MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Bayesian periodogram finds evidence for three planets in 47 Ursae Majoris

2010· article· en· W2168832382 on OpenAlexaff
P. C. Gregory, Debra A. Fischer

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPlanetAstrophysicsRadial velocityMarkov chain Monte CarloPeriodogramPhotometry (optics)StarsEccentricity (behavior)Monte Carlo methodAstronomyAlgorithmStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Bayesian analysis of 47 Ursae Majoris radial velocity data confirms and refines the properties of two previously reported planets with periods of 1079 and 2325 d. The analysis also provides orbital constraints on an additional long-period planet with a period of ∼10 000 d. The three-planet model is found to be 105 times more probable than the next most probable model which is a two-planet model. The non-linear model fitting is accomplished with a new hybrid Markov chain Monte Carlo (HMCMC) algorithm which incorporates parallel tempering, simulated annealing and genetic crossover operations. Each of these features facilitate the detection of a global minimum in χ2. By combining all three, the HMCMC greatly increases the probability of realizing this goal. When applied to the Kepler problem, it acts as a powerful multiplanet Kepler periodogram. The measured periods are 1078 ± 2 d, 2391+100−87 d and 14002+4018−5095 d, and the corresponding eccentricities are 0.032 ± 0.014, 0.098+.047−.096 and 0.16+.09−.16. The results favour low-eccentricity orbits for all three. Assuming the three signals (each one consistent with a Keplerian orbit) are caused by planets, the corresponding limits on planetary mass (M sin i) and semimajor axis are (2.53+.07−.06MJ, 2.10 ± 0.02 au), (0.54 ± 0.07 MJ, 3.6 ± 0.1 au) and (1.6+0.3−0.5MJ, 11.6+2.1−2.9 au), respectively. Based on a three-planet model, the remaining unaccounted for noise (stellar jitter) is 5.7 m s−1. The velocities of model fit residuals were randomized in multiple trials and processed using a one-planet version of the HMCMC Kepler periodogram. In this situation, periodogram peaks are purely the result of the effective noise. The orbits corresponding to these noise-induced periodogram peaks exhibit a well-defined strong statistical bias towards high eccentricity. We have characterized this eccentricity bias and designed a correction filter that can be used as an alternate prior for eccentricity to enhance the detection of planetary orbits of low or moderate eccentricity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations79
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207