Preliminary Analysis of Planetary Characteristics, Dynamics, and Climates from the Systems Alliance Planetary Survey Catalogue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Just a few decades after the discovery of the Charon Relay, and the ensuing First Contact War, relatively little is known about the population of planets linked by the Prothean mass relays. Understanding the nature of these systems and how they may differ from the broader population of planetary systems in our galaxy is key to both continued human habitation across the broader Galaxy, as well as to our understanding of the Prothean civilization. What factors motivated their choices of planetary systems? Characterizing these systems allows us to peer into Prothean society and culture, and make inferences about the preferences that drove their expansion throughout the Galaxy. In this study, we undertake a broad analysis of the systems recorded in the Systems Alliance Planetary Survey, examining their dynamical stability, orbital properties, and the climates of the inhabited worlds. We find that the Alliance data is inconsistent with both a modern understanding of planetary system dynamics, as well as with our understanding of Earth-like climate dynamics. We suggest this is due in part to security-related data obfuscation by the Alliance, and in part due to the real preferences of the Protheans.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.006 |
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".