MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412387861 · doi:10.1038/s41550-025-02595-7

Discovery and dynamics of a Sedna-like object with a perihelion of 66 au

2025· article· en· W4412387861 on OpenAlexaff
Ying-Tung Chen, Patryk Sofia Lykawka, Yukun Huang, J. J. Kavelaars, Wesley C. Fraser, Michele T. Bannister, Shiang‐Yu Wang, Chan-Kao Chang, M. J. Lehner, Fumi Yoshida, Brett Gladman, Mike Alexandersen, Edward Ashton, Young‐Jun Choi, A. Paula Granados Contreras, Takashi Itô, Youngmin JeongAhn, Jianghui Ji, Myungjin Kim, Samantha Lawler, Jian Li, Zhong-Yi Lin, Hong-Kyu Moon, Surhud More, Marco A. Muñoz-Gutiérrez, Keiji Ohtsuki, Lowell Peltier, Rosemary E. Pike, Tsuyoshi Terai, Seitaro Urakawa, Hui Zhang, Haibin Zhao, Ji‐Lin Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Astronomy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ReginaUniversity of VictoriaCampion CollegeUniversity of British ColumbiaHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueNational Science and Technology CouncilNational Astronomical Observatory of JapanMinistry of Science and Technology, TaiwanNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsDynamics (music)Object (grammar)AstrobiologyAstronomyPhysicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The discovery of 2023 KQ14, a Sedna-like object with a perihelion of 66 au, fills a gap in the known population. Its orbit does not align with other Sedna-like objects, shedding light on the diversity and dynamical history of the outer Solar System.

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)0.000
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.001
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature AstronomySame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207