MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087697535 · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abba30

Dynamical Mass Estimates of the β Pictoris Planetary System through Gaussian Process Stellar Activity Modeling

2020· article· en· W3087697535 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de MontréalCentre for Research in Astrophysics of Québec
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsPlanetary systemEccentricity (behavior)Orbit (dynamics)PlanetOrbital elementsOrbital eccentricityOrbital periodRadial velocityAstrometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Nearly 15 yr of radial velocity (RV) monitoring and direct imaging enabled the detection of two giant planets orbiting the young, nearby star β Pictoris. The δ Scuti pulsations of the star, which overwhelm planetary signals, need to be carefully suppressed. In this work, we independently revisit the analysis of the RV data following a different approach than available in the literature to model the activity of the star. We show that a Gaussian process (GP) with a stochastically driven damped harmonic oscillator kernel can model the δ Scuti pulsations. It provides similar results to parametric models but with a simpler framework, using only three hyperparameters. It also enables us to model poorly sampled RV data that were excluded from previous analyses, hence extending the RV baseline by nearly five years. Altogether, the orbit and mass of both planets can be constrained from RV only, which was not possible with the parametric modeling. To characterize the system more accurately, we also perform a joint fit of all available relative astrometry and RV data. Our orbital solutions for b favor a low eccentricity of and a relatively short period of yr. The orbit of c is eccentric with with a period of 3.36 ± 0.03 yr. We find model-independent masses of 11.7 ± 1.4 and 8.5 ± 0.5 for b and c, respectively, assuming coplanarity. The mass of b is consistent with the hottest start evolutionary models, at an age of 25 ± 3 Myr. A direct detection of c would provide a second calibration measurement in a coeval system.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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