MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2545556451 · doi:10.1017/s1743921316002817

Bayesian Planet Searches for the 10 cm/s Radial Velocity Era

2015· article· en· W2545556451 on OpenAlexaff
P. C. Gregory

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Astronomical Union · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApodizationExoplanetPhysicsGaussianRadial velocityStandard deviationTerm (time)AstrophysicsBayesian probabilityPlanetAlgorithmComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceAstronomyOpticsStatisticsMathematicsStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A new apodized Keplerian model is proposed for the analysis of precision radial velocity (RV) data to model both planetary and stellar activity (SA) induced RV signals. A symmetrical Gaussian apodization function with unknown width and center can distinguish planetary signals from SA signals on the basis of the width of the apodization function. The general model for m apodized Keplerian signals also includes a linear regression term between RV and the stellar activity diagnostic In (R'hk), as well as an extra Gaussian noise term with unknown standard deviation. The model parameters are explored using a Bayesian fusion MCMC code. A differential version of the Generalized Lomb-Scargle periodogram provides an additional way of distinguishing SA signals and helps guide the choice of new periods. Sample results are reported for a recent international RV blind challenge which included multiple state of the art simulated data sets supported by a variety of stellar activity diagnostics.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International Astronomical UnionSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207