CONSEQUENCES OF A DISTANT MASSIVE PLANET ON THE LARGE SEMIMAJOR AXIS TRANS-NEPTUNIAN OBJECTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We explore the distant giant planet hypothesis by integrating the large-semimajor-axis, large-pericenter trans-Neptunian objects (TNOs) in the presence of the giant planets and an external perturber whose orbit is consistent with the proposed distant, eccentric, and inclined giant planet, so-called planet 9. We find that TNOs with semimajor axes greater than 250 au experience some longitude of perihelion shepherding, but that a generic outcome of such evolutions is that the TNOs evolve to larger pericenter orbits and commonly get raised to retrograde inclinations. This pericenter and inclination evolution requires a massive disk of TNOs (tens of ) in order to explain the detection of the known sample today. Some of the highly inclined orbits produced by the examined perturbers will be inside of the orbital parameter space probed by prior surveys, implying a missing signature of the ninth-planet scenario. The distant giant planet scenarios explored in this work do not reproduce the observed signal of simultaneous clustering in argument of pericenter, longitude of the ascending node, and longitude of perihelion in the region of the known TNOs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".