THERMAL PHASE VARIATIONS OF WASP-12b: DEFYING PREDICTIONS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report Warm Spitzer full-orbit phase observations of WASP-12b at 3.6 and 4.5 μm. This extremely inflated hot Jupiter is thought to be overflowing its Roche lobe, undergoing mass loss and accretion onto its host star, and has been claimed to have a C/O ratio in excess of unity. We are able to measure the transit depths, eclipse depths, thermal and ellipsoidal phase variations at both wavelengths. The large-amplitude phase variations, combined with the planet's previously measured dayside spectral energy distribution, are indicative of non-zero Bond albedo and very poor day–night heat redistribution. The transit depths in the mid-infrared—( R p / R * ) 2 = 0.0123(3) and 0.0111(3) at 3.6 and 4.5 μm, respectively—indicate that the atmospheric opacity is greater at 3.6 than at 4.5 μm, in disagreement with model predictions, irrespective of C/O ratio. The secondary eclipse depths are consistent with previous studies: F day / F * = 0.0038(4) and 0.0039(3) at 3.6 and 4.5 μm, respectively. We do not detect ellipsoidal variations at 3.6 μm, but our parameter uncertainties—estimated via prayer-bead Monte Carlo—keep this non-detection consistent with model predictions. At 4.5 μm, on the other hand, we detect ellipsoidal variations that are much stronger than predicted. If interpreted as a geometric effect due to the planet's elongated shape, these variations imply a 3:2 ratio for the planet's longest:shortest axes and a relatively bright day–night terminator. If we instead presume that the 4.5 μm ellipsoidal variations are due to uncorrected systematic noise and we fix the amplitude of the variations to zero, the best-fit 4.5 μm transit depth becomes commensurate with the 3.6 μm depth, within the uncertainties. The relative transit depths are then consistent with a solar composition and short scale height at the terminator. Assuming zero ellipsoidal variations also yields a much deeper 4.5 μm eclipse depth, consistent with a solar composition and modest temperature inversion. We suggest future observations that could distinguish between these two scenarios.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".