MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136555805 · doi:10.1086/432594

A Bayesian Analysis of Extrasolar Planet Data for HD 73526

2005· article· en· W2136555805 on OpenAlexaff
P. C. Gregory

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsExoplanetOrbit (dynamics)Markov chain Monte CarloRadial velocityEccentricity (behavior)Bayesian probabilityPlanetAstrophysicsMonte Carlo methodOrbital periodStarsAstronomyAlgorithmStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new Bayesian tool for nonlinear model fitting has been developed, that employs a parallel tempering Markov Chain Monte Carlo algorithm with a novel statistical control system. The algorithm has been used to re-analyze precision radial velocity data for HD 73526. For a single planet model, three possible orbits were found with periods of 127.88 +0.37 −0.09, 190.4 +1.8 −2.1 and 376.2 +1.4 −4.3 days. The 128 day orbit, with an eccentricity of 0.56 ± 0.03, has a maximum value of prior × likelihood which is 16 times larger than for the next highest solution at 376 days. However, the 376 day orbit, with an eccentricity of 0.10 +0.05 −0.10, is formally more probable because for this sparse data set there is a much larger volume of parameter space with a significant probability density in the vicinity of the 376 day peak. The previously reported orbit (Tinney et al. 2003) of 190.5 ± 3.0 days corresponds to our least probable orbit. The analysis highlights the need for measurements around phase 0.5 for the 376 day period. Subject headings: Bayesian methods, time series analysis, extrasolar planets: individual ( HD 73526) 1.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.610
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.239 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations230
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207