exocartographer: A Bayesian Framework for Mapping Exoplanets in Reflected Light
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Future space telescopes will directly image extrasolar planets at visible wavelengths. Time-resolved reflected light from an exoplanet encodes information about atmospheric and surface inhomogeneities. Previous research has shown that the light curve of an exoplanet can be inverted to obtain a low-resolution map of the planet, as well as constraints on its spin orientation. Estimating the uncertainty on 2D albedo maps has so far remained elusive. Here, we present exocartographer, a flexible open-source Bayesian framework for solving the exocartography inverse problem. The map is parameterized with equal-area Hierarchical, Equal Area, and isoLatitude Pixelation (HEALPix) pixels. For a fiducial map resolution of 192 pixels, a four-parameter Gaussian process describing the spatial scale of albedo variations, and two unknown planetary spin parameters, exocartographer explores a 198-dimensional parameter space. To test the code, we produce a light curve for a cloudless Earth in a face-on orbit with a 90° obliquity. We produce synthetic white-light observations of the planet: five epochs of observations throughout the planet’s orbit, each consisting of 24 hourly observations with a photometric uncertainty of 1% (120 data points). We retrieve an albedo map and—for the first time—its uncertainties, along with spin constraints. The albedo map is recognizably of Earth, with a typical 90% uncertainty of 0.14. The retrieved characteristic length scale is ∼9800 km. The obliquity is recovered to be >87.°9 at the 90% credible level. Despite the uncertainty in the retrieved albedo map, we robustly identify a high-albedo region (the Sahara desert) and a large low-albedo region (the Pacific Ocean).
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".