The DOI matches its Crossref record; 100 of the 107 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 43 of the 93 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS
Open accessAbstract
The large relative sizes of circumstellar and circumplanetary disks imply that they might be seen in eclipse in stellar light curves. We estimate that a survey of ~10^4 young (~10 million year old) post-accretion pre-main-sequence stars monitored for ~10 years should yield at least a few deep eclipses from circumplanetary disks and disks surrounding low-mass companion stars. We present photometric and spectroscopic data for a pre-main-sequence K5 star (1SWASP J140747.93-394542.6 = ASAS J140748-3945.7), a newly discovered ~0.9 M_sun member of the ~16 Myr old Upper Centaurus-Lupus subgroup of Sco-Cen at a kinematic distance of 128 +/- 13 pc. This star exhibited a remarkably long, deep, and complex eclipse event centered on 2007 April 29 (as discovered in Super Wide Angle Search for Planets (SuperWASP) photometry, and with portions of the dimming confirmed by All Sky Automated Survey (ASAS) data). At least five multi-day dimming events of >0.5 mag are identified, with a >3.3 mag deep eclipse bracketed by two pairs of ~1 mag eclipses symmetrically occurring +/-12 days and +/-26 days before and after. Hence, significant dimming of the star was taking place on and off over at least a ~54 day period in 2007, and a strong >1 mag dimming event occurring over a ~12 day span. We place a firm lower limit on the period of 850 days (i.e., the orbital radius of the eclipser must be >1.7 AU and orbital velocity must be <22 km s^-1).
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
109 Own interpretation · 36 Own result · 36 No basis given · 18 Partly supported · 17 Sources not found · 11 No full text of the sources · 9 Supported · 5 Not checked yet · 2 Couldn’t confirm · 1 Supported so far · 1 Mixed support · 1 Not supported · accuracy not yet measured
Some cited sources support this claim and some don’t — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Among the binaries found in young clusters, stars in different stages of disk evolution are not rare”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
What the sources say
- Disputedcites Hartigan & Kenyon 2003 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction explicitly says that mixed pairs—young binaries with one disk-bearing star and one without a detectable disk—are rare. Section 4.1 estimates their frequency at about 15%, and the paper reports four mixed pairs among 20 close Taurus-Auriga binaries. Although such pairs exist, the paper's characterization is contrary to the claim that they are not rare. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
- Partly supportedcites McCabe et al. 2006 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (page unavailable) report that five of six passive-disk systems are mixed binaries, with a passive-disk star paired with a star showing different accretion properties. This supports the existence of such pairs in the surveyed star-forming regions, but the paper says the sample is small and the tendency is not statistically significant; it does not establish how common different disk-evolution stages are among young binaries generally. (LLM, conf=0.78)
- Not matchedcites Monin et al. 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Disputed
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“In units corresponding to measuring planet masses in Jupiter masses and orbital periods in days, the value of the normalization is C = 1.4 × 10 -3 .”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 4.1. Probability of Seeing Eclipses by Circumplanetary Disks
What the sources say
- Disputedcites Cumming et al. 2008 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 4, “Summary and Conclusions” (page not provided), gives the normalization in Jupiter masses and days as C = 1.04 × 10^-3, not 1.4 × 10^-3. (LLM, conf=0.94)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Disputed
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Based on a centripetal radius argument, Quillen & Trilling (1998) estimated that an accreting circumplanetary disk would have ξ = 1/3.Hydrodynamic simulations of planets embedded in circumstellar disks also can find ξ ∼ 0.3 (Ayliffe & Bate 2009).A tidal truncation argument suggests ξ ∼ 0.4 (Martin & Lubow 2011).Theoretical models for Jupiter's circumplanetary disk accounting for Galilean satellite”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Quillen & Trilling 1998 source
Section 1.3 (page unavailable) estimates a centrifugal radius of one-third the Hill radius if material enters the Hill sphere through the Lagrange points. This supports the specific ξ = 1/3 estimate attributed to Quillen and Trilling; the other values in the citing sentence are attributed to other sources. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Supportedcites Ayliffe & Bate 2009 source
The citation to Ayliffe & Bate is attached specifically to the statement that hydrodynamic simulations find a circumplanetary-disc size ratio of about 0.3, not to the full 0.1–0.4 range. The Results report that simulated disc radii are close to one-third of the Hill radius, and the Conclusions say their radial extents agree with that value. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Supportedcites Martin & Lubow 2011 source
The Discussion and Conclusions state that tidal effects set the circumplanetary disc radius at 0.41 Hill radii for a cold disc, close to the effective radius in the authors’ warm-disc simulations. This supports the approximately 0.4 size ratio attributed specifically to Martin and Lubow; the citation is not offered for the full range of estimates. (LLM, conf=0.92)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“there has been negligible investigation of the observability of the dense proto-satellite disks that likely existed during the first ∼10 7 years.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 1. INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites Barnes & Fortney 2004 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 2.2 discusses how the prevalence of planetary rings might vary with stellar age, and the Abstract addresses detecting Saturn-like rings in transit light curves. Neither passage addresses whether dense proto-satellite disks existed during the first ~10^7 years or how much their observability has been investigated. Searches for proto-satellite disks and that timescale found no relevant passage in our copy; page numbers were unavailable. (LLM, conf=0.72)
- Could not verifycites Ohta et al. 2009 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract and §5.4 discuss the detectability of planetary rings, including earlier work on rings and satellites. Searches for proto-satellite disks and their observability found no passage addressing dense disks in the first ∼10^7 years or how much they had been investigated. (LLM, conf=0.74)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The multiplicity of class I young stellar objects (YSOs) in embedded clusters and pre-MS stars in young associations is high and ranges from 20% to 60% for the ∼10 1.5 -10 2.5 AU separation range and mass ratios of ∼0.1-1”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Duchêne et al. 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Kraus et al. 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction describes a high companion frequency for Class II/III stars in sparse young associations, and Section 5.4 reports a high companion frequency in Taurus. But the paper’s survey sample excludes most Class 0/I sources (Section 2); the cited passages do not establish a 20%–60% multiplicity range for Class I objects in embedded clusters and pre-main-sequence stars across the specified separation and mass-ratio ranges. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The circumplanetary disk aspect ratio h/r is predicted to be in the range 0.1-0.3”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Canup & Ward 2002 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 3.3 describes a modeled circumplanetary disk whose aspect ratio increases with radius, and Section 3.4 uses approximately 0.1 as a disk value. The passages do not establish 0.3 as an upper bound or explicitly predict a 0.1–0.3 range (pages unavailable in our copy). (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Not matchedcites Alibert et al. 2005
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“A tidally truncated disk around a lowmass secondary is expected to have a shorter accretion lifetime than the primary's disk (Armitage et al. 1999)”
- Also stated in: § 4.2. Probability of Seeing Eclipses by Circumsecondary Disks · plain
“A tidally truncated disk around a low-mass secondary is expected to have a shorter accretion lifetime than the primary's disk (Armitage et al. 1999), though its planet formation timescale could be longer.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2.1. Disk Lifetimes
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Armitage et al. 1999 source
Section 5.3 (p. 430) predicts faster evolution of the smaller, tidally truncated secondary disc and a decline below the primary disc in accretion strength. Section 5.5 adds that this effect is strongest for low mass ratios, consistent with the claimed shorter accretion lifetime for a low-mass secondary. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 4.2. Probability of Seeing Eclipses by Circumsecondary Disks · plain
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The lifetime of the second phase of Jupiter's circumstellar disk is estimated to be of order a million years (Canup & Ward 2002;Alibert et al. 2005;Ward & Canup 2010).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2.1. Disk Lifetimes
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Canup & Ward 2002 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 3.3 (page unavailable) uses 5 × 10^6 years as a characteristic timescale for gas inflow onto Jupiter, but says that slow inflow need persist for at least about 10^5 years to supply the satellites. It does not estimate a million-year lifetime for a “second phase” disk; the model concerns a circumjovian, or circumplanetary, disk rather than a circumstellar one. (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Not matchedcites Alibert et al. 2005
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Ward & Canup 2010 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 3, “Disks with Ongoing Accretion” (page unavailable), describes stages of Jupiter’s circumplanetary disk and reports that Jupiter contracts to within Io’s orbit in less than a million years. The Figure 5 caption in Section 7 (page unavailable) uses a roughly million-year planet-accretion timescale. Neither passage estimates a million-year lifetime for a second phase of Jupiter’s circumstellar disk; the quoted timescales describe planetary contraction and accretion instead. (LLM, conf=0.78)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“(consistent with rotational modulation of starspots, typical for young active stars, e.g., Mamajek & Hillenbrand 2008)”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.2. Light Curves
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Mamajek & Hillenbrand 2008 source
The citation supports the general interpretation, not the measured period of J1407. Section 4.1 identifies starspot modulation as a way to measure stellar rotation; §4.2 describes rotation slowing with age, and §2.1 associates stronger, more rapid activity variability with younger stars. The paper need not report J1407’s 3.211-day period to support the background point for which it is cited. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaincorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“the disk of HD 141569A (Clampin et al. 2003) may extend to its Roche radius when the secondary is at pericenter and approaches HD 141569A (Augereau & Papaloizou 2004;Quillen et al. 2005).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Clampin et al. 2003 source
The Clampin et al. citation is attached to the identification of HD 141569A’s disk, which the paper images and describes in Results (§3). The Roche-radius and pericenter proposition is followed by separate citations and is not attributed to Clampin et al. in this sentence. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Partly supportedcites Augereau & Papaloizou 2004 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 3 (page not available) describes gravitational truncation of the disk by an eccentric companion, and Section 5 places that companion’s pericentre at about 930 AU in the model of HD 141569 A. Our copy does not identify the disk’s extent with a Roche radius or say that it reaches that radius when the companion is at pericentre. (LLM, conf=0.83)
- Supportedcites Quillen et al. 2005 source
Section 3.2 says the simulated disk size is consistent with truncation at the binary’s Roche radius when the binary is at periapse. The Summary and Discussion also infers that the companion binary is near periapse, supporting the claim’s qualified wording. (LLM, conf=0.92)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
- Probably not a substantial claim. 44
- It may state two separate claims as one. 73
- The quote only partly states this claim. 3
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Recent explorations of circumplanetary disks separate the disk evolution into two phases (Alibert et al. 2005;Ward & Canup 2010).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Alibert et al. 2005
