MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210440312 · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac4334

Validation of 13 Hot and Potentially Terrestrial TESS Planets

2022· article· en· W4210440312 on OpenAlexaff
Steven Giacalone, Courtney D. Dressing, Christina Hedges, Veselin B. Kostov, Karen A. Collins, Eric L. N. Jensen, Daniel A. Yahalomi, Allyson Bieryla, David R. Ciardi, Steve B. Howell, J. Lillo-Box, Khalid Barkaoui, Jennifer G. Winters, Elisabeth C. Matthews, John H. Livingston, Samuel N. Quinn, Boris S. Safonov, Charles Cadieux, Elise Furlan, Ian J. M. Crossfield, Avi M. Mandell, Emily A. Gilbert, Ethan Kruse, Elisa V. Quintana, G. Ricker, Sara Seager, Joshua N. Winn, Jon M. Jenkins, Britt Duffy Adkins, David Baker, Thomas Barclay, D. Barrado, Natalie M. Batalha, A. Belinski, Z. Benkhaldoun, Lars A. Buchhave, Luca Cacciapuoti, David Charbonneau, Ashley Chontos, Jessie L. Christiansen, Ryan Cloutier, Kevin I. Collins, Dennis M. Conti, Neil Cutting, Scott Dixon, René Doyon, Mohammed El Mufti, E. Esparza-Borges, Zahra Essack, Akihiko Fukui, Tianjun Gan, Mourad Ghachoui, M. Gillon, Éric Girardin, Ana Glidden, Erica J. Gonzales, P. Guerra, Elliott P. Horch, K. G. Hełminiak, Andrew W. Howard, Daniel Huber, Jonathan Irwin, Giovanni Isopi, Emmanuël Jehin, Taiki Kagetani, Stephen R. Kane, Kiyoe Kawauchi, John F. Kielkopf, Pablo Lewin, Lindy Luker, Michael B. Lund, F. Mallia, Shude Mao, Bob Massey, Rachel A. Matson, Ismael Mireles, M. Mori, F. Murgas, Norio Narita, Tanner O’Dwyer, Erik A. Petigura, Alex S. Polanski, F. J. Pozuelos, Ε. Πάλλη, H. Parviainen, Peter Plavchan, Howard M. Relles, Paul Robertson, Mark E. Rose, Pamela Rowden, Arpita Roy, Arjun B. Savel, Joshua E. Schlieder, C. Schnaible, Richard P. Schwarz, Ramatholo Sefako, A. Selezneva, Brett Skinner, Chris Stockdale, Ivan A. Strakhov, Thiam-Guan Tan, Guillermo Torres, R. Tronsgaard, Joseph D. Twicken, David Vermilion, I. A. Waite, Bradley Walter, Gavin Wang, Carl Ziegler, Yujie Zou

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsPhysicsPlanetExoplanetAstrophysicsStarsTerrestrial planetJames Webb Space TelescopeAstrobiologyGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The James Webb Space Telescope will be able to probe the atmospheres and surface properties of hot, terrestrial planets via emission spectroscopy. We identify 18 potentially terrestrial planet candidates detected by the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) that would make ideal targets for these observations. These planet candidates cover a broad range of planet radii (R p ∼ 0.6–2.0R ⊕) and orbit stars of various magnitudes (K s = 5.78–10.78, V = 8.4–15.69) and effective temperatures (T eff ∼ 3000–6000 K). We use ground-based observations collected through the TESS Follow-up Observing Program (TFOP) and two vetting tools—DAVE and TRICERATOPS—to assess the reliabilities of these candidates as planets. We validate 13 planets: TOI-206 b, TOI-500 b, TOI-544 b, TOI-833 b, TOI-1075 b, TOI-1411 b, TOI-1442 b, TOI-1693 b, TOI-1860 b, TOI-2260 b, TOI-2411 b, TOI-2427 b, and TOI-2445 b. Seven of these planets (TOI-206 b, TOI-500 b, TOI-1075 b, TOI-1442 b, TOI-2260 b, TOI-2411 b, and TOI-2445 b) are ultra-short-period planets. TOI-1860 is the youngest (133 ± 26 Myr) solar twin with a known planet to date. TOI-2260 is a young (321 ± 96 Myr) G dwarf that is among the most metal-rich ([Fe/H] = 0.22 ± 0.06 dex) stars to host an ultra-short-period planet. With an estimated equilibrium temperature of ∼2600 K, TOI-2260 b is also the fourth hottest known planet with R p < 2 R ⊕.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.218
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

Citations32
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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