ERRATUM: “THREE-DIMENSIONAL ATMOSPHERIC CIRCULATION MODELS OF HD 189733b AND HD 209458b WITH CONSISTENT MAGNETIC DRAG AND OHMIC DISSIPATION” (2013, ApJ, 764, 103)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We are correcting a mistake made in plotting Figure 10 of the published article.This is not in any way related to the code used to run the numerical simulations and does not affect any other plots in the paper.Here we present the corrected version of Figure 10.Please note that this also slightly changes a few instances in the text of the published article, and in particular Table 2, where ratios are quoted for the flux variation between the minimum and maximum emission or where the degree offset of the peak flux is quoted.The updated values for the models of HD 209458b (following the same order as in the published version of Table 2) are F min /F max = 13%, 8%, 9%, and 9%, and θ Fmax = 14 • , 0 • , 5 • , and 5 • .The updated values for the models of HD 189733b are F min /F max = 16%, 16%, 16%, 16%, and 15%, while the θ Fmax values remain unchanged.These changes do not significantly alter our main results and conclusions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.070 | 0.033 |
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".