MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896280131 · doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aae5c5

How to Characterize the Atmosphere of a Transiting Exoplanet

2018· article· en· W2896280131 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenuePublications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstronomy and Astrophysical Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExoplanetTransit (satellite)EclipseJames Webb Space TelescopeAtmosphere (unit)Measure (data warehouse)Cover (algebra)Atmospheric composition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This tutorial is an introduction to techniques used to characterize the atmospheres of transiting exoplanets. We intend it to be a useful guide for the undergraduate, graduate student, or postdoctoral scholar who wants to begin research in this field, but who has no prior experience with transiting exoplanets. We begin with a discussion of the properties of exoplanetary systems that allow us to measure exoplanetary spectra, and the principles that underlie transit techniques. Subsequently, we discuss the most favorable wavelengths for observing, and explain the specific techniques of secondary eclipses and eclipse mapping, phase curves, transit spectroscopy, and convolution with spectral templates. Our discussion includes factors that affect the data acquisition, and also a separate discussion of how the results are interpreted. Other important topics that we cover include statistical methods to characterize atmospheres such as stacking, and the effects of stellar activity. We conclude by projecting the future utility of large-aperture observatories such as the James Webb Space Telescope and the forthcoming generation of extremely large ground-based telescopes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.233
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations17
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublications of the Astronomical Society of the PacificSame topicAstronomy and Astrophysical ResearchFrench-language works237,207