
V. Carruba a, *, S. Aljbaae b, A.L.
a
S~
ao Paulo State University (UNESP), School of Natural Sciences and Engineering, Guaratinguet
a, SP, 12516-410, Brazil
b
National Space Research Institute (INPE), Division of Space Mechanics and Control, C.P. 515, 12227-310, S~ao Jos
e dos Campos, SP, Brazil
c
Federal University of S~
ao Paulo (UNIFESP), Science and Technology Institute, 12247-014, S~ao Jos
e dos Campos, SP, Brazil

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Asteroid groups may either form because of collisions or the rotational failure of a parent body. Collisional
Minor planets asteroid families tend to be more spread in proper element domains, while young spin clusters are usually much
Asteroids more compact. Recently, it has been shown that young spin clusters may form at higher rates in extremely young
General
asteroid families (families younger than ’3 Myr) than in more evolved groups. Among asteroid families, the
Individual
Koronis
Koronis family is a natural laboratory to test this phenomenon. While the family itself is very evolved, with an
Celestial mechanics estimated age of more than 2 Byr, two young sub-families are known to be located among Koronis members: the
extremely young family of Karin, with an age of 5.750.05 Myr, and the relatively young sub-family of Kor-
onis(2), with an age of 105 Myr. This fact allows studying the occurrence of young spin clusters in extremely
young, young and evolved asteroid populations, all sharing the same physical properties. Using methods based on
backward numerical integrations, we identify one possible pair candidate in the Karin family, and retrieved the
pair 1741–258640 recently found in other works. No convincing spin pair candidate was found in the Koronis(2)
sub-family. This suggests that the occurrence of young spin clusters in families older than ’ 3 Myr may be a rarer
event than what previously thought.

1. Introduction
Asteroid families are groups of asteroids identified in domains of
proper elements ((Knezevi
c and Milani, 2003)). These groups are
believed to form from a collision that either broke up (fragmentation
families) or formed a crater (craterization families) on the group parent
body. Some asteroid groups, however, can also form because of the
rotational break-up of an asteroid ((Bottke et al., 2002; Walsh et al.,
2008)) or of its satellite ((Jacobson and Scheeres, 2011)). These spin
clusters are found everywhere in the main belt and tend to be much more
compact in proper element domains than collisional asteroid families.
Collisional and fission groups with an age of ’ 5 Myr or less can be
accurately dated using methods based on backward integrations, such as
the Backward Integration Method (BIM) and the Close Encounters
Method (CEM). In BIM, the orbits of families members and of the alleged
parent body are integrated into the past, and the differences of the
secular longitudes of nodes Ω and pericenter ϖ of family members with
respect to that of the parent body are determined. These differences
should tend to values near zeros at the time of the family formation event
(Nesvorný et al., 2002). In the CEM approach, the orbits of several clones
of the parent body and of a possible secondary are simulated into the
past. The time of occurrence of close encounters that happened at relative
velocities and distances less than chosen thresholds are then registered.
The median value of these times yields an estimate of the formation age
of the pair ((Pravec and 25 colleagues, 2010)). More details on both BIM
and CEM can also be found in (Carruba et al., 2018, 2020).
Among evolved asteroid families, the Koronis family is important
because it is located in a very regular region of the main belt, that allowed
for the preservation of information on the initial ejection velocity field of
its members (Carruba et al., 2016), and because, while being a very old
family itself, with an estimated age of at least 2 Byr, there are at least two
know collisional sub-families inside the primary family that formed
recently, that of Karin, with an estimated age of 5:75  0:05 Myr, first
identified by (Nesvorný et al., 2002), and that of Koronis 2, a secondary
family of the Koronis family parent body itself, with an estimated age of
15  5 Myr ((Molnar and Haegert, 2009)).
