10 YEARS OF VISUAL AND CCD PHOTOMETRY OF ASTEROIDS FOR THE MAP
					SUMMARY
	INTRODUCTION
	HISTORY OF THE MAP
	RESULTS OF THE MAP ON OCTOBER 30,2006
	ANALYSES OF THE MAP RESULTS
	THE TOOLS OF THE MAP
	METHODS AND DEVELOPMENT
		VISUAL METHOD
		USE OF THE CCD MEASURES UP TO 2005
		DEVELOPMENTS FOR THE INCREASE OF ACCURATE CCD MEASURES
	CONCLUSIONS
INTRODUCTION
Since 1801, more than 362500 asteroids have been discovered and 145705 of them are numbered at mid-
December 2006
The observed magnitudes of the minor planets are useful for :
				the computation of the absolute magnitudes
				the constitution of the ephemerides
				the estimation of  the rough diameters of the asteroids
Evolution of the magnitude types for the asteroids and their absolute magnitudes
Up to 1985, the absolute magnitude B(1,0) was based on the photographic B band of the UBV system
The photographic plates were at that time the tool of the observatories
The magnitudes B(1,0) used then were issued from published lists officialized in 1978
After 1985, there was a change of band for the absolute magnitude renamed H and passing to the V band
The standard conversion from the B magnitude to V had been made by H = B(1,0) -1,0 mag
Actual Formula for the computation of the V magnitudes of the ephemerides :
Based on the absolute magnitude of an asteroid located at 1 astronomical unit to the Sun and Earth
Formula adoptes by the IAU commission 20 in November 1985 :
	magnitude = H + 5 * log(r*delta) - 2,5 * log [ (1-G)*phi1 + G*phi2 ]
	with
	phi1 = exp[ -3,33*(tan (bêta/2) )0,63]
	phi2 = exp[ -1,87*(tan (bêta/2) )1,22]
H is the averaged absolute magnitude in the V band, with the solar phase angle = 0°
G is the slope parameter ( standardized to 0,15 if the G parameter is unknown )
r and Delta respectively are the heliocentric and geocentric distances
Phi 1 and Phi 2 are two phase functions
beta is the angle phase
NB : The formula predicts the observed opposition surge and the non-linear drop off in brightness at large phase
angles and is valid from 0 <= beta <= 120 degrees
Various remarks :
The H magnitudes of the numbered asteroids have been used for the first time in the "Ephemerides
of Minor Planets" of 1988
Some modifications of these H magnitudes have been made mostly in 1992 and other revisions for the
last time in 1998
The asteroids with problems of magnitude are numerous : about 1 on 10 observed objects
	(estimation based on the total of MAP or pre-MAP objects with regard to the 4500 different objects seen by Harvey)
Various differences of absolute magnitude have been reported by the visual observers before 1996.
The most part of the high discrepancies seen before 1998 have been taken in account by the MPC :
	TABLE OF OBJECTS WITH A HIGH DISCREPANCY OF ABSOLUTE MAGNITUDE - 1980 TO 1996
NAME AND NUMBER			DIFF.		NAME	MAG.	MAG.	MAG.	MAG.
