"Richard D. Saam" writes:
No detailed finite element thermal RTG deceleration analysis was done in
http://arxiv.org/abs/1204.2507v1.
A prior RTG analysis in
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0104064 page 32-33
reads in part:
"So, even though a complete thermal/physical model of
the spacecraft might be able to ascertain if there are any
other unsuspected heat systematics, we conclude that
this particular 'RTG' mechanism does not provide enough power
to explain the Pioneer anomaly"

The "particular mechanism" of section VIII B is "anisotropic heat
reflection off of the back of the spacecraft high-gain antennae", a
mechanism that doesn't play any significant role in the 1204.2507
model--so that quote does not appear to be relevant.

1204.2507 accounts for the deceleration via approximately equal
contributions from differential emissivity of the RTGs and
non-isotropic radiative cooling from the electronics in the main body
of the spacecraft, which are covered in VIII C and VIII D
respectively. (I'll also note that, while the RTG portion of the
1204.2507 model isn't as detailed as it is for the main body of the
spacecraft, it is still considerably more developed than the arguments
in 0104064).

That leaves a constant deceleration residual with time
with no on board mechanistic origin.

It leaves a residual consistent with the mechanisms of 1204.2507 at
the one-sigma level. That doesn't exclude the possibility of an
unaccounted-for residual, but it also doesn't require one. To show
that something more is needed would require somehow reducing the
statistical and systematic uncertainties in 1204.2507.

-dan