Deep Orbital Search for Additional Planets in the HR 8799 System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The HR 8799 system hosts four massive planets orbiting 15 and 80 au. Studies of the system's orbital stability and its outer debris disk open the possibility of additional planets, both interior to and exterior to the known system. Reaching a sufficient sensitivity to search for interior planets is very challenging due to the combination of bright quasi-static speckle noise close to the stellar diffraction core and relatively fast orbital motion. In this work, we present a deep L-band imaging campaign using NIRC2 at Keck comprising 14 observing sequences. We further re-reduce archival data for a total of 16.75 hr, one of the largest uniform data sets of a single direct imaging target. Using a Bayesian modeling technique for detecting planets in images while compensating for plausible orbital motion, we then present deep limits on the existence of additional planets in the HR 8799 system. The final combination shows a tentative candidate, consistent with 4–7 M jup at 4–5 au, detected with an equivalent false-alarm probability better than 3σ. This analysis technique is widely applicable to archival data and to new observations from upcoming missions that revisit targets at multiple epochs.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".