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Ward & Canup 2010 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract describes a transition from a spin-out disk to an accretion disk, supporting a broad two-phase description. But Section 3.2 (Inflow Stages) says the planet–disk configuration passes through three stages, and the Conclusion describes an intermediate period when both spin-out and direct inflow supply the disk. The paper therefore does not separate its full disk evolution into only two phases. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“The lack of differentiation of Callisto (Anderson et al. 1996) suggests that the accretion or formation timescale for all the Galilean satellites was prolonged (Canup & Ward 2002) and would have happened during the second phase of evolution after the circumstellar disk dissipated”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Anderson et al. 1996 source
- Supportedcites Canup & Ward 2002 source
Section 1.3 identifies prolonged accretion of all the satellites as the authors’ preferred explanation for Callisto’s incomplete differentiation. Section 4 explicitly says their model predicts long accretion times for all Galilean satellites. The citation follows the prolonged-timescale claim; the later statement about a second phase after circumstellar-disk dissipation is not attributed to this source by that citation. (LLM, conf=0.92)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“For ξ = 0.2 this gives a planet mass ratio of 2 × 10 -5 and for ξ = 0.1 of 2 × 10 -4 , hence ranging from Saturn to Neptune mass and lower than estimated by Chiang et al. (2009) but consistent with that predicted by Quillen (2006).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2.1. Disk Lifetimes
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Chiang et al. (2009) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Summary (section 4.1; page unavailable) gives Chiang et al.'s conservative constraint as less than 3 Jupiter masses, an upper limit above the Saturn-to-Neptune masses in the citing sentence. It does not estimate a specific mass above that range; the paper also models a 0.1-Jupiter-mass planet (Table 1). Thus the comparison with Chiang's upper limit is supported, but saying the proposed range is lower than Chiang's estimated mass overstates the source. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Quillen (2006) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“The spectral energy distribution for the star (plotted in Figure 1) is consistent with a lightly reddened K5 star (E(B -V ) = 0.09, A V 0.32 mag), with no evidence for infrared excess”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.1. The Star
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites Skrutskie et al. 2006 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 5.2.4, Photometric Accuracy, describes 2MASS stellar photometry, but does not analyze J1407. Searches for J1407, the stated reddening values, a K5 spectral-energy-distribution fit, and infrared excess found no passage addressing those conclusions in our copy; page numbers were not available. (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Could not verifycites Wright et al. 2010 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Instrument section discusses WISE flux corrections for G–K dwarfs, but does not analyze J1407. Searches for J1407, the K5 classification, the stated reddening values, and infrared excess found no passage addressing this star. (LLM, conf=0.78)
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Sco-Cen is the nearest OB association to the Sun (mean subgroup distances of d 118-145 pc; de Zeeuw et al. 1999) and consists of three subgroups with ages of ∼11-17 Myr (Pecaut et al. 2011;Preibisch & Mamajek 2008).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.1. The Star
What the sources say
- Supportedcites de Zeeuw et al. 1999 source
The de Zeeuw et al. citation is attached to Sco-Cen’s proximity and subgroup distances, not the 11–17 Myr ages, which have separate citations. Section 10.2 lists distances of 145, 140, and 118 pc for the three Sco OB2 subgroups, and §4.4 identifies LCC’s mean distance as 118 pc. These measurements support the stated distance range and description of Sco-Cen as the nearest OB association. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Supportedcites Pecaut et al. 2011 source
The Introduction identifies Sco-Cen as the nearest OB association, names its three subgroups, and gives their mean distances as 118–145 pc. The Conclusions give ages of 16 ± 1 Myr for UCL and 17 ± 1 Myr for LCC, and an overall mean of 11 ± 1 ± 2 Myr for Upper Sco. The citing sentence separately attributes the distance figures to de Zeeuw et al. (1999), but Pecaut et al. also reports them. (LLM, conf=0.95)
- Not matchedcites Preibisch & Mamajek 2008
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“its proper motion is statistically consistent with moving toward the UCL convergent point (a negligible peculiar velocity of 0.9 ± 1.8 km s -1 ), with a kinematic distance of 128 ± 13 pc”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.1. The Star
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites de Zeeuw et al. 1999 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 1 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“For example, a separation of 10 AU at a distance of 130 pc corresponds to 77 mas, resolvable perhaps with aperture-masking interferometry on large telescopes (e.g., Ireland & Kraus 2008).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.7. A Preliminary Model
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Ireland & Kraus 2008 source
The Observations section reports that aperture-masking data resolved a binary, and Table 1 gives its separation as 54.1 mas using Keck/NIRC2. This supports the cited example that a wider 77 mas separation could be resolvable with aperture-masking interferometry on a large telescope; the 10 AU at 130 pc conversion is the citing authors’ calculation. (LLM, conf=0.90)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“A K5-type star with rotation period of 3.20 days would be predicted to have soft X-ray emission around the saturation level (log(L X /L bol ) -3.2 ± 0.3; Pizzolato et al. 2003), perfectly consistent with the observed ROSAT X-ray flux (log(L X /L bol ) -3.2), and consistent with other Sco-Cen pre-MS stars (Mamajek et al. 2002).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.4. Rotation Period and X-Ray Emission
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Pizzolato et al. 2003 source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Supportedcites Mamajek et al. 2002 source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
hedgedcorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“During some nights the SuperWASP photometry shows (unphysical) jumps between two photometric levels at the tenths of magnitude level-a systematic effect seen in other SuperWASP studies (e.g., Norton et al. 2011).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.3. Eclipse Substructure
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Norton et al. 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper reports systematic contamination of SuperWASP light curves and spurious periodic signals (Section 2, p. 2). It does not describe nightly jumps between two photometric levels or establish their size as tenths of a magnitude, so it supports only the general point that SuperWASP photometry can have systematic effects. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Variations in eclipse depth in this system are attributed to a possible third companion that tilts the orbital plane of the eclipsing system (Torres & Stefanik 2000).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 5. CONCLUSION
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Torres & Stefanik 2000 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (§8; page unavailable) explains that a third star can change the inner orbit’s inclination and thereby alter eclipses. But the paper applies this explanation to SS Lac, not EE Cep; it does not establish the claimed cause of EE Cep’s eclipse-depth variations. (LLM, conf=0.88)
hedgedconditionalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The number of binaries is flat in log period or semi-major axis space (Halbwachs et al. 2003;Kraus et al. 2011), and young binaries are similar to field population in this respect (Duchêne et al. 2007).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 4.2. Probability of Seeing Eclipses by Circumsecondary Disks
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Halbwachs et al. 2003
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Kraus et al. 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 6.1 reports an approximately log-flat separation distribution for young solar-mass binaries in loose associations over 3–5000 AU, supporting the flat-distribution part attributed to Kraus et al. The citing sentence leaves out those population and separation limits. Its separate comparison with the field is cited to Duchêne et al., not Kraus et al. (LLM, conf=0.87)
- Not matchedcites Duchêne et al. 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The LSST survey design should enable estimation of sub-mas/yr proper motions that will allow kinematic membership assignments of newly discovered pre-MS stars to young clusters and associations of determinable distance and age.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 5. CONCLUSION
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Ivezic et al. 2008 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 2.1.4 (p. 7) gives a design target of 0.2 mas/yr proper-motion accuracy, supporting the sub-mas/yr estimate. Section 4.4 (pp. 33–35) says LSST will observe star-forming regions and survey faint populations there, but describes color and variability selection; it does not say that proper motions will enable kinematic membership assignments of newly discovered pre-main-sequence stars to young clusters or associations of determinable distance and age. (LLM, conf=0.85)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The existence of circumplanetary disks after the dissipation of the protosolar (circumstellar) nebular disk has been postulated from formation scenarios for the Galilean satellites (Canup & Ward 2002;Magni & Coradini 2004;Ward & Canup 2010).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 5. CONCLUSION
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Canup & Ward 2002 source
Table 1 describes a Galilean-satellite formation model in which Jupiter contracts after nebular dispersal and sheds material into a circumplanetary disk. This supports the claim that a post-dispersal disk had been postulated, although it is not the model the authors advocate. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Magni & Coradini 2004 source
- Partly supportedcites Ward & Canup 2010 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (page not provided) links circumplanetary disks to the formation of Jupiter’s regular satellites and describes satellite-formation disk models. It does not establish that those disks existed after the protosolar nebula dissipated; it also describes an accretion-disk scenario in which the solar nebula is still present. (LLM, conf=0.85)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Typical subgroups of OB associations have ∼10 3 stars and ages of ∼3-20 Myr (e.g., de Zeeuw et al. 1999;Briceño et al. 2007), during which the majority of stars have just recently ceased accreting from circumstellar disks (e.g., Mamajek 2009).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 4.1. Probability of Seeing Eclipses by Circumplanetary Disks
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites de Zeeuw et al. 1999 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 4.1 reports an age of about 5 Myr for Upper Scorpius and about 20 Myr for the Sco OB2 complex, broadly supporting the stated age range; the approximately 3 Myr age in §4.3 refers to stars associated with the Lupus clouds, not a typical subgroup. Section 10.1 estimates a few thousand solar masses for entire OB associations, not about 1,000 stars per subgroup. Page numbers were not provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not matchedcites Briceño et al. 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“However, this is difficult to formulate as binary identifications are not complete at mass ratios less than 0.1 (e.g., Kraus et al. 2011) and the number of secondaries hosting passive disks in the 10 7 year old age range is not well characterized.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 4.2. Probability of Seeing Eclipses by Circumsecondary Disks
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Kraus et al. 2011 source
The citation is attached to the binary-identification clause, not the subsequent statement about passive disks. The paper’s discussion of Figure 5 includes companions only at mass ratios above 0.1, and its Figure 4 discussion says detectability varies across the sample. These passages support the cited point that identifications below 0.1 are incomplete. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we present the discovery of a solar-mass premain-sequence (pre-MS) non-accreting star exhibiting a long, unusual eclipse similar to those seen in EE Cep and Aurigae.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 1. INTRODUCTION
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The SuperWASP DR1 photometry for J1407 contains photometry for approximately 29,000 epochs during 206 dates between HJD 2453860 (2006.34)and HJD 2455399 (2010.56),with median photometric precision of 0.023 mag.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.2. Light Curves
