MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6948349012 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.21755

Apache Point Observatory follow-up of ACcelerating Candidate ExopLanet host Stars (APO ACCELS): Ages for 166 Accelerating Stars in the Northern Hemisphere

2025· preprint· en· W6948349012 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiological and pharmacological studies of plants
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStarsExoplanetNorthern HemisphereObservatoryAstrometryPlanet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Directly imaged substellar companions with well-constrained ages and masses serve as vital empirical benchmarks for planet formation and evolution models. Potential benchmark companions can be identified from astrometric accelerations of their host stars. We use Gaia DR3 and Hipparcos astrometry to identify 166 northern hemisphere stars with astrometric accelerations consistent with a substellar companion between 0.5'' and 1''. For this accelerating sample we identify young stars using APO/ARCES spectra and TESS light curves. From spectroscopic screening of the sample, we measure ages for 24 stars with detectable amounts of lithium, place lower age limits on 135 stars with lithium non-detections, and measure ages from R'HK for 34 stars. 129 stars have TESS light curves from which we measure ages for 20 stars with rotation rates < 15 days, and we identify 3 eclipsing binaries. We present median ages and confidence intervals of age posteriors for the entire sample and discuss how the overall age distribution of our sample compares to a uniform star formation rate in the solar neighborhood. We identify 47 stars with median ages < 2 Gyr, 31 stars with median ages < 1 Gyr, and 14 stars with median ages < 0.5 Gyr, making them high-priority targets for direct imaging follow-up.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.075 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicBiological and pharmacological studies of plantsFrench-language works237,207