Searching for Planetary Transits in Galactic Open Clusters: EXPLORE/OC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Open clusters potentially provide an ideal environment for the search for transiting extrasolar planets since they feature a relatively large number of stars of the same known age and metallicity at the same distance. With this motivation, over a dozen open clusters are now being monitored by four different groups. We review the motivations and challenges for open cluster transit surveys for short-period giant planets. Our photometric monitoring survey (EXPLORE/OC) of Galactic southern open clusters was designed with the goals of maximizing the chance of finding and characterizing planets, and of providing for a statistically valuable astrophysical result in the case of no detections. We use the EXPLORE/OC data from two open clusters NGC 2660 and NGC 6208 to illustrate some of the largely unrecognized issues facing open cluster surveys including severe contamination by Galactic field stars ($>$ 80%) and relatively low number of cluster members for which high precision photometry can be obtained. We discuss how a careful selection of open cluster targets under a wide range of criteria such as cluster richness, observability, distance, and age can meet the challenges, maximizing chances to detect planet transits. In addition, we present the EXPLORE/OC observing strategy to optimize planet detection which includes high-cadence observing and continuously observing individual clusters rather than alternating between targets.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".