Inferring planetary obliquity using rotational and orbital photometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The obliquity of a terrestrial planet is an important clue about its formation and critical to its climate. Previous studies using simulated photometry of Earth show that continuous observations over most of a planet's orbit can be inverted to infer obliquity. However, few studies of more general planets with arbitrary albedo markings have been made and, in particular, a simple theoretical understanding of why it is possible to extract obliquity from light curves is missing. Reflected light seen by a distant observer is the product of a planet's albedo map, its host star's illumination, and the visibility of different regions. It is useful to treat the product of illumination and visibility as the kernel of a convolution. Time-resolved photometry constrains both the albedo map and the kernel, the latter of which sweeps over the planet due to rotational and orbital motion. The kernel's movement distinguishes prograde from retrograde rotation for planets with non-zero obliquity on inclined orbits. We demonstrate that the kernel's longitudinal width and mean latitude are distinct functions of obliquity and axial orientation. Notably, we find that a planet's spin axis affects the kernel – and hence time-resolved photometry – even if this planet is east–west uniform or spinning rapidly, or if it is north–south uniform. We find that perfect knowledge of the kernel at 2–4 orbital phases is usually sufficient to uniquely determine a planet's spin axis. Surprisingly, we predict that east–west albedo contrast is more useful for constraining obliquity than north–south contrast.
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 | 0.000 | 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".