Architecture of TOI-561 planetary system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present new observations from CHEOPS and TESS to clarify the architecture of the planetary system hosted by the old Galactic thick disk star TOI-561. Our global analysis, which also includes previously published photometric and radial velocity data, incontrovertibly proves that TOI-561 is hosting at least four transiting planets with periods of 0.44 days (TOI-561 b), 10.8 days (TOI-561 c), 25.7 days (TOI-561 d), and 77.1 days (TOI-561 e) and a fifth non-transiting candidate, TOI-561f with a period of 433 days. The precise characterisation of TOI-561's orbital architecture is interesting since old and metal-poor thick disk stars are less likely to host ultra-short period Super-Earths like TOI-561 b. The new period of planet -e is consistent with the value obtained using radial velocity alone and is now known to be $77.14399\pm0.00025$ days, thanks to the new CHEOPS and TESS transits. The new data allowed us to improve its radius ($R_p = 2.517 \pm 0.045 R_{\oplus}$ from 5$\%$ to 2$\%$ precision) and mass ($M_p = 12.4 \pm 1.4 M_{\oplus}$) estimates, implying a density of $ρ_p = 0.778 \pm 0.097 ρ_{\oplus}$. Thanks to recent TESS observations and the focused CHEOPS visit of the transit of TOI-561 e, a good candidate for exomoon searches, the planet's period is finally constrained, allowing us to predict transit times through 2030 with 20-minute accuracy. We present an updated version of the internal structure of the four transiting planets. We finally performed a detailed stability analysis, which confirmed the long-term stability of the outer planet TOI-561 f.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".