MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765190358 · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aaa458

Phase Curves of WASP-33b and HD 149026b and a New Correlation between Phase Curve Offset and Irradiation Temperature

2018· article· en· W2765190358 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlanetHot JupiterPhase (matter)Context (archaeology)ThermalEclipseOffset (computer science)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present new 3.6 and 4.5 μ m Spitzer phase curves for the highly irradiated hot Jupiter WASP-33b and the unusually dense Saturn-mass planet HD 149026b. As part of this analysis, we develop a new variant of pixel-level decorrelation that is effective at removing intrapixel sensitivity variations for long observations (>10 hr) where the position of the star can vary by a significant fraction of a pixel. Using this algorithm, we measure eclipse depths, phase amplitudes, and phase offsets for both planets at 3.6 and 4.5 μ m. We use a simple toy model to show that WASP-33b’s phase offset, albedo, and heat recirculation efficiency are largely similar to those of other hot Jupiters despite its very high irradiation. On the other hand, our fits for HD 149026b prefer a very high albedo. We also compare our results to predictions from general circulation models, and we find that while neither planet matches the models well, the discrepancies for HD 149026b are especially large. We speculate that this may be related to its high bulk metallicity, which could lead to enhanced atmospheric opacities and the formation of reflective cloud layers in localized regions of the atmosphere. We then place these two planets in a broader context by exploring relationships between the temperatures, albedos, heat transport efficiencies, and phase offsets of all planets with published thermal phase curves. We find a striking relationship between phase offset and irradiation temperature: the former drops with increasing temperature until around 3400 K and rises thereafter. Although some aspects of this trend are mirrored in the circulation models, there are notable differences that provide important clues for future modeling efforts.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations108
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207