Because of the presence of these two young collisional sub-families,
the Koronis family is a natural candidate for studying the mechanisms
producing young spin clusters (Carruba et al., 2020). recently found that
detectable spin clusters tend to be found in higher abundances in young
collisional families, than in older, more evolved ones, and that does not
depend significantly on the physical properties or on the mechanism of

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: valerio.carruba@unesp.br (V. Carruba).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pss.2020.105083
Received 29 January 2020; Received in revised form 25 August 2020; Accepted 26 August 2020
Available online 3 September 2020
0032-0633/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
V. Carruba et al.
formation (craterization or fragmentation) of the primary family. If this
hypothesis is correct, we would expect to find a higher concentration of
spin clusters in the two Koronis sub-families with respect to the rest of the
more evolved material. The main goal of this paper will be to study the
occurrence of fission clusters that can be confirmed using backward
integration methods such as BIM and CEM in the whole Koronis families
and in the collisional sub-families of Karin and Koronis 2.
This paper is so divided: we will use the BIM and CEM techniques to
identify spin clusters candidates in the Karin, Koronis(2) and in the rest of
the Koronis family population. Once spin clusters candidates are identi-
fied, we will verify if their properties are compatible with those of known
spin clusters. Finally, we will discuss the global implications of our
findings in the conclusions.
2. Koronis fission clusters population
As a first step, we identify members of the Koronis family using the
membership data from the AstDys site (http://hamilton.dm.unipi.it/
astdys/accessed on February 14th, 2019), as obtained in (Milani et al.,
2014). According to AstDys, there are 6912 family members in this
family. While more recent and larger databases are available, like for
instance at the Asteroid Families Portal (AFP (Radovi
c et al., 2017)), in
this work we preferred to use an earlier database, but that provides
membership for the Karin and Koronis(2) sub-families, as implemented
by (Nesvorný et al., 2015). Since such information is not readily available
in more recent databases, and since our goal is to understand how spin
clusters tend to form in young sub-families, in this work we will use the
earlier data, which is already quite numerous. Future applications of our
methods could, of course, be extended to new, enlarged populations of
Koronis members.
We then selected asteroids that could be reasonable candidates to be
part of fission clusters. For this, we followed the same approach as in
(Carruba et al., 2020): first, we selected asteroids with a relative distance
of less than 5 m/s. We determine the distance using the metric:
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
5 δa2
dd ¼ na þ 2ðδeÞ2 þ 2ðδsiniÞ2 ;
4 a
where ðδa; δe; δsiniÞ is the separation vector in proper elements, a is the
mean value of the pair semi-major axis. dd is the standard distance metric
as defined in Zappal
a et al. (1990). We then also demand that each pair of
members of each given cluster has a mass ratio between the secondary
and the primary q of less than 0.7, the maximum theoretical limit found
in (Pravec and 25 colleagues, 2010; Pravec and 47 colleagues, 2019). The
mass ratio is computed as (Pravec and 25 colleagues, 2010):
q ¼ 10ð0:6*δHÞ ;
where δH is the difference in absolute magnitude between the pair
Fig. 1. The orbital distribution in the proper ða; eÞ (panel a) and ða; siniÞ (panel b) domains, of members of the Koronis family (black dots), of the primaries of
candidate clusters in the Koronis family (yellow full dots, in the Karin sub-family (red full dots), and in the Koronis 2 sub-family (green full dots). Vertical red lines
display the location of local mean-motion resonances. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of
this article.)
Planetary and Space Science 193 (2020) 105083
members, and the geometric albedo of the pair members is assumed to be
equal. In high number density regions such as the Karin family there can
be clusters formed by several pairs between the same possible parent
body and different secondaries, whose total value of qTot , computed as:
X
Npairs
q¼ qi ; (3)
i¼1
where Npairs is the number of pairs in the cluster, and qi the value of q of
each given pair, can be higher than 0.7. We will report the qTot value for
each studied cluster, but every single pair will be studied separately.