ASTEROID			MAG.	DATES	OBSER-	B(1,0)	H	H	H	REMARKS
			SEEN		VER	EMP87	88-91	92-97	1998 to
( F= fainter or B= brighter than predicted in the annual EMP )									2006
316 Goberta			1,2 +B	88/11/11	Pilcher	11,5	11,5	9,8	9,8	Correction on EMP92
473 Nolli			1,0 +F	88/02/10	Harvey	-	10,0	12,3	12,3	Correction on EMP92
1206 Numerowia			1,6 +F	89/10/22	Harvey	12,4	9,5	11,2	11,8	Correction on EMP92
1212 Francette			2,0 +F	80/02/12	Pilcher	8,0	9,4	9,5	9,54	Correction on EMP87
			0,8 +F	83/08/09	Fabre
			2,2 +F	85/10/10	Harvey
1293 Sonja			1,8 +F	92/11/08	Harvey	15,4	14,0	12,0	12,0	Error on EMP92
		1,3-1,6 +F		96/08/09	Faure
1656 Suomi			1,0 +F	87/11/21	Harvey	15,4	13,1	12,4	12,4	Error on EMP87-92
			1,1 +F	96/02/24	Faure
1663 Van Den Bos			1,5 +B	90/11/12	Harvey	14,9	13,7	12,2	12,2	Correction on EMP92
1890 Konoshenkova			1,0 +F	95/12/21	Harvey	12,6	11,2	10,8	10,8	Error on EMP92 ?
2143 Jimarnold			2,5 +F	97/08/31	Faure	15,3	14,1	11,2	14,3	Correction on EMP98
2183 Neufang			1,0 +F	90/06/20	Harvey	12,6	11,4	11,5	11,5
2491 Tvashtri			1,5 +F	87/01/03	Harvey	14,6	13,7	13,7	13,68
2791 Paradise			1,3 +F	88/01/24	Harvey	13,0	11,5	12,2	11,5
3578 Carestia			1,8 +F	91/10/04	Faure	-	10,5	8,1	11,6	Error on EMP 89/92
			1,9 +F	91/10/13	Harvey
			3,0 +F	96/07/22	Garrett					Correction on EMP98
			3,1 +F	96/09/04	Garrett
3873 Roddy			1,4 +F	92/12/03	Harvey	-	13,1	11,8	12,0	Error on EMP92
		1,3-1,6 +F		96/06/11	Faure
4116 Elachi			1,2 +F	94/03/16	Harvey	-	13,3	13,0	13,2
4729 1980 RO2			1,3 +B	90/10/17	Harvey	-	-	13,1	13,0
4744 1988 RF5			1,2 +F	91/01/26	Harvey	-	11,6	10,9	11,1	Error on EMP92 ?
5641 Mc Cleese			1,7 +F	95/03/25	Harvey	-	-	12,7	12,7
5905 Johnson		1,1-1,4 +F		95/08/02	Harvey	-	-	13,0	13,2
Causes of the high discrepancies of H magnitude
Eventual errors of the photographic magnitude measures which served as basis for the calculation of
the absolute magnitudes B(1,0) modified after in H magnitudes
New inaccuracies relating to the standard conversion from B(1,0) to H by H = B(1.0) + 1.0 mag, for
some of the first thousand of numbered asteroids
The H Magnitudes of the new numbered minor planets often computed from magnitudes of different
color bands, and/or sometimes with a small number of photometric measures, the actual main goal of
the MPC being to do accurate orbital elements for the legions of new discovered asteroïds
HISTORY OF THE MAP
Late in the year 1996, creation of the "Magnitude Alert Project" ( MAP ) by Lawrence GARRETT from the
ALPO Minor Planet Section ( Association of Lunar and Planetory Observers ) to do messages of alerts on the
asteroids suspected to have a real magnitude different from the predicted magnitudes of the ephemerides.
He was helped by Dr. Richard Binzel in getting the start of the Magnitude Program
As I also had the same wish for the asteroids with magnitude discrepancies, I joined immediately the MAP.
Soon, we completed the MAP by a program of follow-up of the MAP objects, for the estimation of their true H
magnitude.
As a member of AUDE ( Association des Utilisateurs de Détecteurs Electroniques, managed by Dr François COLAS
as the Chairperson ), I proposed to do measures for the MAP to the other AUDE members
This Observation project then is run by the Minor planet Section ( Prof. Frederick PILCHER as the coordinator
and Lawrence GARRETT as the acting assistant coordinator ) and by the French AUDE association.
The goals of the MAP are then to find the asteroids with errors of H magnitude equal to 0,3 magnitude and
more, and to follow the MAP objects on many oppositions for a better estimation of the true H magnitude
For this goal, we must obtain many measures in V or similar to V and made on several oppositions,
by several observers, to permit STATISTICALLY the elimination of the sources of errors (variability,
personal deviation and various causes of random errors ).
For that, some measures made during a night on one or some MAP objects always are useful.
It's an easy task, feasible on a part of night…or between two other types of observations.
