Debris Disk Results from the Gemini Planet Imager Exoplanet Survey's Polarimetric Imaging Campaign
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We report the results of a ∼4 yr direct imaging survey of 104 stars to resolve and characterize circumstellar debris disks in scattered light as part of the Gemini Planet Imager (GPI) Exoplanet Survey. We targeted nearby (≲150 pc), young (≲500 Myr) stars with high infrared (IR) excesses ( L IR / L ⋆ > 10 −5 ), including 38 with previously resolved disks. Observations were made using the GPI high-contrast integral field spectrograph in H -band (1.6 μ m) coronagraphic polarimetry mode to measure both polarized and total intensities. We resolved 26 debris disks and 3 protoplanetary/transitional disks. Seven debris disks were resolved in scattered light for the first time, including newly presented HD 117214 and HD 156623, and we quantified basic morphologies of five of them using radiative transfer models. All of our detected debris disks except HD 156623 have dust-poor inner holes, and their scattered-light radii are generally larger than corresponding radii measured from resolved thermal emission and those inferred from spectral energy distributions. To assess sensitivity, we report contrasts and consider causes of nondetections. Detections were strongly correlated with high IR excess and high inclination, although polarimetry outperformed total intensity angular differential imaging for detecting low-inclination disks (≲70°). Based on postsurvey statistics, we improved upon our presurvey target prioritization metric predicting polarimetric disk detectability. We also examined scattered-light disks in the contexts of gas, far-IR, and millimeter detections. Comparing H -band and ALMA fluxes for two disks revealed tentative evidence for differing grain properties. Finally, we found no preference for debris disks to be detected in scattered light if wide-separation substellar companions were present.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".