MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4315479811 · doi:10.3847/2515-5172/acb149

False Alarms Revealed in a Planet Search of TESS Light Curves

2023· article· en· W4315479811 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Notes of the AAS · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsBishop's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVettingLight curvePlanetExoplanetTransit (satellite)Computer scienceKeplerStarsAstronomyAlgorithmPhysicsEngineeringComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper, we investigate the impact of false alarms on planet searches of TESS data by performing a search of a large number of stars. We examine the period distribution of transit-like signatures uncovered in a Box-Least Squares transit search of TESS light curves, and show significant pileups at periods related to instrumental and astrophysical noise sources. Signatures uncovered in a search of inverted light curves feature similar structures in the period distribution. Automated vetting methods will need to remove these excess detections, and light curve inversion appears to be a suitable method for simulating false alarms and designing new vetting metrics. Automated vetting will be a significant step toward making TESS data useful for demographic studies.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it