A survey of eight hot Jupiters in secondary eclipse using WIRCam at CFHT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present near infrared high-precision photometry for eight transiting hot Jupiters observed during their predicted secondary eclipses. Our observations were carried out using the staring mode of the WIRCam instrument on the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope (CFHT). We present the observing strategies and data reduction methods which delivered time series photometry with statistical photometric precision as low as 0.11%. We performed a Bayesian analysis to model the eclipse parameters and systematics simultaneously. The measured planet-to-star flux ratios allowed us to constrain the thermal emission from the day side of these hot Jupiters, as we derived the planet brightness temperatures. Our results combined with previously observed eclipses reveal an excess in the brightness temperatures relative to the blackbody prediction for the equilibrium temperatures of the planets for a wide range of heat redistribution factors. We find a trend that this excess appears to be larger for planets with lower equilibrium temperatures. This may imply some additional sources of radiation, such as reflected light from the host star and/or thermal emission from residual internal heat from the formation of the planet.
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 | 0.000 | 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".