MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903874709 · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aaf79c

Bright Opportunities for Atmospheric Characterization of Small Planets: Masses and Radii of K2-3 b, c, and d and GJ3470 b from Radial Velocity Measurements and Spitzer Transits

2019· article· en· W2903874709 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEphemerisPlanetRadial velocityPhotometry (optics)StarsTransit (satellite)ObservatoryStellar rotation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We report improved masses, radii, and densities for four planets in two bright M-dwarf systems, K2-3 and GJ3470, derived from a combination of new radial velocity and transit observations. Supplementing K 2 photometry with follow-up Spitzer transit observations refined the transit ephemerides of K2-3 b, c, and d by over a factor of 10. We analyze ground-based photometry from the Evryscope and Fairborn Observatory to determine the characteristic stellar activity timescales for our Gaussian Process fit, including the stellar rotation period and activity region decay timescale. The stellar rotation signals for both stars are evident in the radial velocity data and is included in our fit using a Gaussian process trained on the photometry. We find the masses of K2-3 b, K2-3 c, and GJ3470 b to be 6.48 , 2.14 , and 12.58 M ⊕, respectively. K2-3 d was not significantly detected and has a 3 σ upper limit of 2.80 M ⊕ . These two systems are training cases for future TESS systems; due to the low planet densities ( ρ < 3.7 g cm −3 ) and bright host stars ( K < 9 mag), they are among the best candidates for transmission spectroscopy in order to characterize the atmospheric compositions of small planets.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations62
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207