Assessing the C/O Ratio Formation Diagnostic: A Potential Trend with Companion Mass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The carbon-to-oxygen (C/O) ratio in an exoplanet atmosphere has been suggested as a potential diagnostic of planet formation. Now that a number of exoplanets have measured C/O ratios, it is possible to examine this diagnostic at a population level. Here, we present an analysis of currently measured C/O ratios of directly imaged and transit/eclipse planets. First, we derive atmospheric parameters for the substellar companion HD 284149 AB b using data taken with the OSIRIS integral field spectrograph at the W.M. Keck Observatory and report two non-detections from our ongoing imaging spectroscopy survey with Keck/OSIRIS. We find an effective temperature of T eff = 2502 K, with a range of 2291–2624 K, log g = 4.52 , with a range of 4.38–4.91, and [M/H] = 0.37, with a range of 0.10–0.55. We derive a C/O of 0.59 − 0.30 + 0.15 for HD 284149 AB b. We add this measurement to the list of C/O ratios for directly imaged planets and compare them with those from a sample of transit/eclipse planets. We also derive the first dynamical mass estimate for HD 284149 AB b, finding a mass of ∼28 M Jup. There is a trend in C/O ratio with companion mass (M Jup), with a break seen around 4 M Jup. We run a Kolmogorov–Smirnov and an Anderson–Darling test on planets above and below this mass boundary, and find that they are two distinct populations. This could be additional evidence of two distinct populations possibly having two different formation pathways, with companion mass as an indicator of most likely formation scenario.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".