Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radial velocity surveys find Jupiter mass planets with semi-major axes a less than 0.1 AU around ~1% of solar-type stars; counting planets with $a$ as large as 5 AU, the fraction of stars having planets reaches ~ 10% {Marcy,Butler}. An examination of the distribution of semi-major axes shows that there is a clear excess of planets with orbital periods around 3 or 4 days, corresponding to a~0.03$ AU, with a sharp cutoff at shorter periods (see Figure 1). It is believed that Jupiter mass planets form at large distances from their parent stars; some fraction then migrate in to produce the short period objects. We argue that a significant fraction of the `hot Jupiters' (a<0.1 AU) may arise in binary star systems in which the orbit of the binary is highly inclined to the orbit of the planet. Mutual torques between the two orbits drive down the minimum separation or periapse r_p between the planet and its host star (the Kozai mechanism). This periapse collapse is halted when tidal friction on the planet circularizes the orbit faster than Kozai torque can excite it. The same friction then circularizes the planet orbit, producing hot Jupiters with the peak of the semimajor axis distribution lying around 3 days. For the observed distributions of binary separation, eccentricity and mass ratio, roughly 2.5% of planets with initial semimajor axis a_p ~ 5au will migrate to within 0.1au of their parent star. Kozai migration could account for 10% or more of the observed hot Jupiters.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".