Stringent Upper Bounds on Atmospheric Mass Loss from Three Neptune-sized Planets in the TOI-4010 System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Photoevaporative models predict that the lower edge of the Neptune desert is sculpted by atmospheric mass loss. However, the stellar high-energy fluxes that power hydrodynamic escape and set predicted mass loss rates can be uncertain by multiple orders of magnitude. These uncertainties can be bypassed by studying mass loss for planets within the same system, as they have effectively undergone scaled versions of the same irradiation history. The TOI-4010 system is an ideal test case for mass loss models, as it contains three Neptune-sized planets with planet b located in the “Neptune desert,” planet c in the “Neptune ridge,” and planet d in the “Neptune savanna.” Using Keck/NIRSPEC, we measured the metastable helium transit depths of all three planets in order to search for evidence of atmospheric escape. We place upper bounds on the excess helium absorption of 1.23%, 0.81%, and 0.87% at 95% confidence for TOI-4010 b, c, and d respectively. We fit our transmission spectra with Parker wind models and find that this corresponds to 95th-percentile upper limits of 1010.17 g s−1, 1010.53 g s−1, and 1010.50 g s−1 on the mass loss rates of TOI-4010 b, c, and d respectively. Our non-detections are inconsistent with expectations from one-dimensional hydrodynamic models for solar composition atmospheres. We consider potential reductions in signal from a decreased host star extreme ultra-violet and X-ray luminosity, planetary magnetic fields, enhanced atmospheric metallicities, and fractionation, and explore the implications of our measurements for the past evaporation histories of all three planets.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".