Overall, 2539 asteroid pairs candidates in the Koronis family satisfy
these selection criteria. Of these, 1431, or 53.4% of the total, are mem-
bers of the Karin collisional sub-family, 809, or 31.9%, are inside the
Koronis 2 family, and 299, or 14.7%, are found in the remaining, older
Koronis family asteroids.
Fig. 1 displays the results of this preliminary analysis, where we show
projections in the ða; eÞ (panel a) and ða; siniÞ (panel b) domains of
members of the Koronis family, and of candidate fission clusters pri-
maries in the whole Koronis family, and in the Karin and Koronis 2
collisional sub-families.
Concerning the CEM analysis, following the approach of (Pravec and
28 colleagues, 2018), to identify members of spin clusters we will check
for encounters that occurred to within 20 times the Hill radius of the
primary object, where:
 1
1 4π Gρ 3
RHill ¼ aD1 ; (4)
2 9μ
where a is the primary semi-major axis, D1 is the primary diameter, G is
the gravitational constant, ρ is the primary density, assumed to be equal
to 2500 kgm3 , a typical value for S-type objects, and μ is the gravita-
tional parameter of the Sun. We will then also require the encounter to
have occurred at relative velocities smaller than 4  vesc , where:
1 8π
(1) vesc ¼ D1 Gρ: (5)
2 3
For an asteroid pair to be considered robust, we demand the pair to
have experienced at least 36 encounters occurring at low relative speed
and distances. This corresponds to 5% of the population of clones used
for our simulations (729), which is the statistical null hypothesis. In the
next sub-section we will start by analyzing the fission clusters candidates
in the Karin collisional sub-family.
2.1. Karin spin clusters
(2)
First, we verified which of the clusters inside the Karin family has an
age obtained with BIM younger than the estimated age of the family, of
2
V. Carruba et al.
5:75  0:05 Myr. Table (1) of the supplementary materials displays our
results. Since in this work we did not find any pairs whose primary has an
absolute magnitude H higher than 15, for the sake of brevity we do not
report these pairs in the supplementary materials. Information on these
tested pairs is available upon reasonable request. Out of 41 spin cluster
candidates with a primary with H < 15, BIM confirms a younger age for
23 of them, or 56.1% of the total. For 2 clusters, we found a possible age
older than that of the Karin primary family.
We then studied the pairs that passed the BIM selection criterion with
CEM. Only one pair, that of 57735-258677, satisfied our selection
criteria. This pair experienced 34 encounters at low relative velocities
and distances, which is just two encounters short of our requirement of
36. It had an age of 0.030.01 Myr. The mass ratio of this pair was 0.19,
the value of dd was of 4.69 m/s, the absolute magnitude of the primary
was 15.0, with a ΔH of 0.9. Fig. 2 shows an ða; eÞ and ða; sinðiÞÞ pro-
jections of Karin family members and of the identified spin pair
candidate.
High-quality astrometric data from the ESA Gaia mission (Gaia
Collaboration: (Gaia CollaborationBrown et al., 2018), Gaia Collabora-
tion (Spoto et al., 2018):) was available for (832) Karin itself, however,
none of the asteroids possibly belonging to its candidate spin clusters
satisfied our selection criteria.
Overall, the potential spin clusters population involves only 2 Karin
members out of 480 sub-family members, which is 0.4% of the total. The
statistical significance of this pair will be further investigated later on in
this paper. The next sub-section will be dedicated to the identification of
possible spin clusters inside the Koronis(2) sub-family.
2.2. Koronis(2) spin clusters
In the Koronis(2) sub-family among the studied pairs candidates (see
Table (2) of the supplementary materials for a list of the 10 pairs whose
primary has H < 15), only 1 was confirmed by BIM and studied with
CEM. No pair or group among the studied ones satisfy the RHill or the vesc
requirements. Overall, it appears that no spin clusters are observable
among the studied Koronis(2) population. The next sub-section will be
dedicated to the study of spin cluster in the larger Koronis family.
