The California-Kepler Survey. VI. Kepler Multis and Singles Have Similar Planet and Stellar Properties Indicating a Common Origin<sup>∗</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The California-Kepler Survey (CKS) catalog contains precise stellar and planetary properties for the Kepler planet candidates, including systems with multiple detected transiting planets (“multis”) and systems with just one detected transiting planet (“singles”, although additional planets could exist). We compared the stellar and planetary properties of the multis and singles in a homogeneous subset of the full CKS-Gaia catalog. We found that sub-Neptune-sized singles and multis do not differ in their stellar properties or planet radii. In particular: (1.) The distributions of stellar properties , [Fe/H], and for the Kepler sub-Neptune-sized singles and multis are statistically indistinguishable. (2.) The radius distributions of the sub-Neptune-sized singles and multis with P > 3 days are indistinguishable, and both have a valley at ∼1.8 . However, there are significantly more detected short-period (P < 3 days), sub-Neptune-sized singles than multis. The similarity of the host-star properties, planet radii, and radius valley for singles and multis suggests a common origin. The similar radius valley, which is likely sculpted by photo-evaporation from the host star within the first 100 Myr, suggests that planets in both singles and multis spend much of the first 100 Myr near their present, close-in locations. One explanation that is consistent with the similar fundamental properties of singles and multis is that many of the singles are members of multi-planet systems that underwent planet–planet scattering.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.012 |
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".