MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973925805 · doi:10.1088/2041-8205/759/2/l41

NON-DETECTION OF PREVIOUSLY REPORTED TRANSITS OF HD 97658b WITH <i>MOST</i> PHOTOMETRY

2012· article· en· W1973925805 on OpenAlexaff
Diana Dragomir, J. M. Matthews, Andrew W. Howard, V. Antoci, Gregory W. Henry, John Asher Johnson, R. Kuschnig, Geoffrey W. Marcy, A. F. J. Moffat, Jason F. Rowe, S. M. Ruciński, Dimitar Sasselov, W. W. Weiß

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAstronomical Observations and Instrumentation
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité de MontréalSaint Mary's UniversityUniversity of TorontoSt. Mary's UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotometry (optics)PhysicsAstronomyAstrophysicsStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The radial velocity-discovered exoplanet HD 97658b was recently announced to transit, with a derived planetary radius of 2.93 ± 0.28 R ⊕ . As a transiting super-Earth orbiting a bright star, this planet would make an attractive candidate for additional observations, including studies of its atmospheric properties. We present and analyze follow-up photometric observations of the HD 97658 system acquired with the Microvariability and Oscillations of STars space telescope. Our results show no transit with the depth and ephemeris reported in the announcement paper. For the same ephemeris, we rule out transits for a planet with radius larger than 2.09 R ⊕ , corresponding to the reported 3σ lower limit. We also report new radial velocity measurements which continue to support the existence of an exoplanet with a period of 9.5 days, and obtain improved orbital parameters.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.191
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations30
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal LettersSame topicAstronomical Observations and InstrumentationFrench-language works237,207