MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2988060618 · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab6f6d

OGLE-2015-BLG-1771Lb: A Microlens Planet Orbiting an Ultracool Dwarf?

2020· article· en· W2988060618 on OpenAlexaff
Xiangyu Zhang, Weicheng Zang, A. Udalski, Andrew Gould, Yoon-Hyun Ryu, Tianshu Wang, Hongjing Yang, Shude Mao, P. Mróz, J. Skowron, M. K. Szymański, I. Soszyński, P. Pietrukowicz, S. Kozłowski, K. Ulaczyk, Michael D. Albrow, Sun‐Ju Chung, Cheongho Han, Kyu‐Ha Hwang, Youn Kil Jung, In-Gu Shin, Yossi Shvartzvald, Jennifer C. Yee, Wei Zhu, Sang-Mok Cha, Dong-Jin Kim, Hyoun-Woo Kim, Seung‐Lee Kim, Chung‐Uk Lee, Dong-Joo Lee, Yongseok Lee, Byeong-Gon Park, Richard W. Pogge

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Research Foundation of Korea
KeywordsGravitational microlensingPhysicsBrown dwarfPlanetAstronomyAstrophysicsGravitational lensJovianExoplanetPlanetary systemLight curveMicrolensProper motionPlanetary massSaturnLens (geology)StarsGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We report the discovery and the analysis of the short ( days) planetary microlensing event, OGLE-2015-BLG-1771. The event was discovered by the Optical Gravitational Lensing Experiment, and the planetary anomaly (at I ∼ 19) was captured by The Korea Microlensing Telescope Network. The event has three surviving planetary models that explain the observed light curves, with planet-host mass ratio q ∼ 5.4 × 10−3, 4.5 × 10−3 and 4.5 × 10−2, respectively. The first model is the best-fit model, while the second model is disfavored by Δχ 2 ∼ 3. The last model is strongly disfavored by Δχ 2 ∼ 15 but not ruled out. A Bayesian analysis using a Galactic model indicates that the first two models are probably composed of a Saturn-mass planet orbiting a late M dwarf, while the third one could consist of a super-Jovian planet and a mid-mass brown dwarf. The source-lens relative proper motion is μ rel ∼ 9 mas yr−1, so the source and lens could be resolved by current adaptive-optics instruments in 2020 if the lens is luminous.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 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

Citations23
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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