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“a deep eclipse with maximum depth ∼3 mag between HJD 2454213 (2007 April 23) and HJD 2454227 (2007 May 7), with a complex pattern of roughly symmetric dimming and brightening within ±26 days of 2007 April 29 HJD 2454220.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.1. The Star
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The light curve is dominated by a quasi-sinusoidal component with amplitude ∼0.1 mag in the WASP-V photometric band, with periodicity of 3.21 days (consistent with rotational modulation of starspots, typical for young active stars)”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.1. The Star
plaincorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite the appearance of some discrepant photometric points (with correspondingly large photometric errors), there is no evidence for any complex behavior similar to that seen for J1407.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.2. Light Curves
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of our ∼350 Sco-Cen survey stars, at least 200 appear to be new bona fide pre-MS stars, and SuperWASP light curves were available for 138 of them.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.1. The Star
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The light curve for J1407 from the SuperWASP datafoot_6 is dominated by (1) a sinusoidal component with amplitude ∼0.1 mag in the WASP-V photometric band, with periodicity of 3.211 days”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.2. Light Curves
plaincorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There is no hint from the spectrum of J1407 that it could contain a giant star, a hot component, or constitute a symbiotic binary.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.6. Other Explanations
hedgedSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As a UCL member, the tangential motion of J1407 on the sky is 32 mas yr -1 or 20 km s -1 at its predicted distance of 128 pc.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.6. Other Explanations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We have examined SuperWASP light curves of neighboring stars of similar magnitude, as well as J1407 outside of eclipse, and seen no such variations”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.3. Eclipse Substructure
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Including the gradual dimming phase, the eclipse on J1407 lasted about 54 days.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.6. Other Explanations
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“(5) spectral appearance consistent with being dwarf or pre-MS, but not a giant.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.6. Other Explanations
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We have not yet positively identified more than a single eclipse, so at present it is possible that the eclipse was a one-time occurrence.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.6. Other Explanations
hedgedSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We conclude that there is no evidence for any eclipse events with photometric coverage up to 2330 days (6.4 years), and that there are no eclipse events in any periods up to 850 days (2.3 years).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.5. Constraints on the Eclipse Period
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nightly averages of SuperWASP data (see Figure 5) exhibit two pairs of multiday dips, labeled A 1 and A 2 , separated by ∼24 days, and B 1 and B 2 , separated by ∼51.5 days.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.3. Eclipse Substructure
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“(4) proper motion statistically consistent with Sco-Cen membership, and predicted kinematic distance harmonious with pre-MS status”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.6. Other Explanations
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Long-term median magnitudes outside of eclipse are plotted with dotted lines (V = 12.29 for ASAS, V = 12.45 for SuperWASP).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 5. CONCLUSION
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The eclipse was deep for about 14 days but is bookended by a gradual dimming covering a period of about ±54 days.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 5. CONCLUSION
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The complex eclipse of J1407 that took place in 2007 is slightly asymmetric and contains significant substructure, similar to the eclipses of the Be star EE Cep that have been interpreted in terms of an occulting planetary system (Galan et al. 2010).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 5. CONCLUSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Galan et al. 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A preliminary good fit (but by no means unique) to the daily averaged light curve for J1407 is shown in Figure 12”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.7. A Preliminary Model
hedgedcorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Integrating over the masses, we find dN = C P 0.26 d log P with C = 4.5×10 -3 .”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 4.1. Probability of Seeing Eclipses by Circumplanetary Disks
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The distribution gives a probability of an FGK star hosting a gas giant between 1-5 AU (365-1825 days), interior to this (2-365 days), and from 5-20 AU, in each case of about f g ∼ 0.05 or 5%.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 4.1. Probability of Seeing Eclipses by Circumplanetary Disks
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We have had success modeling the primary eclipse; however, the peripheral dips have been more difficult to model.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.7. A Preliminary Model
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Dips A 1 and A 2 are ∼51.5 days apart, and dips B 1 and B 2 are ∼24 days apart.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 5. CONCLUSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The midway dates for both the”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 5. CONCLUSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“Mosqueira et al. (2010) suggest that Iapetus' large separation from Saturn's principal satellite Titan is suggestive that the remnant circum-Saturnian nebula may have had two components: a dense inner disk that spawned most of Saturn's regular satellites, out to the centrifugal radius near Titan, and a disk of much lower density beyond the centrifugal radius-perhaps”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Mosqueira et al. 2010 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Relaxing the assumptions about the size, mass, composition, and structure of the disk in our back-of-theenvelope calculation has little impact on the feasibility of the idea that dusty disks of high optical depth may be a common feature of young gas giant planets, and such objects may be observable via deep eclipses of young stars.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 1. INTRODUCTION
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because of the extended estimated circumplanetary disk lifetime, we can consider the possibility that circumplanetary disks can be seen in eclipse against a young central star after the dissipation of the circumstellar disk.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In the first phase the circumplanetary disk is fed by material from the circumstellar disk and the circumplanetary disk acts like an accretion disk.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The size of such a proto-moon disk in this case would be a few solar radii-i.e., large enough and optically thick enough to potentially eclipse a star's light.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 1. INTRODUCTION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“emission lines and UV emission suggest that the hidden object is a B-type star (see discussion by Chadima et al. 2011).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 1. INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Chadima et al. 2011 source
hedgedcorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In the second phase the circumstellar disk has dissipated, and the viscosity of the circumplanetary disk both drives accretion onto the planet and causes the disk to spread outward.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These disks would then evolve passively after the circumstellar reservoir was depleted (Section 2), with matter accreting onto the planet, grain growth and proto-satellite accretion, and depletion through other mechanisms”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 1. INTRODUCTION
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The primary object is a B5e giant star, and only primary eclipses are seen (Mikolajewski & Graczyk 1999).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 1. INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Mikolajewski & Graczyk 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“modeling of Iapetus, the outermost regular satellite of Saturn, suggests that it formed 3-5 Myr after the formation of Ca-Al inclusions (Castillo-Rogez et al. 2009).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Castillo-Rogez et al. 2009 source
hedgedSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Callisto, currently has a semi-major axis that is only a small fraction of Jupiter's Hill radius a ≈ 0.0355r H .”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These circumplanetary disks likely had outer radii of ξ > 0.01-0.05and could have been detectable by eclipses with ∼1-10 day timescales to observers along opportune lines of sight.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The large relative sizes of circumstellar and circumplanetary disks imply that they might be seen in eclipse in stellar light curves.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > Abstract
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of course, such a disk need not be face-on-more likely the disk would have a non-zero inclination with respect to the planet-star orbital plane, so the star need not be completely geometrically eclipsed by such a circumplanetary disk.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 1. INTRODUCTION
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“EE Cep exhibits long (30-90 day) asymmetric eclipses with a period of 5.6 years and depth of ∼0.6-2.1 mag.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 1. INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Mikolajewski & Graczyk 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Presumably a disk of much higher optical depth and significant radial substructure existed during the epoch of satellite formation.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 1. INTRODUCTION
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Infrared emission from the disk was detected with IRAS (Backman & Gillett 1985).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 1. INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Backman & Gillett 1985 source
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We suspect that this new star is being eclipsed by a low-mass object orbited by a dense inner disk, further girded by at least three dusty rings of optical depths near unity.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > Abstract
hedgeddirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the large fraction of binary systems in young associations and clusters suggests that long-period eclipsing circumsecondary disk systems may be discovered in lower mass systems.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The mass of the star and the lack of detected infrared emission suggest that the host object for the eclipsing disk is low mass, possibly a low-mass star, brown dwarf, or giant planet.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 1. INTRODUCTION
hedgedconditionalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Jupiter's Hill radius is about 743R Jup”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“discovering and characterizing eclipses by circumplanetary and circumsecondary disks will provide us with observational constraints on the conditions that spawn satellite systems around gas giant planets and planetary systems around stars.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Structure seen in the wings of the eclipse has recently been interpreted in terms of rings and gaps in a forming planetary system around a lower mass secondary (Galan et al. 2010).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 1. INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Galan et al. 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“A good rough guideline covering a wide range of conditions is aspect ratio h/r ∼ 0.05-0.1”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Edgar et al. 2007 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These observations led Kalas et al. to suggest that the planet hosts a circumplanetary ring akin to Saturn's (see Arnold & Schneider 2004), which would extend to at least 20 Jupiter radii for an assumed albedo of 0.4 to recover the observed fluxes.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2.1. Disk Lifetimes
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kalas et al. 2008 source
- Not matchedcites Arnold & Schneider 2004
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We estimate that the lifetime of a circumplanetary disk at 25 AU could be about 10 times longer (or of order 10foot_3 years) and at 100 AU (such as Fomalhaut b) 100 times longer (or of order 10 8 years).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2.1. Disk Lifetimes