THE ACTUAL NICHE OF THE MAP ( AMONG THE AMATEURS )
ASTEROIDS < 6 UA			OCCULTATIONS			LIGHTCURVES				MAP
DIAM. >  75 KM			Known accurate orbit
			Sure occult. Sites
			sûre H mag to 0.1 mag							=> out of MAP goals
Diameter			very accurate							no
0.01 mag H accuracy			with help lightcurve			Adjustment on				no
albedo			with help lightcurve			the V band to do….				no
taxonomical type			with help lightcurve							no
period of rotation				no			yes		sometimes possible
Light variability				no			yes			seen if high
visible shapes of object				yes			yes			no
DIAM. <  75 KM			Orbit less accurate
			Narrow width of occ.line
0.1 mag H accuracy				not easy		difficult adjustment on V band				possible
estimation of diameter				not easy		( faint stars + filters )				possible
period of rotation				no			yes		sometimes possible
Light variability				no			yes			seen if high
visible shapes of object				not easy			fairly good			no
		OBLIGATION TO OBSERVE AGAIN THE OBJECT AT SEVERAL OPPOSITIONS
From 1997 to 2002, the observers of 2 associations formed the hard core of the MAP observers :
	The visual observers of the ALPO Minor Planet Section
	The AUDE  observers using CCD cameras
All the 6 most active visual observers are members of the virtual club named "Millenium Club", which contains,
with Paul COMBA and Tom LASKOWSKY, the eight observers who observed visually MORE THAN 1000
DIFFERENT ASTEROIDS ... and even several thousands as Roger HARVEY, unmatched world record
holder with more than 4400 minor planets !
The CCD observers, mainly AUDE members, discovered since 1996 many asteroids , supernovae and
made numerous lightcurves which permitted the discovery of several binary asteroids, but also many
variable stars in the images of the followed asteroids ( group "CDR-CDL" managed by Raoul BEHREND )
Some other active CCD observers, notably Americans ( Brian WARNER from the CALL,... ) or Italians ( Sergio
FOGLIA et al ) also made measures for the MAP, directly or indirectly during their lightcurve work.
Since 2003, the activity mainly continued visually
	The difficulties to obtain accurate CCD magnitudes by the amateurs were the causes of the retirement by
	a majority of the CCD observers
	Reorientation from a part of the CCD observers toward the asteroid lightcurves, more easy feasible and
	more desired by the professional astronomers.
		TABLE OF THE MORE ACTIVE MAP OBSERVERS
		In blue, the visual observers			In gold, the CCD observers ( measures often linked to lightcurves )
OBSERVER  NAME					TOTAL OF MEASURES			visual	CCD	CCD	CCD
					( on December 31,2006 )			estimations	Tycho	USNO	GSC
Gérard FAURE					France	715		667	44	4
René ROY					France	474				402	72
Andrew SALTHOUSE					USA	295		295
Roger HARVEY					USA	293		293
Jean-Marie LLAPASSET					France	200				132	68
Pierre ANTONINI					France	174				92	82
Bernard CHRISTOPHE					France	138				138
Lawrence GARRETT					USA	122		122
Claude BOIVIN					Canada	110				78	32
Stefano SPOSETTI					Swiss	102			26	60	42
Robin CHASSAGNE					France	91				39	52
Stephane MORATA/Didier MORATA					France	68				43	25
Raoul BEHREND ( +6 MOWLAVI + REVAZ)					Swiss	64			54	10
Frederick PILCHER					USA	62		62
Bruno  CHARDONNENS					Swiss	43				43
Olivier THIZY					France	42				1	41
Serafino Zani Observatory					Italy	41				41
(FOGLIA,CREMASHINI, MARINELLO, PIZETTI)
Emmanuel BROCHARD					France	34			17	17
Raymond PONCY					France	33			18		15
Fernand VAN DEN ABBEEL					Belgium	29			14	15
Dennis CHESNEY					USA	27				27
Ben HUDGENS					USA	26		26
Philippe MARTINOLE					France	24				24
Jean-Gabriel BOSCH					Swiss	23				23
	CHARACTERISTICS OF THE VISUAL OBSERVERS OF THE MAP, ON DECEMBER 31,2006
		(by chronological order of entrance in the Millenium Club)
visual		Visual	Actual		Obser-	Local	Total	Total		Honoured
Observers		activity	teles-	Country	vation	limit	obser-	different		by the
		since	cope		site	mag.	vations	asteroids		asteroid
		......
