Spin–Orbit Misalignment and Precession in the Kepler-13Ab Planetary System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Gravity darkening induced by rapid stellar rotation provides us with a unique opportunity to characterize the spin–orbit misalignment of a planetary system through analysis of its photometric transit. We use the gravity-darkened transit modeling code simuTrans to reproduce the transit light curve of Kepler-13Ab by separately analyzing phase-folded transits for 12 short-cadence Kepler quarters. We verify the temporal change in impact parameter indicative of spin–orbit precession identified by Szabó et al. and Masuda, reporting a rate of change day−1. We further investigate the effect of light dilution on the fitted impact parameter and find that less than 1% of additional light is sufficient to explain the seasonal variation seen in the Kepler quarter data. We then extend our precession analysis to the phase curve data from which we report a rate of change day−1. This value is consistent with that of the transit data at a lower significance and provides the first evidence of spin–orbit precession based solely on the temporal variation of the secondary eclipse.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".