Revisiting the Orbital Dynamics of the Hot Jupiter WASP-12 b with New Transit Times
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we examine the transit timing deviations of the extensively studied hot Jupiter WASP-12 b using a comprehensive dataset of 391 transit light curves. The dataset includes 7 new photometric observations obtained with the 1.3 m Devasthal Fast Optical Telescope, the 0.61 m VASISTHA telescope, and the 0.3 m AG Optical IDK telescope, along with 119 light curves from the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS), 97 from the Exoplanet Transit Database (ETD), 34 from the ExoClock Project, and 134 from previously published sources. To ensure homogeneity and precision, we modeled all 391 light curves and determined their mid-transit times. A detailed transit timing analysis revealed a significant orbital decay rate of $-31.97 \pm 0.80~\mathrm{ms~yr^{-1}}$, corresponding to a stellar tidal quality factor of $Q'_\star = (1.52 \pm 0.038) \times 10^{5}$, thereby confirming that the orbit of WASP-12 b is indeed decaying rapidly. Furthermore, the computation of model selection metrics ($χ^2_r$, BIC, AIC) favors orbital decay as the most likely explanation. However, the presence of an eccentricity above the threshold value allows apsidal precession to remain a viable alternative. We also derived a planetary Love number of $k_p = 0.63 \pm 0.089$, consistent with Jupiter's value, suggesting a similar internal density distribution. In this study, orbital decay is strongly supported, as a plausible cause of the timing deviations observed in WASP-12 system. Continued high-precision monitoring will be essential to further constrain the system's orbital evolution.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".