PILCHER		1968	35 cm	USA	Illinois	14,9	> 4500	1816		(1990) Pilcher
HARVEY		1974	73 cm	USA	North	16	> 9500	4493		(4278) Harvey
					Carolina
FAURE		1975	20 cm	France	Isere	16,5	~ 4600	1974		(8297) Gerardfaure
SALTHOUSE		1965	44 cm	USA	New	14,5	18600	1728	not yet
					Jersey
HUDGENS		1972	40 cm	USA	Texas	15,5	> 4500	1980	not yet
GARRETT		1974	32 cm	USA	Vermont	15,9	> 2500	1223	not yet
			THE SIX MORE ACTIVE VISUAL OBSERVERS IN THE MAP
Frederick PILCHER				Roger HARVEY				Gérard FAURE
Andrew SALTHOUSE				Ben HUDGENS				Lawrence GARRETT
		THE ASTRONOMICAL EQUIPMENTS USED BY THE VISUAL OBSERVERS
		C 14  PILCHER
Type of Celestron 14 used by Frederick PILCHER						Dome and 29 inch Telescope from Roger HARVEY
Celestron 8 and movable panels used by Gerard FAURE						Andrew SALTHOUSE and his 17 inch telescope
Ben HUDGENS and one of his telescopes ( Meade 16 )						Lawrence GARRETT near his 13 inch telescope
The five American observers use big telescopes but are hindered by the light pollution of the nearest cities.
Contrary to all expectations, the small telescope of 20 cm, used under a pure mountain sky, has
one of the highest limit magnitudes.
The theoritical limit of magnitude for a telescope is soon exceeded, when the observer can see through an
eyepiece, under a pure and quiet sky, at more than 20° over the horizon and by high magnification.
RESULTS OF THE MAP ON OCTOBER 30,2006
MAP asteroid by group :
Near Earth Asteroids						42
Mars-crossers						27
Hungarias						8
Cisjovian Belt						332
Jupiter-trojans and jupiter-crossers						7
asteroids in the MAP Database on October 27,2006						416
Distribution of the MAP objects by thousand of numbered asteroids
Groups of numbers			Total
1 to 999			43
1000 to 1999			91	included 3 Mars-crossers
2000 to 2999			38
3000 to 3999			20	included 1 NEA and 3 Mars-crossers
4000 to 4999			37	included 1 NEA and 3 Mars-crossers
5000 to 5999			43	included 2 NEAs and 5 Mars-crossers
6000 to 6999			40	included 3 NEAs and 3 Mars-crossers
7000 to 7999			23	included 1 NEA and 2 Mars-crossers
8000 to 8999			4	included 1 NEA
9000 to 9999			6	included 1 NEA
10000 to 19999			28	included 3 NEAs
20000 to 29999			7	included 3 NEAs and 1 Mars-crossers
30000 to 39999			4	included 2 NEAs
40000 to 49999			5	included 3 Mars-crossers
50000 to 135000			7	included 4 NEAs and 3 Mars-crossers
Unnumbered			20	included 20 NEAs
			416
The "bright" objects of the seven first thousands are more accessible by the amateur observers of the MAP
Beyond the N°10000, NEA and Mars-crossers often are the objects which are possibily visible by the amateurs
Distribution of the MAP Asteroids by official H magnitudes :
absolute		Total		NEA	Mars-	Hungaria		Cisjovian		Jupiter-
Magnitude					crosser			belt		trojans
mag H = 8		9						5		4
mag H = 9		15						14		1
mag H = 10		53						52		1
mag H = 11		111			1		1	109
mag H = 12		113			12		3	98
mag H = 13		64		1	7		4	51		1
mag H = 14		11		2	6			3
mag H = 15		6		5	1
mag H = 16		9		9
mag H = 17		5		5
mag H = 18		8		8
mag H = 19		3		3
mag H = 20		7		7
mag H = 21		2		2
		416		42	27		8	332		7
% on Total				10%	6%		2%	80%		2%
The size of the smallest object of each group decreases with the increasing distance to the Earth
Averaged difference of absolute H magnitude in the MAP, by tenth of magnitude :
Averaged.Diff.		B/x,x	F/x,x	Total	%	cumul %		Legend
V band		Objects	Objects	Objects				B/x,x = x,x mag brighter than predicted
								F/x,x = x,x mag fainter than predicted
0	mag	5	5	10	2,43%	2,43%		Total = Total objects by averaged diff.