2.3. Spin clusters in the Koronis family that are not members of either
Karin or Koronis(2)
Using our selection criteria, we identified several possible spin clus-
Fig. 2. An ða; eÞ (left panel) and ða; sinðiÞÞ (right panel) projections of members
of the Karin family (black dots) and of the asteroids in the spin pair candidate
identified in this work (red full circle, also identified by a label). (For inter-
pretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred
to the Web version of this article.)
3
Planetary and Space Science 193 (2020) 105083
ters in the Koronis family that are not members of the two sub-families of
Karin and Koronis(2). A list of 62 of these groups with a primary with
H < 15 is reported in Table (3) of the supplementary materials. 13 of
these clusters, 21.0% of the total, are confirmed by a BIM analysis and
were studied with CEM. Of these 13 groups, only one, that of (1741)
Giclas, satisfies the RHill and vesc criteria, and can be classified as a spin
clusters candidate. The pair 1741–258640 was recently identified and
studied by (Pravec and 47 colleagues, 2019). It has a mass ratio of 0.002,
the value of dd was of 0.43 m/s. The absolute magnitude of the primary is
11.620:06, and the ΔH is 4.500.08, according to (Pravec and 47
colleagues, 2019). Our CEM age is 0:05þ0:120:01 , based on a statistics of 1702
encounters (Pravec and 47 colleagues, 2019). found an age of 0:27þ1:12 0:18 ,
which overlaps with our result. Differences between the two nominal
values of the age estimates may be caused by the difference in the
number of clones used by the two groups (729 by our group, 1000 in
(Pravec and 47 colleagues, 2019) and by the different set up of the nu-
merical simulations used by the different groups, that may produce dif-
ferences in the statistics of close encounters for this pair, as obtained in
the two works. The orbital locations of this pair in the ða; eÞ and ða; siniÞ
domains are shown in Fig. 3.
Since previous results showed that spin clusters can be found inside
larger cluster or collisional families (Pravec and 28 colleagues, 2018;
Carruba et al., 2020), here we looked if larger groups can be associated
with the Giclas pair. For this purpose, we first verified if dynamical
families can be associated with the parent body of the spin cluster, using
the Hierarchical Clustering Method (HCM (Zappal
a et al., 1990),), as
implemented by the Asteroid Families Portal (AFP, (Radovi
c et al., 2017),
accessed on November 30th, 2019). For each studied group, we increase
the distance cutoff until the group merges with the larger Koronis family.
Fig. 4 displays the number of family members and the number of new
family members as a function of the distance cutoff for the (1741) Giclas
group, up to the point, at a cutoff of 19 m/s, where it merges with the
Koronis family, as shown by the large increase by the number of total and
new members observed for this group at this distance cutoff.
Once the largest possible group is identified, the convergence of the
secular angles Ω and ϖ with respect to the possible parent body are then
computed, using a numerical simulation into the past. If these angles
converge to within plus or minus 30∘ with respect to the known members
at the estimated time of the group formation, the new object is consid-
ered a possible new member. This method, called Selective Backward
Integration Method, or SBIM, by some authors (Novakovi
c et al., 2012),
allows to select new possible objects to be studied with CEM. Fig. 5
displays SBIM results in Ω for the (1741) group (ϖ results are not shown
for the sake of brevity). Since the new 11 possible members nodal dif-
ferences of this group are not converging to the same solution shown by
the original pair (in red in the figure), no new member was identified
using this method.
Overall, the population of objects possibly belonging to spin clusters
is just of 2 asteroids out of the 6186 family members (excluding the sub-
families asteroids). This is just 0.03% of the studied sample, which sug-
gests that the occurrence of spin clusters in more evolved groups may be a
rather rare event.
