MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1482073007 · doi:10.1088/0004-6256/149/6/202

THE 5:1 NEPTUNE RESONANCE AS PROBED BY CFEPS: DYNAMICS AND POPULATION

2015· article· en· W1482073007 on OpenAlexaff
Rosemary E. Pike, J. J. Kavelaars, J. M. Petit, Brett Gladman, Mike Alexandersen, Kathryn Volk, Cory Shankman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsNeptuneResonance (particle physics)Libration (molecule)PopulationEccentricity (behavior)Celestial mechanicsAstronomyAstrophysicsScatteringNice modelStarsPlanetary systemPoint (geometry)PlanetParticle physicsOpticsGeometryPlanetary migration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canada–France Ecliptic Plane Survey discovered four trans-Neptunian objects with semimajor axes near the 5:1 resonance, revealing a large and previously undetected intrinsic population. Three of these objects are currently resonant with Neptune, and the fourth is consistent with being an object that escaped the resonance at some point in the past. The non-resonant object may be representative of a detached population that is stable at slightly lower semimajor axes than the 5:1 resonance. We generated clones of these objects by resampling the astrometric uncertainty and examined their behavior over a 4.5 Gyr numerical simulation. The majority of the clones of the three resonant objects ( ) spend a total of 10 7 years in resonance during their 4.5 Gyr integrations; most clones experience multiple periods of resonance capture. Our dynamical integrations reveal an exchange between the 5:1 resonance, the scattering objects, and other large semimajor axis resonances, especially the 4:1, 6:1, and 7:1 resonances. The multiple capture events and relatively short resonance lifetimes after capture suggest that these objects are captured scattering objects that stick in the 5:1 resonance. These 5:1 resonators may be representative of a temporary population, requiring regular contributions from a source population. We examined the dynamical characteristics (inclination, eccentricity, resonant island, libration amplitude) of the detected objects and their clones in order to provide an empirical model of the orbit structure of the 5:1 resonance. This resonance is dynamically hot and includes primarily symmetric librators. Given our orbit model, the intrinsic population necessary for the detection of these three objects in the 5:1 resonance is (95% confidence) objects with 8 and .

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207