A search for transit-timing variations in the transiting hot-Jupiter systems HIP 65, NGTS-6, NGTS-10, and WASP-173
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Hot Jupiters are Jupiter-mass planets with orbital periods of less than 10 d. Their short orbital separations make tidal dissipation within the stellar host especially efficient, potentially leading to a measurable evolution of the orbit. One possible manifestation of this is orbital decay, which presents itself observationally through variations in the orbital period and thus times of transit. Here, we select four promising exoplanetary systems for detecting this effect: HIP 65, NGTS-6, NGTS-10, and WASP-173. We present 33 new transit light curves taken with the 1.54 m Danish Telescope, and analyse these alongside photometric data from the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite and transit-timing data from the literature. We construct two ephemeris models for each target: a linear ephemeris and a shrinking orbital period due to tidal decay. The linear ephemeris is preferred for three of the four models – the highest significance for the quadratic ephemeris is over 3$\sigma$ for WASP-173. We compare these results to theoretical predictions for tidal dissipation of gravity waves in radiation zones, and find that wave breaking is predicted only in WASP-173, making rapid decay plausible in this system but unclear in the other three. The sensitivity of transit timings to orbital decay depends on the square of the time interval covered by available observations, so our results establish a useful baseline against which future measurements can be compared. NGTS-6 and NGTS-10 are important objects for future study as they are in the first field to be observed by the upcoming PLATO mission.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".