3. Properties of the spin clusters in the Koronis family
Now that a sample of 2 possible spin pairs has been identified in the
Koronis family, we can start to study their properties and compare them
with those or previously known groups. First, we consider the statistical
significance of these two pairs. For this purpose, we follow the approach
of (Pravec and Vokrouhlický, 2009). First, we define a volume V1 ¼
ΔaΔeΔðsinðiÞÞΔωΔϖ, where Δa ¼ 0:0178  a, Δe ¼ ΔðsinðiÞÞ ¼ 0:014,
Δω ¼ Δϖ ¼ 2π , and a is the semi-major axis of the primary of the pair
candidate. Another nested box with width one half of the V1 box limits
and a volume of V1=2 ¼ V1 =25 ¼ V1 =32 is then considered. The boxes are
centered at the orbit of the candidate pair primary. As a next step, we
V. Carruba et al.
Fig. 3. Location in the ða; eÞ (panel a) and ða; sinðiÞÞ (panel b) planes of the (1741) Giclas pairs (red full circles). Black point displays the orbital location of Koronis
family members, other symbols are the same as in Fig. 1. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of
this article.)
Fig. 4. The number of group members (left panel) and the number of new
family members as a function of the distance cutoff for the (1741) Giclas group.
Fig. 5. The difference in Ω of the original (1741) group (red thick line) and of
the extended group (blue lines). (For interpretation of the references to colour in
this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
determine the number of asteroids in the V1 and V1=2 boxes, N1 and N1=2 .
The binomial probability that the small distance between two orbits is
not coincidental, assuming a uniform distribution of orbits in the boxes,
4
Planetary and Space Science 193 (2020) 105083
for small values of N1 (N1 < 100) is then given by:
2Þ1
ðN1=2X 
N1  2 i
PB ¼ 1  pV ð1  pV ÞN1 2i ; (6)
i¼0
i
where pV ¼ ð1=2Þ5 ¼ 1=32 is the volume ratio of the smaller box to the
largest one. Two objects are subtracted from the count to account for the
pair members. For pairs in regions with high density of orbits and large
N1 the binomial distribution can be approximated by the Poisson one:
2Þ1
ðN1=2X
λi
PP ¼ 1  eλ ; (7)
i¼0
i!
where λ ¼ ðN1  2ÞpV . For the pairs of interest in this work,
1741–258640, and 57735-258677, we found that N1 ¼ 6, N1=2 ¼ 2, and
N1 ¼ 603, N1=2 ¼ 112, respectively. This yields a probability PB ¼
88.97% for the first pair, while for the second, because of the highly non-
uniform density of asteroids surrounding this pair, its statistical signifi-
cance cannot be calculated straightforwardly. Nominal values of PP of
less than 0.05% would be obtained using eq. (7).1 As already observed by
(Pravec and 47 colleagues, 2019), the first pair appears to be a likely one,
since is found in a low number density region of the Koronis family. The
second pair cannot be confirmed based on statistical arguments alone and
should be, at this point, considered only as a pair candidate. It could
possibly be a real spin pair, or a case of spurious identification associated
with the last time when the asteroids met on their heliocentric orbits in
 zka et al. (Zi
their synodic cycles (Zi  zka et al., 2016)).
Methods to identify asteroid pairs based on the rotation period of the
primary and the difference in absolute magnitude between the primary
and the P1 secondary in the pair, ΔH, were devised by (Pravec and 25
colleagues, 2010; Pravec and 28 colleagues, 2018). The period of the
(1741) Giclas pair primary was 2.943 h (Pravec and 47 colleagues,
2019), while that of (57735) (2001 UQ159) is estimated by (Davalos
et al., 2019) to be 16.26 h. Fig. 6 displays this data, as well as the isolines
associated with the expected behavior of spin pairs. Both pairs are
compatible with such an origin, so confirming the analysis of (Pravec and
47 colleagues, 2019).
