Peculiar architectures for the WASP-53 and WASP-81 planet-hosting systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report the detection of two new systems containing transiting planets. Both were identified by WASP as worthy transiting planet candidates. Radial velocity observations quickly verified that the photometric signals were indeed produced by two transiting hot Jupiters. Our observations also show the presence of additional Doppler signals. In addition to short-period hot Jupiters, we find that the WASP-53 and WASP-81 systems also host brown dwarfs, on fairly eccentric orbits with semimajor axes of a few astronomical units. WASP-53c is over 16 MJupsin ic and WASP-81c is 57 MJupsin ic. The presence of these tight, massive companions restricts theories of how the inner planets were assembled. We propose two alternative interpretations: the formation of the hot Jupiters within the snow line or the late dynamical arrival of the brown dwarfs after disc dispersal. We also attempted to measure the Rossiter–McLaughlin effect for both hot Jupiters. In the case of WASP-81b, we fail to detect a signal. For WASP-53b, we find that the planet is aligned with respect to the stellar spin axis. In addition we explore the prospect of transit-timing variations, and of using Gaia's astrometry to measure the true masses of both brown dwarfs and also their relative inclination with respect to the inner transiting hot Jupiters.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".