Testing Velocity Kinks as a Planet Detection Method: Do Velocity Kinks in Surface Gas Emission Trace Planetary Spiral Wakes in the Midplane Continuum?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Spiral density waves generated by an embedded planet are understood to cause “kinks” in observed velocity channel maps of CO surface emission by perturbing the gas motion within the spiral arms. If velocity kinks are a reliable probe of embedded planets, we should expect to see the planet-driven spiral arms in other observational tracers. We test this prediction by searching the dust continuum for the midplane counterparts of the spirals responsible for all of the velocity kink planet candidates reported to date whose orbits lie inside the dust continuum disk. We find no clear detection of any spiral structure in current continuum observations for six of the 10 velocity kink planet candidates in our sample (DoAr 25, GW Lup, Sz 129, HD 163296 #2, P94, and HD 143006), despite the high planet masses inferred from the kink amplitude. The remaining four cases include three clear detections of two-armed dust spirals (Elias 27, IM Lup, and WaOph 6) wherein neither spiral arm aligns with a wake originating from a reported planet location, suggesting that under the planetary-origin hypothesis, an accurate method for inferring the location of the planet in the midplane may need to encompass vertical effects. The 10th case, HD 97048, is inconclusive with current knowledge of the disk geometry.
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 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".