Discovery of TOI-1260d and the characterization of the multiplanet system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We report the discovery of a third planet transiting the star TOI-1260, previously known to host two transiting sub-Neptune planets with orbital periods of 3.127 and 7.493 d, respectively. The nature of the third transiting planet with a 16.6-d orbit is supported by ground-based follow-up observations, including time-series photometry, high-angular resolution images, spectroscopy, and archival imagery. Precise photometric monitoring with CHEOPS allows to improve the constraints on the parameters of the system, improving our knowledge on their composition. The improved radii of TOI-1260b and TOI-1260c are $2.36 \pm 0.06 \rm R_{\oplus }$, $2.82 \pm 0.08 \rm R_{\oplus }$, respectively while the newly discovered third planet has a radius of $3.09 \pm 0.09 \rm R_{\oplus }$. The radius uncertainties are in the range of 3 per cent, allowing a precise interpretation of the interior structure of the three planets. Our planet interior composition model suggests that all three planets in the TOI-1260 system contains some fraction of gas. The innermost planet TOI-1260b has most likely lost all of its primordial hydrogen-dominated envelope. Planets c and d were also likely to have experienced significant loss of atmospheric through escape, but to a lesser extent compared to planet b.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".