OGLE-2018-BLG-0799Lb: a <i>q</i> ∼ 2.7 × 10−3 planet with <i>Spitzer</i> parallax
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We report the discovery and analysis of a planet in the microlensing event OGLE-2018-BLG-0799. The planetary signal was observed by several ground-based telescopes, and the planet-host mass ratio is q = (2.65 ± 0.16) × 10−3. The ground-based observations yield a constraint on the angular Einstein radius θE, and the microlensing parallax vector $\boldsymbol{{\pi} }_{\rm E}$, is strongly constrained by the Spitzer data. However, the 2019 Spitzer baseline data reveal systematics in the Spitzer photometry, so there is ambiguity in the magnitude of the parallax. In our preferred interpretation, a full Bayesian analysis using a Galactic model indicates that the planetary system is composed of an $M_{\rm planet} = 0.26_{-0.11}^{+0.22}M_{\rm J}$ planet orbiting an $M_{\rm host} = 0.093_{-0.038}^{+0.082}~\mathrm{M}_{\odot }$, at a distance of $D_{\rm L} = 3.71_{-1.70}^{+3.24}$ kpc. An alternate interpretation of the data shifts the localization of the minima along the arc-shaped microlens parallax constraints. This, in turn, yields a more massive host with median mass of $0.13 {\, \mathrm{M}_{\odot }}$ at a distance of 6.3 kpc. This analysis demonstrates the robustness of the osculating circles formalism, but shows that further investigation is needed to assess how systematics affect the specific localization of the microlens parallax vector and, consequently, the inferred physical parameters.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".