MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083045048 · doi:10.1088/2041-8205/774/2/l18

LIMITS ON QUAOAR'S ATMOSPHERE

2013· article· en· W2083045048 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSublimation (psychology)OccultationPhotometry (optics)Atmosphere (unit)Isothermal processRelative humidity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Here we present high cadence photometry taken by the Acquisition Camera on Gemini South, of a close passage by the ~540 km radius Kuiper belt object, (50000) Quaoar, of a r' = 20.2 background star. Observations before and after the event show that the apparent impact parameter of the event was 0."019 ± 0."004, corresponding to a close approach of 580 ± 120 km to the center of Quaoar. No signatures of occultation by either Quaoar's limb or its potential atmosphere are detectable in the relative photometry of Quaoar and the target star, which were unresolved during closest approach. From this photometry we are able to put constraints on any potential atmosphere Quaoar might have. Using a Markov chain Monte Carlo and likelihood approach, we place pressure upper limits on sublimation supported, isothermal atmospheres of pure N_2, CO, and CH_4. For N_2 and CO, the upper limit surface pressures are 1 and 0.7 μbar, respectively. The surface temperature required for such low sublimation pressures is ~33 K, much lower than Quaoar's mean temperature of ~44 K measured by others. We conclude that Quaoar cannot have an isothermal N_2 or CO atmosphere. We cannot eliminate the possibility of a CH_4 atmosphere, but place upper surface pressure and mean temperature limits of ~138 nbar and ~44 K, respectively.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.005

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations10
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal LettersSame topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207