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“however, there are other environmental factors such as dispersal of the host molecular cloud, birth cluster density, and disk evaporation that can influence multiplicity and disperse disks (Monin et al. 2007;Prato & Weinberger 2010).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2.1. Disk Lifetimes
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Monin et al. 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Prato & Weinberger 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“δm ∼ 9.8”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This level of magnitude difference is not extremely high, suggesting that it may be feasible to detect reflected light from circumplanetary disks with an adaptive optics system.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because of the large size of a circumplanetary or circumsecondary disk, the fraction f orient of objects capable of giving eclipses, and that such eclipses will be seen, is not low.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 2. CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISK ECLIPSES
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If it shared the absolute magnitude of the K5Ib standard σ CMa (M V -4.3), then J1407 would represent a young, massive star ≈18 kpc away, ≈6 kpc above the Galactic disk midplane, with a tangential velocity of ≈2800 km s -1 .”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.6. Other Explanations
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As discussed in the previous section, the period analysis suggests that the orbital period P > 850 days (2.33 yr), so the ratio of eclipse duration to orbital period must be less than 0.06.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.6. Other Explanations
hedgeddirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The hypothetical disk appears to produce some obscuration during a minimum of Δt ≈ 54 days, and hence the obscuration occurs during a faction f eclipse < 6.3% of the period.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.7. A Preliminary Model
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both this mass estimate and the previous one estimated from the 850 day period limit suggest that the mass of the companion must be low and in the brown dwarf or low-mass M star regime.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.7. A Preliminary Model
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“EE Cep has a similar period and duration and also exhibits variations in eclipse depth (Galan et al. 2010).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.5. Constraints on the Eclipse Period
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Galan et al. 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“J1407's total proper motion (32 mas yr -1 ) would then imply a tangential velocity of ≈670 km s -1 , i.e., faster than the local Galactic escape velocity.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.6. Other Explanations
hedgeddirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The period analysis above suggests that the orbital period P > 850 days (2.33 yr), which for m 1 = 0.9 M suggests an orbital radius of >1.7 AU and an orbital velocity of <21.7 km s -1 .”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.7. A Preliminary Model
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If the shallow depression seen in early 2001 (see Figure 7) is an eclipse, then the period is 6.12 years and just about at the 2330 day limit.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.5. Constraints on the Eclipse Period
hedgedconditionalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If it was a true secondary eclipse, then the period should be 12.24 years and the next secondary eclipse would take place around 2013.46.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.2. Light Curves
hedgedconditionalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The error at 12 μm is only 3% of the flux, so at best a disk could be emitting with a 12 μm infrared flux of λF λ ∼ 5 × 10 -17 W m -2 .”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.6. Other Explanations
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“m 2 ∼ 1.2M J ξ -3 . (9”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.7. A Preliminary Model
hedgedcorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The ratio of the width of these gaps to one-half of the eclipse time is approximately 3/26 or 0.11, suggesting that the disk must have an aspect ratio h/r smaller than this ratio.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.7. A Preliminary Model
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The longer the period, the lower f eclipse , and the lower the estimated mass of the secondary.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.7. A Preliminary Model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“(3) the future detection of another similar eclipse would obviously negate the idea.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.6. Other Explanations
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The disk radius is only weakly dependent on the period (proportional to P -1/3 ) and would be smaller for a more distant companion.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.7. A Preliminary Model
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No plausible stellar or substellar companion can be responsible for dimming the K5 pre-MS star J1407 by more than 3 mag (>95% dimming), and eclipses by such an object would not explain the irregular shape, depth, and duration of the eclipse.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.6. Other Explanations
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is significantly lower than the ratios for either V718 Persei or KH 15D (0.2 and 0.3, respectively) and suggests that a circumbinary or circumstellar disk about the K star cannot account for the eclipse.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.6. Other Explanations
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For ξ ∼ 0.2 expected for circumplanetary disks this gives m 2 ∼ 0.1 M and an M dwarf.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.7. A Preliminary Model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hence, we should consider the possibility that J1407 also exhibits large variations in eclipse duration and depth.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.5. Constraints on the Eclipse Period
hedgedconditionalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Using the energy conversion factor of Fleming et al. (1995), this translates to an X-ray flux in the ROSAT band of f X = 2.9 × 10 -13 erg s -1 cm -2 , and using our previous distance and bolometric luminosity estimates, L X = 10 29.8 erg s -1 and log(L X /L bol ) -3.4 dex.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.4. Rotation Period and X-Ray Emission
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Fleming et al. (1995) source
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If the secondary has a mass of 1 M J , then the satellites in the disk could have mass lower than that of Earth, and if the secondary is an M star of mass 0.1 M , then the gap opening satellites could have mass lower than Saturn.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.7. A Preliminary Model
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Assuming the disk to be of similar size to typical planetary orbits (∼10 AU), this would translate to sweeping the disk in the z-direction approximately ∼4(r disk /10 AU) km per week.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.6. Other Explanations
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The disk is of similar size to typical planetary orbits (about 10 AU) in the one-time occultation scenario.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Substructure in the eclipse suggests that the disk is thin h/r 0.01 and has gaps that may contain satellites with mass ∼10 -3 times that of the secondary.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 5. CONCLUSION
hedgedconditionalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because the lifetime of a circumplanetary disk could be longer for planets at large semi-major axis, light detected from outer exoplanets such as Fomalhaut b may arise from such a disk.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 5. CONCLUSION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Regardless of the nature of the disked companion of J1407 (low-mass star, brown dwarf, or gas giant planet), detailed observations of future eclipses should provide useful constraints on either circumsecondary or circumplanetary disk structure and the early evolution of planets and/or satellites.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 5. CONCLUSION
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The densest of Saturn's named rings-the B ring-has a radially averaged optical depth of order unity and surface density of ∼50 g cm -2 (Zebker et al. 1985;de Pater & Lissauer 2001;Tiscareno 2012), implying an approximate opacity of κ ∼ 0.02 cm 2 g -1 .”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.7. A Preliminary Model
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Zebker et al. 1985 source
- Not matchedcites de Pater & Lissauer 2001
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Tiscareno 2012
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Even given LSST's proposed field revisit time (∼3 days, but twice per night), a J1407-like eclipse would have been easily detected.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 5. CONCLUSION
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“As has been proposed for this system, the asymmetry of the eclipse could be due to the impact parameter of the disk with respect to the line of sight (Mikolajewski & Graczyk 1999).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 5. CONCLUSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Mikolajewski & Graczyk 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such eclipses seen among young stars may provide remarkable laboratories for testing satellite and planet formation scenarios.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 5. CONCLUSION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This star was selected to be in the appropriate age range and could host either a circumplanetary disk or a lower mass secondary star with a disk.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 5. CONCLUSION
hedgedSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The systematic difference is mostly due to SuperWASP-V being calibrated to the Tycho V T band(Pollacco et al. 2006), whereas the ASAS is converted to the Johnson V system via Hipparcos(Pojmanski 2002).”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 5. CONCLUSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Pollacco et al. 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Pojmanski 2002
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The ratio of a few hours (or a quarter day) to the half eclipse length is about 0.01, suggesting that the disk has an extremely low aspect ratio of h/r 0.01.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.7. A Preliminary Model
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To estimate the probability of detecting a circumplanetary disk eclipse, we must consider the number of stars that host gas giant planets.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 4.1. Probability of Seeing Eclipses by Circumplanetary Disks
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Adopting this mass opacity for J1407's dust annuli, the thick inner disk would have a mass of ∼0.8 M Moon , the two rings shown would have masses of ∼0.2 and ∼0.1 M Moon , and the outermost ring would contain ∼0.5 M Moon of dust mass.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.7. A Preliminary Model
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We estimate that eclipses from the thick inner circumplanetary disks that spawn regular satellite systems around gas giants may last for days; however, tenuous outer disks of lower optical depths to larger fractions of the Hill radius could persist for weeks, depending on the planet's mass and semi-major axis.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 5. CONCLUSION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This probability is very low and implies that high-cadence monitoring of many stars is required to detect circumplanetary disk eclipses.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 4.1. Probability of Seeing Eclipses by Circumplanetary Disks
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A system with a recurring circumplanetary eclipse would make it possible to study eclipses in depth, so discovery of systems with short orbital periods is important.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 4.1. Probability of Seeing Eclipses by Circumplanetary Disks
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Constraints from the gas giant satellite systems in our own solar system suggest that their circumplanetary disk structures could have produced quite complex eclipses if seen in transit, with dense inner regions, gaps where satellite formation is taking place, and low-density disks possibly extending to large fractions of the Hill radius.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 5. CONCLUSION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The authors state this as an assumption.
