Updated Catalog of Kepler Planet Candidates: Focus on Accuracy and Orbital Periods
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We present a new catalog of Kepler planet candidates that prioritizes accuracy of planetary dispositions and properties over uniformity. This catalog contains 4376 transiting planet candidates, including 1791 residing within 709 multiplanet systems, and provides the best parameters available for a large sample of Kepler planet candidates. We also provide a second set of stellar and planetary properties for transiting candidates that are uniformly derived for use in occurrence rate studies. Estimates of orbital periods have been improved, but as in previous catalogs, our tabulated values for period uncertainties do not fully account for transit timing variations (TTVs). We show that many planets are likely to have TTVs with long periodicities caused by various processes, including orbital precession, and that such TTVs imply that ephemerides of Kepler planets are not as accurate on multidecadal timescales as predicted by the small formal errors (typically 1 part in 10 6 and rarely >10 −5 ) in the planets’ measured mean orbital periods during the Kepler epoch. Analysis of normalized transit durations implies that eccentricities of planets are anticorrelated with the number of companion transiting planets. Our primary catalog lists all known Kepler planet candidates that orbit and transit only one star; for completeness, we also provide an abbreviated listing of the properties of the two dozen nontransiting planets that have been identified around stars that host transiting planets discovered by Kepler.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it