<i>TESS</i> and <i>CHEOPS</i> discover two warm sub-Neptunes transiting the bright K-dwarf HD 15906
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We report the discovery of two warm sub-Neptunes transiting the bright (G = 9.5 mag) K-dwarf HD 15906 (TOI 461, TIC 4646810). This star was observed by the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) in sectors 4 and 31, revealing two small transiting planets. The inner planet, HD 15906 b, was detected with an unambiguous period but the outer planet, HD 15906 c, showed only two transits separated by ∼ 734 d, leading to 36 possible values of its period. We performed follow-up observations with the CHaracterising ExOPlanet Satellite (CHEOPS) to confirm the true period of HD 15906 c and improve the radius precision of the two planets. From TESS, CHEOPS, and additional ground-based photometry, we find that HD 15906 b has a radius of 2.24 ± 0.08 R⊕ and a period of 10.924709 ± 0.000032 d, whilst HD 15906 c has a radius of 2.93$^{+0.07}_{-0.06}$ R⊕ and a period of 21.583298$^{+0.000052}_{-0.000055}$ d. Assuming zero bond albedo and full day-night heat redistribution, the inner and outer planet have equilibrium temperatures of 668 ± 13 K and 532 ± 10 K, respectively. The HD 15906 system has become one of only six multiplanet systems with two warm (≲ 700 K) sub-Neptune sized planets transiting a bright star (G ≤ 10 mag). It is an excellent target for detailed characterization studies to constrain the composition of sub-Neptune planets and test theories of planet formation and evolution.
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 | 0.001 | 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".