The rings have optical opacity similar to Saturn's rings.
“(if the rings have optical opacity similar to Saturn's rings)”
The authors state this as an assumption.
ξ is similar for different circumplanetary disks.
“If ξ is similar for different circumplanetary disks”
The paper relies on this without support.
The radii of circumstellar and circumplanetary disks can vastly exceed those of stars and planets.
“The radii of circumstellar and circumplanetary disks can vastly exceed those of stars and planets.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Natural satellites are a ubiquitous feature among the giant planets in our solar system, and most likely among extrasolar gas giants.
“natural satellites are a ubiquitous feature among the giant planets in our solar system, and most likely among extrasolar gas giants.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The tidal deformations of the primary and secondary objects are negligible.
“we assume the tidal deformations of both objects to be negligible because the length of the eclipse and minimum period implies a large disk and distance to the primary”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The disk and rings are thin debris disks of dust with uniform density and opacity.
“The disk and rings are assumed to be thin debris disks of dust with uniform density and opacity.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The gaps in the disk are twice the Hill radius of an object embedded in the disk.
“If we assume that the gaps are twice the Hill radius of an objected embedded in the disk”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The disk is of similar size to typical planetary orbits (about 10 AU) in the one-time occultation scenario.
“Assuming the disk to be of similar size to typical planetary orbits (∼10 AU)”
The paper relies on this without support.
The gas giant frequency f_g ~ 0.05 derived for FGK field stars applies to the young pre-MS sample considered.
“The distribution gives a probability of an FGK star hosting a gas giant between 1-5 AU (365-1825 days), interior to this (2-365 days), and from 5-20 AU, in each case of about f g ∼ 0.05 or 5%.”
“Restricting our study to planets between 1 and 5 AU (with f g ∼ 0.05) and monitoring them for 10 years (approximately the orbital time at 5 AU for ∼1 M ), the above fraction f c suggests that if we monitor 10 4 stars 10 7 years old, then ∼2 of them should exhibit circumplanetary disk eclipses.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Circumplanetary disks can persist after circumstellar disk dissipation with sufficient optical depth to produce detectable eclipses.
“We consider a sample of stars restricted so that they have already depleted circumstellar disks (i.e., are post-accretion pre-MS stars) but are young enough that they could host circumplanetary disks of sufficient optical depth to produce detectable eclipses.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“Given Keplerian circular orbits for J1407b, any period greater than 14 to 15 years is improbable considering they cannot explain the high orbital velocity derived from the rate of change of the light curve (Mamajek et al. 2012; Kenworthy et al. 2015).”
From Constraining the period of the ringed secondary companion to the young star J1407 with photographic plates (2018) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This has been interpreted as the first detection of an eclipsing ring system circling a substellar object (dubbed J1407b).”
From Mass and period limits on the ringed companion transiting the young star J1407 (2015) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“No other eclipses of J1407 are observed over the nine year span of data from WASP-South and ASAS as reported in Mamajek et al. (2012), with a period search excluding all periods P < 850 d.”
From Mass and period limits on the ringed companion transiting the young star J1407 (2015) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The star therefore appears to be a weak-lined T Tauri star, not hosting its own circumstellar disk, and is a young ( ∼ 16 Myr) solar analogue ( M ∼ 0.9 M ⊙ ).”
From Mass and period limits on the ringed companion transiting the young star J1407 (2015) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“We then follow the observing techniques devised in Dumusque et al. (2011) to mitigate stellar astrophysical noise: observations were scheduled by blocks of three spectra obtained on consecutive nights, to approximately match the rotation period of the star (Mamajek et al. 2012).”
From Mass and period limits on the ringed companion transiting the young star J1407 (2015) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“1SWASP J140747.93-394542.6 (hereafter J1407) is a pre-main-sequence, ∼16 Myr old, 0.9 M , V = 12.3 mag K5 star at 133 pc associated with the Sco-Cen OB association (Mamajek et al. 2012;van Werkhoven et al. 2014;Kenworthy et al. 2015).”
From MODELING GIANT EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEMS IN ECLIPSE AND THE CASE OF J1407B: SCULPTING BY EXOMOONS? (2015) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This light curve is interpreted as the transit of a giant ring system that is filling up a fraction of the Hill sphere of an unseen secondary companion, J1407b.”
From MODELING GIANT EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEMS IN ECLIPSE AND THE CASE OF J1407B: SCULPTING BY EXOMOONS? (2015) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“In the first attempt to model the system using nightly averaged photometry, Mamajek et al. (2012) posited at least four large rings girding J1407b.”
From MODELING GIANT EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEMS IN ECLIPSE AND THE CASE OF J1407B: SCULPTING BY EXOMOONS? (2015) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Using photometry averaged in 24 hr bins, a ring model with four broad rings is consistent with data on these timescales (Mamajek et al. 2012).”
From MODELING GIANT EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEMS IN ECLIPSE AND THE CASE OF J1407B: SCULPTING BY EXOMOONS? (2015) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The light curve of 1SWASP J140747.93-394542.6,a ∼16 Myr old star in the Sco-Cen OB association, underwent a complex series of deep eclipses that lasted 56 days, centered on 2007 April.”
From MODELING GIANT EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEMS IN ECLIPSE AND THE CASE OF J1407B: SCULPTING BY EXOMOONS? (2015) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“interpreted as the transit of a giant Hill sphere filling debris ring system around a secondary companion, J1407b.”
From Constraining the period of the ringed secondary companion to the young star J1407 with photographic plates (2018) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“In 2007, it displayed a complex symmetric dimming pattern of up to 3 magnitudes during a 56 day eclipse.”
From A search for transiting companions in the J1407 (V1400 Cen) system (2021) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“J1407 is a young star and has X-ray emission consistent with saturation (log LX = LBOL = 3 : 4; Mamajek et al. 2012)”
From A search for transiting companions in the J1407 (V1400 Cen) system (2021) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This indicates that the rings are geometrically thin (with a height-todiameter ratio hring = dring 0 : 001; Mamajek et al. 2012)”
From ALMA and NACO observations towards the young exoring transit system J1407 (V1400 Cen) (2020) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Analysis of the optical light curve show sharp transitions in optical depth, implying the presence of discontinuities in particle density with ring radius, very similar to the rings of Saturn.”