0,1	mag	15	15	30	7,28%	9,71%		% =   % of the total of MAP objects
0,2	mag	23	25	48	11,65%	21,36%
0,3	mag	17	46	63	15,29%	36,65%
0,4	mag	14	41	55	13,35%	50,00%
0,5	mag	7	62	69	16,75%	66,75%
0,6	mag	4	36	40	9,71%	76,46%
0,7	mag	1	33	34	8,25%	84,71%
0,8	mag	3	17	20	4,85%	89,56%
0,9	mag	4	15	19	4,61%	94,17%
1,0	mag		4	4	0,97%	95,15%
1,1	mag		4	4	0,97%	96,12%
1,2	mag		3	3	0,73%	96,84%
1,3	mag		4	4	0,97%	97,82%
1,4	mag		3	3	0,73%	98,54%
1,5	mag		1	1	0,24%	98,79%
1,6	mag		4	4	0,97%	99,76%
1,7	mag				0,00%	99,76%
1,8	mag				0,00%	99,76%
1,9	mag				0,00%	99,76%
2	mag				0,00%	99,76%
2,6	mag		1	1	0,24%	100%
		93	319	412
Undefined				4
		Grand Total		416
A majority of MAP objects are fainter than predicted.
The discrepancy of light is below 0.5 magnitude for 50% of the MAP objects.
Nevertheless, 5% of the MAP objects have a discrepancy of H magnitude H superior or equal to 1.0
magnitude and more  !
Actual state of the MAP objects :
Objects put in the MAP because observed with at least 0,3 mag of difference between predicted and
observed magnitudes
Total of oppositions followed for the MAP objects :
	29	MAP objects seen at 3 oppositions and more
	74	MAP objects seen at 2 oppositions
	313	MAP objects seen at 1 opposition
On October 17,2006, are noted as without possible H magnitude discrepancy in the MAP :
	53	objects with difference < half-variability, following the accumulation of measures
	6	unnumbered NEA, for which the MPC rectified its H mag to a value similar to the MAP H mag
	13	objects for which the successive measures brought back the difference < 0,2 or even 0,1 mag
	72	MAP objects, then 17,3% of the total
Like this, this is the indirect proof of the efficiency of the statistical processing of the measures.
	( minoration of the impact of the natural variability of the asteroids and of the errors of measures )
	344	other MAP asteroids need more measures !
		The most urgent goals are the objects with a high discrepancy of magnitude and those
		observed at less than 3 oppositions
The 29 MAP objects observed at least during 3 oppositions :
			Oppositions	Mea-	Obser-	H MPC	# MAP	H MAP
				sures	vers
(921) Jovita			6	30	5	10,6	-0,9	9,7
(1444) Pannonia			5	457	8	9,1	2,6	11,7
(9117) Aude			5	36	9	12,4	0,7	13,1
(3904) Honda			4	42	8	11,3	0,7	12,0
(4483) Petofi (Hungaria)			4	19	6	11,9	1,1	13,0
(1166) Sakuntala			4	18	4	8,8	1,1	9,9
(881) Athene			4	12	3	10,3	1,3	11,6
(1353) Maartje			4	12	2	10,4	-0,4	10,0	new measures to do
(927) Ratisbona			3	194	8	9,54	-0,1	9,4	out of MAP; diff.H very small
(1384) Kniertje			3	121	6	9,7	1,7	11,4
(2829) Bobhope			3	75	2	10,3	-0,3	10,0	out of MAP; diff.H < half-variab.
(552) Sigelinde			3	39	11	9,4	0,2	9,6	out of MAP; diff.H < half-variab.
(775) Lumiere			3	33	2	10,4	-0,2	10,2	out of MAP; diff.H < half-variab.
(5641) Mc Cleese (Mars-cr)			3	15	5	12,7	1,4	14,1
(612) Veronika			3	15	3	11,2	-0,4	10,8
(1178) Irmela			3	14	5	11,81	-0,1	11,7	out of MAP; diff.H < half-variab.
