A New Global Database of Lunar Impact Craters >1–2 km: 1. Crater Locations and Sizes, Comparisons With Published Databases, and Global Analysis
Abstract
This paper presents a new, global database of lunar impact craters, estimated to be a complete census of all craters with diameters larger than 1–2 km. The database contains over 2 million craters, making it larger in number than any previously published lunar effort by more than a factor of 10. Of those craters, 1.3 million have diameters ≥1 km, approximately 83,000 are ≥5 km, and 6,972 craters are ≥20 km. How the database was constructed along with the reliability of features is described in detail. Comparisons are made with past published databases, demonstrating good agreement for crater size and location. An ellipticity analysis is conducted, illustrating there is no dominant direction for elliptical crater orientation based on location, diameter range, or ellipticity amount, consistent with randomness for craters ≥10 km. A spatial density analysis is described, comparing the spatial density of small versus large craters, and numerous observations about the nonuniformity of the size distributions of craters across the Moon are made. The spatial density is also used in a discussion about kilometer‐scale secondary impact craters and clearly shows that they dominate the crater population in some areas of the lunar surface. This paper presents just a tiny sample of the scientific investigations that could be done with this new crater database.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Cites
Global Distribution of Large Lunar Craters: Implications for Resurfacing and Impactor Populations
Head, J. W., Fassett, C. I., Kadish, S. J., Smith, D. E., Zuber, M. T., Neumann, G. A., & Mazarico, E. (2010) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1195050 · Cited by 302 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Optical navigation for Lunar landing based on Convolutional Neural Network crater detector
Silvestrini, S., Piccinin, M., Zanotti, G., Brandonisio, A., Bloise, I., Feruglio, L., Lunghi, P., Lavagna, M., & Varile, M. (2022) · Aerospace Science and Technology · doi:10.1016/j.ast.2022.107503 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
- Authors
- Robbins, S. J.
- Affiliations
- Southwest Research Institute (US)
- Corresponding author
- Robbins, Stuart J.
- ORCID
- Robbins, Stuart J.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2019-04
- Volume
- 124
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 871-892
- ISSN
- 2169-9097 (ISSN-L)
- 2169-9100
- OpenAlex
- W2903185461
- Cited by
- 251
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 35 · 2025: 59 · 2024: 53 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 5
- FWCI
- 5.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Geophysical Research Planets (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Maryland Space Grant Consortium
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NNX15AH97G, NNH13ZDA006C)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Planetary Science and Exploration
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astro and Planetary Science
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › History and Developments in Astronomy
- Keywords
- lunar craters, lunar surface, crater size-frequency distribution, secondary impact craters, lunar geology
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review