From ALMA and NACO observations towards the young exoring transit system J1407 (V1400 Cen) (2020) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Expectations suggest that these circumplanetary discs are large (order of AU) and should be clearly visible as transits in time-series photometry (Mamajek et al. 2012).”
From Beyond Circular Eclipsers (BeyonCE) light curve modelling: I. Shallot Explorer (2024) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Based on the absence of a second eclipse, the authors constrain the period P > 2.33 yr, yielding an orbital radius greater than 17 au and a circular orbital velocity less than 21.7 km s -foot_1 (assuming m 1 = 0.9 M ).”
From Analysis of 1SWASP J140747.93−394542.6 eclipse fine-structure: hints of exomoons (2014) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The central eclipse is surrounded by two 1 mag eclipses at ±12 and ±26 d.”
From Analysis of 1SWASP J140747.93−394542.6 eclipse fine-structure: hints of exomoons (2014) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“They propose a preliminary 4-ring model with a central opaque disc accompanied by three discrete rings with opacities τ = 0.5, 0.2, 0.05.”
From Analysis of 1SWASP J140747.93−394542.6 eclipse fine-structure: hints of exomoons (2014) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This ratio of the variability time-scale of an hour over half the eclipse duration of 54 d implies an aspect ratio of the disc of h/r ≈ 0.0015, confirming earlier findings by Mamajek et al. (2012).”
From Analysis of 1SWASP J140747.93−394542.6 eclipse fine-structure: hints of exomoons (2014) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The multiple CCDs of SuperWASP provide significantly different light curves, as observed by Mamajek et al. (2012) and Norton et al. (2011).”
From Analysis of 1SWASP J140747.93−394542.6 eclipse fine-structure: hints of exomoons (2014) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Using the revised intrinsic colours for K5 pre-MS stars, and the BVJHK s photometry for J1407 compiled inMamajek et al. (2012), we estimate that the star is statistically consistent with being unreddened, but adopt extinction A J = 0.02 ± 0.02 (A V = 0.06 ± 0.06 mag).”
From Analysis of 1SWASP J140747.93−394542.6 eclipse fine-structure: hints of exomoons (2014) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“J1407 (1SWASP J140747.93-394542.6 in full) is a young star in the Scorpius-Centaurus OB association that underwent a series of complex eclipses over 56 days in 2007.”
From Constraints on the size and dynamics of the J1407b ring system (2016) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“a series of papers investigating the J1407 system (Mamajek et al. 2012;Van Werkhoven et al. 2014;Kenworthy et al. 2015;Kenworthy & Mamajek 2015) conclude that there is a secondary substellar companion (called J1407b) with a giant multi-ring system in orbit around the primary star.”
From Constraints on the size and dynamics of the J1407b ring system (2016) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Since the height to diameter ratio of the J1407b exorings is <0.01 (Mamajek et al. 2012), we limit our model to be co-planar with the secondary's orbit.”
From Constraints on the size and dynamics of the J1407b ring system (2016) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Given that the height to diameter ratio of the J1407b exorings is <0.01 (Mamajek et al. 2012) and that there is radial structure at all spatial scales, the system is dynamically cold and any such retrograde generating event must have happened a dynamically long time ago.”
From Constraints on the size and dynamics of the J1407b ring system (2016) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The young ( ∼ 16 Myr) pre-main-sequence star in Sco-Cen 1SWASP J140747.93394542.6, hereafter referred to as J1407, underwent a deep eclipse in 2007 April, bracketed by several shallower eclipses in the surrounding 54 d.”
From Mass and period limits on the ringed companion transiting the young star J1407 (2015) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The star therefore appears to be a weak-lined T Tauri star, not hosting its own circumstellar disk, and is a young ( ∼ 16 Myr) solar analogue ( M ∼ 0.9 M ⊙ ).”
From Mass and period limits on the ringed companion transiting the young star J1407 (2015) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The T eff inferred from the SED fit is consistent with previous estimates (Mamajek et al. 2012; van Werkhoven et al. 2014) and the spectral type estimate (K4.8) from the MIKE analysis (§2.4).”
From Mass and period limits on the ringed companion transiting the young star J1407 (2015) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The measured RV is consistent with J1407's membership in the UCL subgroup of Sco-Cen, as proposed by Mamajek et al. (2012).”
From Mass and period limits on the ringed companion transiting the young star J1407 (2015) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“There is no evidence of flux from this companion, indicating that it is a very low mass star, brown dwarf, or perhaps even a gas giant planet (Mamajek et al. 2012).”
From Mass and period limits on the ringed companion transiting the young star J1407 (2015) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“We can place strong constraints on the nature of the companion detected in transit in Mamajek et al. (2012) for circular orbits.”
From Mass and period limits on the ringed companion transiting the young star J1407 (2015) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“We interpret the 56-day J1407 light-curve event centered on UT 2007 April 30 as being due to a highly structured ring system surrounding an unseen secondary companion, supporting the conclusions in Mamajek et al. (2012), van Werkhoven et al. (2014), and Kenworthy et al. (2015).”
From MODELING GIANT EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEMS IN ECLIPSE AND THE CASE OF J1407B: SCULPTING BY EXOMOONS? (2015) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“is a probable kinematic member of the ScoCen OB Association (Mamajek et al. 2012; Pecaut & Mamajek 2016).”
From Constraining the period of the ringed secondary companion to the young star J1407 with photographic plates (2018) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The 16 Myr old star 1SWASP J140747.93-394542.6 (V1400 Cen) underwent a series of complex eclipses in May 2007, interpreted as the transit of a giant Hill sphere filling debris ring system around a secondary companion, J1407b.”
From Constraining the period of the ringed secondary companion to the young star J1407 with photographic plates (2018) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The photometric variability during the transit ranges on timescales from hours through to months, suggesting a large coherent structure of the order of 1 AU in diameter.”
From Constraining the period of the ringed secondary companion to the young star J1407 with photographic plates (2018) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“These light curves show that the star underwent a complex series of deep transits lasting 56 days around 2007 May and includes a maximum dimming of > 95%.”
From ALMA and NACO observations towards the young exoring transit system J1407 (V1400 Cen) (2020) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“1SWASP J140747.93-394542.6 (hereafter J1407) is a premain-sequence, 16 Myr old, 0 : 9 M , V = 12 : 3 mag K5 star with parallax 7 : 1835 0 : 0447 mas (Gaia Collaboration et al. 2018), consistent with d = 138 : 7 0 : 6 pc (Bailer-Jones et al. 2018) and membership of the Sco-Cen OB association (Mamajek et al. 2012).”
From ALMA and NACO observations towards the young exoring transit system J1407 (V1400 Cen) (2020) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In 2007 the active young solar mass star J1407, also known as V1400 Centauri, was observed to have an unusually long and complex transit of ~56 days (Mamajek et al., 2012).”
From A Self-Gravitating Exoring Around J1407b and Implications for In-Situ Exomoon Formation (2022) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al., 2012
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Equation ( 14) is equivalent to equation 10 in Mamajek et al. (2012), although the authors missed a factor π in their equation.”
From Analysis of 1SWASP J140747.93−394542.6 eclipse fine-structure: hints of exomoons (2014) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“A recently discovered V = 12.3 mag K5 pre-main-sequence star in the SuperWASP (Super Wide Angle Search for Planets) data base shows a peculiar light curve with a highly structured eclipse pattern covering a timespan of at least 54 d with maximum dimming of at least 3.3 mag.”
From Analysis of 1SWASP J140747.93−394542.6 eclipse fine-structure: hints of exomoons (2014) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In summary, the most significant change to the adopted parameters for J1407 is that the estimate radius is about 18 per cent larger compared to Mamajek et al. (2012).”
From Analysis of 1SWASP J140747.93−394542.6 eclipse fine-structure: hints of exomoons (2014) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Mamajek et al. (2012) find that the J1407 light curve shows a variability of approximately 3.21 d in the SuperWASP data, as expected from rotational modulation of star spots and a young star of ∼16 Myr.”
From Analysis of 1SWASP J140747.93−394542.6 eclipse fine-structure: hints of exomoons (2014) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“While the first night is compatible with the 21.7 km s -1 upper limit found by Mamajek et al. (2012), the second night is not.”
From Analysis of 1SWASP J140747.93−394542.6 eclipse fine-structure: hints of exomoons (2014) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The minimum speeds derived only from the light-curve slopes, stellar radius and limb darkening are incompatible with both the minimum period of 2.3 yr found by Mamajek et al. (2012), in spite of the large uncertainties on stellar properties.”
From Analysis of 1SWASP J140747.93−394542.6 eclipse fine-structure: hints of exomoons (2014) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The scenario Mamajek et al. (2012) propose involves a circumsecondary or circumplanetary disc, which obscures the primary star, J1407.”