(1388) Aphrodite			3	12	4	8,9	1,6	10,5
(6354) Vangelis			3	12	3	11,8	0,5	12,3
(4628) Laplace			3	10	4	11,0	0,3	11,3
(1239) Queteleta			3	10	4	12,5	-0,6	11,9
(453) Tea			3	10	2	10,6	-0,3	10,3	out of MAP; diff.H < half-variab.
(1296) Andree			3	9	3	10,9	0,4	11,3	all measures of the same value
(1656) Suomi (Mars-cr)			3	9	3	12,4	0,5	12,9
(5518) Mariobotta			3	9	4	12,8	0,3	13,1	new measures to do
(4378) Voigt			3	9	3	11,7	0,1	11,8	out of MAP; diff.H very small
(3401) Vanphilos (Mars-cr)			3	9	3	12,6	-0,3	12,3	new measures to do
(3455) Kristensen			3	5	4	12,7	0,8	13,5
(1909) Alekhin			3	5	2	12,3	0,6	12,9	new measures to do
(3873) Roddy (Mars-cr)			3	3	3	12,0	1,1	13,1	new measures to do
The objects marked in orange are those for which the discrepancy decreades under 0.3 mag or about equal to the half-variability
	A visual evidence of the reality of high discrepancies of magnitude : (921) Jovita !!
		( 0,06 mag of highest half-amplitude for the known lightcurve )
The 20 MAP Objects with the highest discrepancy of magnitude ( difference > 1,0 magnitude ) :
Number, name and group			Diff.H mag		half-	Oppo-	mea-	Obser-	History of Magnitude H
					variability	sitions	sures	vers	88-91	92-97	98 and +
					(maximum)
(1444) Pannonia			2,6	F	0.29	5	457	8	11.7	11.2	9.7
(1388) Aphrodite			1,6	F	0.25	3	12	4	12.23	11.7	11.7
(6823) 1988 ED1			1,6	F?	?	2	5	3	-	10.7	10.7
(44227) 1998 QP14			1,6	F?	?	1	10	1	-	-	17.3
(6911) Nancygreen (Hungaria)			1,6	F	0.26	2	4	3	-	-	13.0
(1384) Kniertje			1,5	F	0.26	3	121	6	11.29	11.25	11.25
(5641) Mc Cleese (Mars-cr)			1,4	F	0.06	3	15	5	-	12.0	12.6
(4440) Tchantches (Hungaria)			1,4	F	0.16	2	141	5	13.20	12.8	12.9
(5749) 1991 FV			1,4	F	?	2	4	3	-	12.5	12.1
(881) Athene			1,3	F	0.27	4	12	3	10.27	10.29	10.29
(5738) Billpickering (Mars-cr)			1,3	F?	0.23	1	7	4	-	11.1	11.3
(5785) Fulton			1,3	F?	?	1	9	4	-	12.8	12.7
(8021) Walter			1,3	F?	0.04	1	36	3	-	-	12.5
(4860) Gubbio			1,2	F?	0.43	1	4	2	-	12.0	12.0
(10772) 1990 YM			1,2	F?	0.65	1	4	1	-	-	11.4
(1166) Sakuntala			1,2	F	0.20	4	18	4	14.2	13.0	13.0
(3873) Roddy (Mars-cr.)			1,1	F	0.05	3	3	3	11.8	11.7	11.8
(5026) Martes			1,1	F?	?	1?	3	2	-	11.6	11.6
(4483) Petofi (Hungaria)			1,1	F	0.49	4	19	6	-	10.8	11.7
(7663) 1994 RX1			1,1	F?	0.20	1	91	3	-	-	12.7
In the table, one can see that the known half-variabilities are nearly all small with regard to the highest
differences of H magnitudes. These discrepancies of magnitude certainly are mainly due to wrong H magnitudes.
The asteroids only observed at one opposition may be would be have a modification of their discrepancy of H
magnitude.