Based on this analysis, we can conclude that there are 1 confirmed
pair and a pair candidate in the Koronis family. Previous works, (Carruba
et al., 2020; Carruba and Ribeiro, 2020; Carruba et al., 2020b), showed
that spin clusters tend to be more compact than most groups formed by
collisions, and that they tend to be found at lower values of ðlog10 ðσ ðaÞÞ,
1
Binomial probability calculation as performed in this section only provide a
lower limit on the real statistical probability of asteroid pairs Other methods
based on the distance of the members of the pair (Pravec and Vokrouhlický,
2009) yields an even higher probability of the pair 1741–258640 being real.
V. Carruba et al.
Fig. 6. Positions of the (1741) Giclas and (57735) (2001 UQ159) pairs in the
ðP1 ; ΔHÞ diagram. The dashed line marks values of periods and ΔH typical of
spin clusters, while the blue and red line display the limits of typical values
covered by these groups. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this
figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
where σ ðaÞ is the standard deviation of the dispersion in proper a. Kor-
onis spin pairs appear to follow this trend. Fig. 7 displays the locations in
the ðlog10 ðσ ðaÞÞ; ageÞ plane of the 2 Koronis pairs. Both pairs are found in
the dark green region where most spin clusters are usually encountered,
which confirms their potential status as the outcome of a rotational
failure.
4. Conclusions
In this work, we searched for possible spin clusters among the
members of the Koronis family and its sub-families. It is the first time that
a survey of this type was conducted for a major main-belt asteroid family.
The Koronis family is a natural laboratory for understanding the pro-
cesses that lead to the formation of young spin clusters. While the family
Fig. 7. Locations in the ðlog10 ðσ ðaÞÞÞ; ageÞ diagrams of the 2 spin pairs candi-
dates identified in this work. The green area displays the region where most spin
clusters have been identified so far. The yellow area the region where collisional
families are most common, and the light green area shows the transition region
where both groups have been found, according to the classification of (Carruba
et al., 2020b). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure
legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
5
Planetary and Space Science 193 (2020) 105083
itself is very old, the presence of the young Karin sub-family and the more
evolved Koronis(2) sub-family allow us to study how often spin clusters
may occur in extremely young, young and more evolved asteroid fam-
ilies, all sharing the same composition and physical properties.
We identified 1 possible spin pair in the Karin sub-family, whose
primary period and a difference in absolute magnitudes between the pair
component are compatible with an origin from rotational failure.
Because of the high number density of asteroids nearby, currently the
pair 57735-258677 can be considered as a possible pair candidate. We
did not identify any convincing spin cluster candidate in the Koronis(2)
sub-family, and we retrieved the already known pair 1741–258640
((Pravec and 47 colleagues, 2019)) in the Koronis family. This negative
result may suggest that the occurrence of spin clusters in families older
than ’ 3 Myr may be a much rarer event than previously thought. An
analysis of other evolved large families containing extremely young
sub-families, such as the Eos family with the Zelima sub-family (Tsir-
voulis, 2019; Carruba and Ribeiro, 2020), or of the Themis family with
the younger Beagle sub-family (Carruba et al., 2018), conducted with the
approach used in this work, could provide more insights on this
phenomenon.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
V. Carruba: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Formal
analysis, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Visualization, Writing -
original draft, Writing - review & editing. S. Aljbaae: Validation, Visu-
alization, Software, Investigation, Writing - review & editing. A.L.

Fazenda: Validation, Software, Investigation, Writing - review & editing.