From Analysis of 1SWASP J140747.93−394542.6 eclipse fine-structure: hints of exomoons (2014) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“While the first night is compatible with the 21.7 km s -1 upper limit found by Mamajek et al. (2012), the second night is not.”
From Analysis of 1SWASP J140747.93−394542.6 eclipse fine-structure: hints of exomoons (2014) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Adopting the spectral type of K5±1 from Mamajek et al. (2012), and the intrinsic properties of K5 pre-MS stars from Pecaut & Mamajek (2013), we estimate slightly revised stellar parameters: T eff = 4140 +190-120 K and BC J 1.58 ± 0.06 mag.”
From Analysis of 1SWASP J140747.93−394542.6 eclipse fine-structure: hints of exomoons (2014) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The minimum speeds derived only from the light-curve slopes, stellar radius and limb darkening are incompatible with both the minimum period of 2.3 yr found by Mamajek et al. (2012), in spite of the large uncertainties on stellar properties.”
From Analysis of 1SWASP J140747.93−394542.6 eclipse fine-structure: hints of exomoons (2014) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. (2012)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“We therefore conclude that a giant ring system as proposed in Mamajek et al. (2012) can be a dynamically stable solution, but only if the rings are on a retrograde orbit, for relatively large masses of J1407b.”
From Constraints on the size and dynamics of the J1407b ring system (2016) · cites this paper as Mamajek et al. 2012
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated major: it would touch a result — a value a result rests on, reported and recomputed p-values on opposite sides of the significance level, two passages that conflict with no sign which is right, or a cited work retracted before this paper was published.
In the paper
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > Abstract
“For possible periods in the range 2.33-200 yr, the estimated total ring mass is ∼8-0.4M Moon”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.7. A Preliminary Model
“the total ring mass ranges from ∼3.6 M Moon for P = 2.33 yr to ∼0.8 M Moon for P = 200 yr.”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.7. A Preliminary Model
“a thick inner disk with τ ⊥ = 0.5 and outer radius 76R c”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 4. THE PROBABILITY OF SEEING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY OR CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS IN A SAMPLE OF YOUNG STARS
“"Rochester" 1? 81 3.0 0.5 0.8”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.4. Rotation Period and X-Ray Emission
“L X = 10 29.8 erg s -1 and log(L X /L bol ) -3.4 dex.”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.4. Rotation Period and X-Ray Emission
“perfectly consistent with the observed ROSAT X-ray flux (log(L X /L bol ) -3.2)”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 3.7. A Preliminary Model
“orbital period 9862 days (a = 8.7 AU)”
§ PLANETARY CONSTRUCTION ZONES IN OCCULTATION: DISCOVERY OF AN EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEM TRANSITING A YOUNG SUN-LIKE STAR AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR DETECTING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY AND CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS > 4. THE PROBABILITY OF SEEING ECLIPSES BY CIRCUMSECONDARY OR CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS IN A SAMPLE OF YOUNG STARS
“This model assumes a companion orbital period of 27 years (a = 9.7 AU)”
Citations
Cites
The Two Micron All Sky Survey (2MASS)
Skrutskie, M. F., Cutri, R. M., Stiening, R., Weinberg, M. D., Schneider, S., Carpenter, J. M., Beichman, C., Capps, R., Chester, T., Elias, J., et al. (2006) · The Astronomical Journal · doi:10.1086/498708 · Cited by 12,019 · cited 1×
“1) is consistent with a lightly reddened K5 star (E(B-V) = 0.09, AV ≃ 0.32 mag), with no evidence for infrared excess (via 2MASS and WISE preliminary release photometry; Skrutskie et al. 2006; Wright et al. 2010).”
BackgroundInfluentialTHE WIDE-FIELD INFRARED SURVEY EXPLORER (WISE): MISSION DESCRIPTION AND INITIAL ON-ORBIT PERFORMANCE
Wright, E. L., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Mainzer, A. K., Ressler, M. E., Cutri, R. M., Jarrett, T., Kirkpatrick, J. D., Padgett, D., McMillan, R. S., Skrutskie, M., et al. (2010) · The Astronomical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868 · Cited by 7,987
LSST: from Science Drivers to Reference Design and Anticipated Data Products
Ivezić, Ž., Kahn, S. M., Tyson, J. A., Abel, B., Acosta, E., Allsman, R., Alonso, D., AlSayyad, Y., Anderson, S. F., Andrew, J., et al. (2008) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.0805.2366 · Cited by 4,357
LSST: From Science Drivers to Reference Design and Anticipated Data Products
Ivezić, Ž., Kahn, S. M., Tyson, J. A., Abel, B., Acosta, E., Allsman, R., Alonso, D., AlSayyad, Y., Anderson, S. F., Andrew, J., et al. (2019) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab042c · Cited by 4,357
Self-citationNumerical recipes in Fortran (The art of scientific computing)
Ames, W. F., & Brezinski, C. (1993) · Mathematics and Computers in Simulation · doi:10.1016/0378-4754(93)90043-t · Cited by 4,306
Reipurth, B., Jewitt, D. C., & Keil, K. (2007) · Cited by 2,831
Maehara, H., Soyano, T., & Skiff, B. A. (2009) · VizieR Online Data Catalog · Cited by 2,684
Realization of Accurate Close-Binary Light Curves: Application to MR Cygni
WILSON, R. E., & Devinney, E. J. (1971) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/150986 · Cited by 2,301 · cited 1×
“Light from the primary star is modeled as a collection of spherically symmetric points (Wilson & Devinney 1971) and a secondary star or planet modeled as a sphere (we assume the tidal deformations of both objects to be negligible because the length of the eclipse and minimum period implies a large…”
Background(1993) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.31-2093 · Cited by 2,161
New limb-darkening coefficients for modeling binary star light curves
Hamme, W. V. (1993) · The Astronomical Journal · doi:10.1086/116788 · Cited by 1,492 · cited 1×
“Limb darkening was calculated following van Hamme (1993).”
Method
Research works printed but not linked: 15
- Baraffe, 1998, A&A, 337, 403
- Cutri, 2003, VizieR Online Data Catalog, 2246, 0
- D'Antona, 1997, Mem. Soc. Astron. Ital., 68, 807
- de Pater, 2001, Planetary Sciences, 544
- Duchêne, 2007, Protostars and Planets V, 379
- Graczyk, 2011, Acta Astron., 61, 103
- Khaliullin, 2006, IBVS, 5722, 1
- Monin, 2007, Protostars and Planets V, 395
- Pecaut, 2011, ApJ
- Perryman, 1997, The Hipparcos and Tycho Catalogues, 1200
- Pojmanski, 2002, Acta Astron., 52, 397
- Preibisch, 2008, Handbook of Star Forming Regions, II, 235
- Siess, 2000, A&A, 358, 593
- Voges, 1999, A&A, 349, 389
- Voges, 2000, IAU Circ., 7432, 3
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Pecaut, M. J., & Mamajek, E. E. (2016) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1300 · Cited by 407
Self-citationPlanet Hunters IX. KIC 8462852 - Where's the Flux?
Boyajian, T. S., LaCourse, D. M., Rappaport, S. A., Fabrycky, D., Fischer, D. A., Gandolfi, D., Kennedy, G. M., Korhonen, H., Liu, M. C., Moor, A., et al. (2016) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stw218 · Cited by 291
“93−394542.6 (normally called ‘J1407’, Mamajek et al. 2012; van Werkhoven et al. 2014; Kenworthy & Mamajek 2015).”
BackgroundInfluentialWōtan: Comprehensive Time-series Detrending in Python
Hippke, M., David, T. J., Mulders, G. D., & Heller, R. (2019) · The Astronomical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab3984 · Cited by 249
Mann, A. W., Newton, E. R., Rizzuto, A. C., Irwin, J., Feiden, G. A., Gaidos, E. J., Mace, G. N., Kraus, A. L., James, D. J., Ansdell, M., et al. (2016) · The Astronomical Journal · doi:10.3847/0004-6256/152/3/61 · Cited by 195
“Indeed the only close-in planet (candidates) around < 20Myr old stars are from transit surveys (van Eyken et al. 2012; Mamajek et al. 2012; Kenworthy et al. 2015, e.g.,).”
BackgroundSize distribution of particles in Saturn’s rings from aggregation and fragmentation
Brilliantov, N., Krapivsky, P., Bodrova, A., Spahn, F., Hayakawa, H., Stadnichuk, V., & Schmidt, J. (2013) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · doi:10.1073/pnas.1503957112 · Cited by 147
“The same size distributions are expected for other collision dominated rings, as the rings of Uranus [42, 43], Chariklo [44, 45] and Chiron [46, 47], and possibly around extrasolar objects [48, 49, 50].”
