MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410941777 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad7bb8

Statistical Trends in JWST Transiting Exoplanet Atmospheres

2025· article· en· W4410941777 on OpenAlexaff
Guangwei Fu, Kevin B. Stevenson, David K. Sing, Sagnick Mukherjee, Luis Welbanks, Daniel Thorngren, Shang‐Min Tsai, Peter Gao, Joshua D. Lothringer, Thomas G. Beatty, Cyril Gapp, T. M. Evans, Romain Allart, Stefan Pelletier, Pa Chia Thao, Andrew W. Mann

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsMontreal Clinical Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExoplanetPhysicsAstrobiologyAstronomyPlanet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Our brains are hardwired for pattern recognition as correlations are useful for predicting and understanding nature. As more exoplanet atmospheres are being characterized with JWST, we are starting to unveil their properties on a population level. Here we present a framework for comparing exoplanet transmission spectroscopy from 3 to 5 μm with four bands: L (2.9–3.7 μm), SO2 (3.95–4.1 μm), CO2 (4.25–4.4 μm), and CO (4.5–4.9 μm). Together, the four bands cover the major carbon-, oxygen-, nitrogen-, and sulfur-bearing molecules including H2O, CH4, NH3, H2S, SO2, CO2, and CO. Among the eight high-precision gas giant exoplanet planet spectra we collect, we find strong correlations between the SO2 – L index and planet mass (r = −0.41 ± 0.09) and temperature (r = −0.64 ± 0.08), indicating SO2 preferably exists (SO2 – L > −0.5) among low-mass (∼ <0.3 M J) and cooler (∼ <1200 K) targets. We also observe strong temperature dependency for both CO2 – L and CO – L indices. Under equilibrium chemistry and isothermal thermal structure assumptions, we find that the planet sample favors supersolar metallicity and a low C/O ratio (<0.7). In addition, the presence of a mass–metallicity correlation is favored over uniform metallicity with the eight planets. We further introduce the SO2 – L versus CO2 – L diagram, similar to the color–magnitude diagram for stars and brown dwarfs. All reported trends here will be testable and will be further quantified with existing and future JWST observations within the next few years.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→