THE BEST RESULTS OF THE MAP
									estimated DIAMETER
			Oppositions	Mea-	Obser-	H MPC	# MAP	H MAP	MPC	MAP
				sures	vers				in Km	in Km
(921) Jovita			6	30	5	10,6	-0,9	9,7	33,4	50
(1444) Pannonia			5	457	8	9,1	2,6	11,7	65	19,9
(9117) Aude			5	36	9	12,4	0,7	13,1	14,3	10,4
(3904) Honda			4	42	8	11,3	0,7	12,0	23,7	17,5
(4483) Petofi (Hungaria)			4	19	6	11,9	1,1	13,0	18,3	11
(1166) Sakuntala			4	18	4	8,8	1,1	9,9	74,5	45
(881) Athene			4	12	3	10,3	1,3	11,6	38	20,7
(1384) Kniertje			3	121	6	9,7	1,7	11,4	50	22,6
(5641) Mc Cleese (Mars-cr.)			3	15	5	12,7	1,4	14,1	12,5	6,2
(612) Veronika			3	15	3	11,2	-0,4	10,8	24,8	30,2
(1388) Aphrodite			3	12	4	8,9	1,6	10,5	71	35
(6354) Vangelis			3	12	3	11,8	0,5	12,3	19,1	15,1
(4628) Laplace			3	10	4	11,0	0,3	11,3	27	23,7
(1239) Queteleta			3	10	4	12,5	-0,6	11,9	13,5	18,3
(1296) Andree			3	9	3	10,9	0,4	11,3	28,6	23,7
(1656) Suomi (Mars-cros.)			3	9	3	12,4	0,5	12,9	14,3	11,5
(3455) Kristensen			3	5	4	12,7	0,8	13,5	12,5	8,5
In this list, 4 objects with an estimated size divided by 2 and 1 object increasing its size by 50 % !!
A good result acquired by some amateurs !!
All these asteroids were been observed at 3 oppositions and more and all have a half-variability smaller than
the H discrepancy.
ANALYSES OF THE MAP RESULTS
analysis N°1 : Comparative analysis between the most used observational means from 1997 to 2006
Types of measures
AMv		Visual observations with comparative measures of asteroids
TMx		CCD Observations made with photometric stars of Loneos, Tycho, Hipparcos
UMx		CCD Observations made with USNO stars
GMx		CCD Observations made with stars GSC
	NB:	Some visual measures made with the USNO or the GSC catalogs are not taken in account
Analysis
1) Computation of the averaged difference on H magnitude for each type of measures and each asteroid
2) Difference by asteroid between the averaged differences of CCD types of measures and the visual ones
taken as basis.
3) Global averaged difference of the 3 types of CCD observations with regard to the visual one
4) Computation of the global averaged absolute value of each type ( no sign + or - ) with regard to the visual
type.
The results of the phases 3 and 4 are summarized in the table below :
MAP Objects taken in account :
The 179 objects ( 2158 measures ) observed at once visually and by one of the CDD types
Results								AMv	TMx	UMx	GMx
Global averaged difference of H mag for the 179 asteroids								0,32	0,27	0,43	0,51
Global averaged difference with regard to AMv ( phase 3 )									0,01	0,14	0,17
Global averaged difference (absolute value) with regard to AMv ( ph.4 )									0,30	0,27	0,34
Highest individual difference found with regard to AMv								mag	0,82	1,95	1,53
Conclusions
The small difference between the visual observations and those TMx show the acceptable quality of the
visual measures
The increasing global difference of the AMv and TMx measures toward the UMx and the GMx measures
show the increasing inaccuracy of the used stellar catalogs.
The individual analysis of the averaged differences of the TMx show that the errors of magnitude may be
sometimes high (errors on CCD processing), up to 0,8 magnitude…
With the experience, yet now, the visual observation is the quickest mean and the less hazardous to
estimate a magnitude in the V band, for an amateur.
Visually, an inacurracy of +/-0,2 mag implicate 5 tenths of magnitude, fan already rather large for a
trained eye
A result at +/- 0,3 mag is rare for an experienced visual observer
Analysis N°2 : Some comparative results betwen the MAP, the Minor Planet Center and Astdys
The website "Asteroids - Dynamic Site (AstTDys)" is specialized in the in the development of proper orbital
of minor planets ( except orbits too chaotic )
The revised H magnitudes of the numbered asteroids of the file "allnum_pro,htm" from Astdys are updated
quarterly, thank's to the new astrometrical measures published by the MPC
Only Astdys and the MAP have lists of revised H magnitudes; It's not the case for the MPC
The 3 entities use the statistical effect to appreciate the averaged H magnitude and to reduce the
inaccuracies ( measures and variability ).