W. Barletta: Validation, Software, Writing - review & editing. A. Luc-
chini: Validation, Software, Writing - review & editing. B. Martins:
Validation, Software, Writing - review & editing. P. Furlaneto: Valida-
tion, Software, Writing - review & editing.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to two anonymous reviewers for comments and
suggestions that greatly improved the quality of this work. We would like
to thank the S~ao Paulo State Science Foundation (FAPESP) that supported
this work via the grant 16/04476-8, and the Brazilian National Research
Council (CNPq, grant 301577/2017-0). We are grateful for the use of
data from the Asteroid Dynamics Site (AstDys) (http://hamilton.dm.un
ipi.it/astdys, (Knezevi
c and Milani, 2003)). We thank Dr. Federica
Spoto for providing the high-quality astrometric Gaia data used for
simulations of asteroids in the (832) Karin cluster. This publication also
makes use of data products from the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer
(WISE) and Near-Earth Objects (NEOWISE), which are a joint project of
the University of California, Los Angeles, and the Jet Propulsion Labo-
ratory/California Institute of Technology, funded by the National Aero-
nautics and Space Administration.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.pss.2020.105083.
References
Bottke Jr., W.F., Vokrouhlický, D., Rubincam, D.P., Broz, M., 2002. In: Bottke Jr., W.F.,
Cellino, A., Paolicchi, P., Binzel, R.P. (Eds.), The Effect of Yarkovsky Thermal Forces
on the Dynamical Evolution of Asteroids and Meteoroids, Asteroid III. University of
Arizona Press, Tucson, p. 395.
V. Carruba et al.
Carruba, V., Ribeiro, J.V., 2020. Planet. Space Sci. 182, A104810.
Carruba, V., Nesvorný, D., Aljbaae, S., 2016. Icarus 271, 57.
Carruba, V., De Oliveira, E.R., Rodrigues, B., Requena, I., 2018. MNRAS 479, 4815.
Carruba, V., Spoto, F., Barletta, W., Aljbaae, S., Fazenda, A., Martins, B., 2020. Nat.
Astron. 4, 83.
Carruba, V., Ramos, L.G., Spoto, F., 2020b. MNRAS 493, 2556.
Davalos, J.A.G., Silva, J.S., Tamayo, F.J., Alvarez, F.I., 2019. Minor Planet Bull. 46, 268.
Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A.G.A., Vallernari, A., Prustj, T., other 450 colleagues, 2018.
A&A 616, A1.
Jacobson, S.A., Scheeres, D.J., 2011. Icarus 214, 161.
Knezevi
c, Z., Milani, A., 2003. A&A 403, 1165.
Milani, A., Cellino, A., Knezevi
c, Z., et al., 2014. Icarus 239, 46.
Molnar, L.A., Haegert, M.J., 2009. AAS/Div. Planet. Sci. Meet. Abst. #41 41, 27.05.
Nesvorný, D., Bottke, W.F., Dones, L., Levison, H.F., 2002. Nature 417, 720.
Planetary and Space Science 193 (2020) 105083
Nesvorný, D., Broz, M., Carruba, V., 2015. Identification and dynamical properties of
asteroid families. In: Michel, P., DeMeo, F.E., Bottke, W. (Eds.), Asteroid IV. Univ.
Arizona Press and LPI, p. 297.
Novakovi
c, B., Hsieh, H.H., Cellino, A., 2012. MNRAS 424, 1432.
Pravec, P., 25 colleagues, 2010. Nature 466, 1085.
Pravec, P., 28 colleagues, 2018. Icarus 304, 110.
Pravec, P., 47 colleagues, 2019. Icarus 333, 429.
Pravec, P., Vokrouhlický, D., 2009. Icarus 204, 580.
Radovi
c, V., Novakovi
c, B., Carruba, V., Marceta, D., 2017. MNRAS 470, 576.
Gaia Collaboration, Spoto, F., Tanga, P., Mignard, F., other 448 colleagues, 2018. A&A
616, A13.
Tsirvoulis, G., 2019. MNRAS 482, 2612.
Walsh, K.J., Richardson, D.C., Michel, P., 2008. Nature 454, 188.
Zappal
a, V., Cellino, A., Farinella, P., Knezevic, Z., 1990. AJNR 100, 2030.
 zka, J., Gal
ad, A., Vokrouhlický, D., Pravec, P., Kusnir
ak, P., Hornoch, K., 2016. A&A
Zi
595, A20.