MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3018604819 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab8d25

WISEA J083011.95+283716.0: A Missing Link Planetary-mass Object

2020· article· en· W3018604819 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParallaxBrown dwarfPlanetObject (grammar)PopulationFlux (metallurgy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present the discovery of WISEA J083011.95+283716.0, the first Y-dwarf candidate identified through the “Backyard Worlds: Planet 9” citizen science project. We identified this object as a red, fast-moving source with a faint W 2 detection in multiepoch AllWISE and unWISE images. We have characterized this object with Spitzer and Hubble Space Telescope’s (HST) follow-up imaging. With mid-infrared detections in Spitzer's ch1 and ch2 bands and flux upper limits in HST F 105 W and F 125 W filters, we find that this object is both very faint and has extremely red colors ( ch 1 − ch 2 = 3.25 ± 0.23 mag, F 125 W − ch 2 ≥ 9.36 mag), consistent with a T eff ∼ 300 K source, as estimated from the known Y-dwarf population. A preliminary parallax provides a distance of pc, leading to a slightly warmer temperature of ∼350 K. The extreme faintness and red HST and Spitzer colors of this object suggest that it may be a link between the broader Y-dwarf population and the coldest known brown dwarf WISE J0855−0714, and may highlight our limited knowledge of the true spread of Y-dwarf colors. We also present four additional “Backyard Worlds: Planet 9” late-T brown dwarf discoveries within 30 pc.

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 score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.222
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations34
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→