▣ ARTIFACT-SETICOURTNEY V. BOWER WATCH ACTIVE
[  OK  ] /inquiries/INQ-001 :: trojan-multi-axis-survey
[  OK  ] pipeline v2.0 (remediated) ........................ OK
[ WARN ] inquiry status ........................... ACTIVE / FOLLOW-UP
[  ON  ] working console available at ./console/

A Multi-Axis Anomaly Survey of the Jupiter Trojan Population

An exploratory seven-dimension screen of 1,848 Jupiter Trojans using thermal, orbital, and photometric catalogue measurements. Five objects meet the raw 3+ dimension threshold, three meet the quality-filtered threshold, and none meet it when variability is excluded. The results identify follow-up questions; they do not establish an unexplained physical source.

Premise and method

Trojan populations offer a setting for comparing small-body properties. The screen combines several measurements to rank objects for review. These measurements can share data, fitted parameters, and systematic errors; the seven dimensions are not established as statistically independent.

albedo (pV) · beaming parameter (η) · diameter/H consistency · orbit quality · eccentricity · inclination · photometric variability

The reported pipeline uses medians and median absolute deviations to score 1,848 objects with matched thermal and catalogue data. Composite rankings combine per-dimension scores and threshold counts. The three variants use all dimensions, apply photometric quality cuts, or exclude variability.

An earlier catalogue–thermal join allowed missing identifiers to match and affected entries including 588 Achilles. The revised run corrects that join. Fixing a processing error is necessary, but does not independently validate the remaining rankings.

Sol Jupiter L₄ L₅ FIG. I  ·  THE TROJAN GEOMETRY
FIG.01 Schematic Sun–Jupiter L₄/L₅ geometry. The dots illustrate Trojan swarms; they are not measured object positions.

Reported outlier counts

All dimensions: 5 objects pass on 3+ dimensions.
Photometric quality cuts: 3 objects.
Variability excluded: 0 objects.

Every 3+ dimension classification depends on including photometric scatter. This sensitivity makes background confusion and photometric quality central to interpretation. It does not by itself establish that the scatter is physical, or that every flagged object is a processing artifact.

269620 (2010 UJ58) — follow-up target

The report lists η = 0.628 versus a sample median of 0.88 (robust z = −2.2), and eccentricity 0.158 at the 96th sample percentile. These are screening statistics, not probabilities of an unusual origin. Interpretation of a fitted thermal parameter depends on model assumptions and measurement uncertainty.

Only three valid W2 epochs survive the quality cuts. Under conservative scoring the object retains two outlier dimensions, beaming and eccentricity, rather than three. Its photometric variability remains inadequately established.

30806 (1989 UP5) — contamination check pending

This object entered the list after the join correction, with a reported quality-filtered scatter z-score of 9.03. Gaia/2MASS contamination checks remain pending. A large score before those checks is a reason to inspect the measurements, not a confirmed physical anomaly.

Archival checks and limits

The report attempted checks of 24 surveys for 269620 and retained fourteen survey-date checks, with no coincident detections. Two VLASS epochs returned measurements consistent with noise (SNR approximately 0.0 and +0.3), with a reported 5σ limit of approximately 660 μJy/beam at 2–4 GHz.

These results apply to the checked coverage, epochs, matching criteria, and sensitivity. They do not exhaust the archives or exclude all contaminating sources. A lack of counterparts is not evidence for an exotic source.

The working console

The interactive console summarizes scores for selected objects, the three scoring variants, and archival checks. Its orbital view is schematic. The downloadable PDF preserves the earlier report; the qualifications here apply to its stronger language.

▶ NEXT TEST // WHAT WOULD DISCRIMINATE

Complete contamination checks for 30806 and obtain better photometry for 269620. If reliable spectra are feasible, they could test conventional composition models; unusual spectral features alone would not establish technology. Contamination or an adequate natural model should downgrade a candidate, while repeatable residuals in independent measurements would justify further study.