Warm Jupiters Beyond the Tidal Synchronization Limit may Exhibit a Wide Range of Secondary Eclipse Depths
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract With the JWST we can now characterize the atmospheres of longer-orbit planets, but this moves us into a regime where we cannot assume that tidal forces from the star have eroded the planets’ obliquities and synchronized their rotation rates. These rotation vectors may be tracers of formation and evolution histories and also enable a range of atmospheric circulation states. Here we delineate the orbital space over which tidal synchronization and alignment assumptions may no longer apply and present three-dimensional atmospheric models of a hypothetical warm Jupiter over a range of rotation rates and obliquities. We simulate the secondary eclipses of this planet for different possible viewing orientations and times during its orbital, seasonal cycle. We find that the eclipse depth can be strongly influenced by the rotation rate and obliquity through the timing of the eclipse relative to the planet’s seasonal cycle, and advise caution in attempting to derive properties such as albedo or day–night transport from this measurement. We predict that if warm Jupiters beyond the tidal limit have intrinsic diversity in their rotation vectors, then this will manifest itself as dispersion in their secondary eclipse depths. We explore eclipse mapping as a way to uniquely constrain the rotation vector of warm Jupiters but find that the associated signals are likely at the edge of the JWST performance. Nevertheless, as the JWST begins to measure the secondary eclipses of longer-orbital-period planets, we should expect to observe the consequences of a wider range of rotation states and circulation patterns.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".