The H magnitudes from the MPC and Astdys are issued from approximate measures joined to the
astrometric data from astrometrists. The measures without indication of color band are assimilated to V
measures. As numerous measures come from R band, some of them are brighter than predicted if they
are assimilated to V
In the MAP, we try to take in account only the "sure" measures or eventually corrected by a standard
deviation ( V-R = + 0.4 by example )
A) Comparisons MPC - MAP :
The corrections of H magnitudes on the NEA by the MPC on the unnumbered asteroids converged on
the same results than the MAP for 8 cases :
		H MPC / observations		H MAP		H MPC after adjustment			number	Group
1999 RH27		16,5		16,9		16,9			16064	Amor 3
1998 FX2		18,0		18,3		18,2			20255	Amor 3
1998 PG		17,0		17,4		17,3			31345	Amor 2
1998 WS		12,1		12,5		12,5			47035	Mars-crosser
1998 SS49		16,5		15,8		15,8			85713	Apollo 2
1998 QR15		18,5		18,1		18,1			-	Amor 3
2000 DO1		20,3		20,4		20,4			-	Apollo 1
2001 SG276		17,4		17,8		17,7			-	Amor 1
NB: on 28 other objects for which have been used MPC magnitudes for unnumbered objects during the MAP observations :
	13 obtained modifications of their MPC H magnitude going towards the MAP H magnitude
	15 had no modification of their MPC H or moving away from the H MAP
	( NB : For the majority of them briefly bright, the MAP obtained only few measures )
Then there are 21 NEA which constitute 58,3% of the total of 41 MAP objects and for which the MPC
magnitudes joined or approached the H magnitudes from the MAP
B) Comparisons of the MAP with the MPC and Astdys :
Global average of the differences between the H magnitudes
	MAP-Astdys		378 asteroids		F/0,20
	MAP-MPC		416 asteroids		F/0,34	higher, because no update by the MPC
Probable reason of the faintness of the MAP magnitudes :
Lack of color bande type for many R measures joined to the astrometric measures received by the MPC, which after didn't revise
the H magnitudes of the objects numbered since 1998 !
The difference with Astdys is fainter, because Astdys periodically rectify the H magnitudes of the MPC
analysis N°3 : Some comparative results between the MAP and the professional or efficient observers
During the last 10 years, few H magnitudes of MAP objects processed independently by the specialists in
photometry.
Some results have been published in 2006, thank's to works on lightcurves :
			Oppos.	Measur.	# MAP	H MPC	H MAP	revis.H	Observatory
(4440) Tchantches (Hungaria)			2	141	1,4/F	12,3	13,7	14,0	Simeis	MPB 2006-2
(4860) Gubbio			1	3	1,2/F	11,8	13,3	13,3	Warner	MAP Message 30/10
(5641) Mc Cleese (Mars-crosser)			3	15	1,4/F	12,7	14,1	14,4	Ondrejov	MPB 2006-1
Due to the lack of accurate V-R indexes for these asteroids, the V-R indexes have been estimated to  0.4
magnitude by the concerned observatories
The real V-R index may differ for the majority of the cisjovian belt members of +/- 0,2 mag
The discrepancy of Gubbio seen at v mag 16.0-16.1 was visually detected in October 2006 with a T20cm,
then confirmed with a CCD camera by Brian Warner (CALL) !
analysis N°4 : Impact of the natural variability of the minor planets :
Distribution of 2658 maximum amplitudes of lightcurves on October 15,2006
		(photometric database G.FAURE of  October 15,2006)
highest		total of		% on	cumul.	cumulative %		highest half-amplitude
Amplitude		asteroids		total	Total
Less than 0.1 mag		202		8%	202	8%		less than 0.05 mag
0.1x mag		609		23%	811	31%		about 0.05 mag
0.2x mag		571		21%	1382	52%		about 0.1 mag
0.3x mag		423		16%	1805	68%		about 0.15 mag
0.4x mag		286		11%	2091	79%		about 0.2 mag
0.5x mag		177		7%	2268	85%		about 0.25 mag
0.6x mag		118		4%	2386	90%		about 0.3 mag
0.7x mag		62		2%	2448	92%		about 0.35 mag
0.8x mag		61		2%	2509	94%		about 0.4 mag