DEEP THERMAL INFRARED IMAGING OF HR 8799 bcde: NEW ATMOSPHERIC CONSTRAINTS AND LIMITS ON A FIFTH PLANET
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present new L ' (3.8 μm) and Brα (4.05 μm) data and reprocessed archival L ' data for the young, planet-hosting star HR 8799 obtained with Keck/NIRC2, VLT/NaCo, and Subaru/IRCS. We detect all four HR 8799 planets in each data set at a moderate to high signal-to-noise ratio (S/N ≳ 6–15). We fail to identify a fifth planet, "HR 8799 f," at r < 15 AU at a 5σ confidence level: one suggestive, marginally significant residual at 0 2 is most likely a point-spread function artifact. Assuming companion ages of 30 Myr and the Baraffe planet cooling models, we rule out an HR 8799 f with a mass of 5 M J (7 M J ), 7 M J (10 M J ), or 12 M J (13 M J ) at r proj ∼ 12 AU, 9 AU, and 5 AU, respectively. All four HR 8799 planets have red early T dwarf-like L ' − [4.05] colors, suggesting that their spectral energy distributions peak in between the L ' and M ' broadband filters. We find no statistically significant difference in HR 8799 cde's color. Atmosphere models assuming thick, patchy clouds appear to better match HR 8799 bcde's photometry than models assuming a uniform cloud layer. While non-equilibrium carbon chemistry is required to explain HR 8799 b and c's photometry/spectra, evidence for it from HR 8799 d and e's photometry is weaker. Future, deep-IR spectroscopy/spectrophotometry with the Gemini Planet Imager, SCExAO/CHARIS, and other facilities may clarify whether the planets are chemically similar or heterogeneous.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".