Eigenspectra: a framework for identifying spectra from 3D eclipse mapping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Planetary atmospheres are inherently 3D objects that can have strong gradients in latitude, longitude, and altitude. Secondary eclipse mapping is a powerful way to map the 3D distribution of the atmosphere, but the data can have large correlations and errors in the presence of photon and instrument noise. We develop a technique to mitigate the large uncertainties of eclipse maps by identifying a small number of dominant spectra to make them more tractable for individual analysis via atmospheric retrieval. We use the eigencurves method to infer a multiwavelength map of a planet from spectroscopic secondary eclipse light curves. We then apply a clustering algorithm to the planet map to identify several regions with similar emergent spectra. We combine the similar spectra together to construct an ‘eigenspectrum’ for each distinct region on the planetary map. We demonstrate how this approach could be used to isolate hot from cold regions and/or regions with different chemical compositions in observations of hot Jupiters with the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST). We find that our method struggles to identify sharp edges in maps with sudden discontinuities, but generally can be used as a first step before a more physically motivated modelling approach to determine the primary features observed on the planet.
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 | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
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".