Evidence of Long-term Period Variations in the Exoplanet Transit Database (ETD)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We analyze a large number of citizen science data and identify eight hot Jupiter systems that show evidence for deviations from a constant orbital period: HAT-P-19 b, HAT-P-32 b, TrES-1 b, TrES-2 b, TrES-5 b, WASP-4 b, WASP-10 b, and WASP-12 b. The latter system is already well known to exhibit strong evidence for tidal orbital decay and serves as an important control for this study. Several other systems we identify have disputed period drifts in the literature, allowing the results here to serve as an independent analysis. The citizen science data are from the Exoplanet Transit Database (ETD), which is a global project established in 2008 by the Variable Star and Exoplanet Section of the Czech Astronomical Society. With over 400 planets and 12,000 contributed observations spanning 15 yr, the ETD is brimming with potential for studying the long-term orbital evolution of close-in hot Jupiters. We use our results to discuss prioritization of targets for follow-up investigations, which will be necessary to confirm the period drifts and their causes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".