BackgroundExomoon Habitability Constrained by Illumination and Tidal Heating
Heller, R., & Barnes, R. (2013) · Astrobiology · doi:10.1089/ast.2012.0859 · Cited by 146
βPICTORIS’ INNER DISK IN POLARIZED LIGHT AND NEW ORBITAL PARAMETERS FORβPICTORISb
Millar‐Blanchaer, M. A., Graham, J. R., Pueyo, L. A., Kalas, P., Dawson, R. I., Wang, J., Perrin, M. D., Moon, D., Macintosh, B., Ammons, S. M., et al. (2015) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/811/1/18 · Cited by 131
“Indeed the transit of a ring system surrounding an exoplanet was recently detected around J1407 (Mamajek et al. 2012).”
BackgroundMODELING GIANT EXTRASOLAR RING SYSTEMS IN ECLIPSE AND THE CASE OF J1407B: SCULPTING BY EXOMOONS?
Kenworthy, M. A., & Mamajek, E. E. (2015) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/800/2/126 · Cited by 123
“In the first attempt to model the system using nightly averaged photometry, Mamajek et al. (2012) posited at least four large rings girding J1407b.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialSelf-citationACCRETION ONTO PLANETARY MASS COMPANIONS OF LOW-MASS YOUNG STARS
Zhou, Y., Herczeg, G. J., Kraus, A. L., Metchev, S., & Cruz, K. L. (2014) · The Astrophysical Journal Letters · doi:10.1088/2041-8205/783/1/l17 · Cited by 114
Evryscope Science: Exploring the Potential of All-Sky Gigapixel-Scale Telescopes
Law, N. M., Fors, O., Ratzloff, J., Wulfken, P., Kavanaugh, D., Sitar, D. J., Pruett, Z., Birchard, M. N., Barlow, B. N., Cannon, K., et al. (2015) · Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific · doi:10.1086/680521 · Cited by 104
“…disks should be easy to detect as disappearing or dimming stars in the Evryscope survey, especially in star-formation regions, where monitoring only ∼10; 000 targets could produce several dustdisk eclipse events on the timescales of the Evryscope survey (Mamajek et al. 2012; Kenworthy et al. 2015).”
BackgroundTHE ORBIT AND TRANSIT PROSPECTS FOR β PICTORIS b CONSTRAINED WITH ONE MILLIARCSECOND ASTROMETRY
Wang, J. J., Graham, J. R., Pueyo, L. A., Kalas, P., Millar-Blanchaer, M. A., Ruffio, J.-B., Rosa, R. J. D., Ammons, S. M., Arriaga, P., Bailey, V. P., et al. (2016) · The Astronomical Journal · doi:10.3847/0004-6256/152/4/97 · Cited by 99
“93-394542.6 (hereafter J1407) system, which has a similar age (∼16Myr; Mamajek et al. 2012) and thus likely at a similar stage in its evolution.”
BackgroundInfluentialKipping, D., Hartman, J. D., Buchhave, L. A., et al. (2013) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/770/2/101 · Cited by 98
“At best, one can interpret the possible detection of a circumplanetary disc by Mamajek et al. (2012) as a putative moon-forming region.”
BackgroundWright, J. T., Cartier, K. M. S., Zhao, M., Jontof-Hutter, D., & Ford, E. B. (2015) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.3847/0004-637x/816/1/17 · Cited by 115
“93-394542.6 (Mamajek et al. 2012; Kenworthy & Mamajek 2015), an apparent ringed proto-planet around a pre-Main Sequence star, and EE Cep (Graczyk et al. 2003; Ga lan et al. 2010), a Be star occulted every 5.6 y by an object with what appears to be a large, almost gray, disk.”
BackgroundInfluentialOUTCOMES AND DURATION OF TIDAL EVOLUTION IN A STAR-PLANET-MOON SYSTEM
Sasaki, T., Barnes, J. W., & O'Brien, D. P. (2012) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/754/1/51 · Cited by 86
“It is likely that the mechanisms for moon formation in our solar system (impact, capture, and coaccretion) prevail beyond it (Mamajek et al. 2012).”
BackgroundEvryscope Science: Exploring the Potential of All-Sky Gigapixel-Scale Telescopes
Law, N. M., Fors Aldrich, O., Ratzloff, J. K., Wulken, P., Kavanaugh, D., Sitar, D. J., Pruett, Z. R., Birchard, M. N., Barlow, B. N., Cannon, K. C., et al. (2015) · Dipòsit Digital de la Universitat de Barcelona (Universitat de Barcelona) · Cited by 79
Meshkat, T., Mawet, D. P., Bryan, M. L., Hinkley, S., Bowler, B. P., Stapelfeldt, K. R., Batygin, K., Padgett, D., Morales, F. Y., Serabyn, E., et al. (2017) · The Astronomical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa8e9a · Cited by 80
“…M08: Mamajek & Hillenbrand (2008), Me09: Metchev et al. (2009), M09: Moór et al. (2009), M10: Maldonado et al. (2010), M11: Moór et al. (2011), M12: Mamajek et al. (2012), M13: Meshkat et al. (2013), M15: Meshkat et al. (2015), N04: Nordström et al. (2004), P09: Plavchan et al. (2009), P12:…”
THE ORBIT AND TRANSIT PROSPECTS FOR β PICTORIS b CONSTRAINED WITH ONE MILLIARCSECOND ASTROMETRY
Wang, J., Graham, Jr., Pueyo, L. A., Kalas, P., Millar-Blanchaer, M., Ruffio, J.-B., Rosa, R., Ammons, S., Arriaga, P., Bailey, V. P., et al. (2016) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · Cited by 71
A NOVEL METHOD FOR IDENTIFYING EXOPLANETARY RINGS
Zuluaga, J. I., Kipping, D., Sucerquia, M., & Alvarado-Montes, J. A. (2015) · The Astrophysical Journal Letters · doi:10.1088/2041-8205/803/1/l14 · Cited by 82
“…such as oblateness (Carter & Winn 2010; Leconte et al. 2011), magnetic bow shocks (Vidotto et al. 2010), exomoons (Kipping 2009; Heller et al. 2014), and exoplanetary rings or “exorings” (Barnes & Fortney 2004; Ohta et al. 2009; Tusnski & Valio 2011; Mamajek et al. 2012; Kenworthy & Mamajek 2015).”
BackgroundON THE VIABILITY OF THE MAGNETOROTATIONAL INSTABILITY IN CIRCUMPLANETARY DISKS
Fujii, Y., Okuzumi, S., Tanigawa, T., & Inutsuka, S. (2014) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/785/2/101 · Cited by 44
“Thus, perhaps we are more likely to be able to observe circumplanetary disks than previously thought (e.g., Mamajek et al. 2012), and satellite formation may occur over a long timescale.”
BackgroundAN ALMA DISK MASS FOR THE CANDIDATE PROTOPLANETARY COMPANION TO FW TAU
Kraus, A. L., Andrews, S. M., Bowler, B. P., Herczeg, G. J., Ireland, M., Liu, M. C., Metchev, S., & Cruz, K. L. (2014) · The Astrophysical Journal Letters · doi:10.1088/2041-8205/798/1/l23 · Cited by 60
“93-394542.6 (Mamajek et al. 2012; Kenworthy et al. 2015).”
InfluentialPerryman, M. A. C. (2011) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511994852.011 · Cited by 71
Estimating Tropical Forest Structure Using a Terrestrial Lidar
Palace, M., Sullivan, F. B., Ducey, M. J., et al. (2016) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0154115 · Cited by 57
ALMA MEASUREMENTS OF CIRCUMSTELLAR MATERIAL IN THE GQ LUP SYSTEM
MacGregor, M. A., Wilner, D. J., Czekala, I., Andrews, S. M., Dai, Y. S., Herczeg, G. J., Kratter, K. M., Kraus, A. L., Ricci, L., & Testi, L. (2017) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/17 · Cited by 59
“There is also evidence for circumplanetary disks around planets at closer separations from photometric transit surveys (J1407, see Mamajek et al. 2012).”
BackgroundFAMILIES OF PLAUSIBLE SOLUTIONS TO THE PUZZLE OF BOYAJIAN’S STAR
Wright, J. T., & Sigurd̵sson, S. (2016) · The Astrophysical Journal Letters · doi:10.3847/2041-8205/829/1/l3 · Cited by 71
“93-394542.6 (Mamajek et al. 2012; Kenworthy & Mamajek 2015, an apparent ringed protoplanet around a pre-main-sequence star), although we find it more likely that the disk would be in the field than in orbit around Boyajianʼs Star (Section 8.4).”
BackgroundInfluentialOCCULTATION OF THE T TAURI STAR RW AURIGAE A BY ITS TIDALLY DISRUPTED DISK
Rodriguez, J. E., Pepper, J. A., Stassun, K. G., Siverd, R. J., Cargile, P., Beatty, T. G., & Gaudi, B. S. (2013) · The Astronomical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-6256/146/5/112 · Cited by 58
“Photometric variability was seen during the eclipse and attributed to gaps in the large ring system around the hypothesized planet (Mamajek et al. 2012).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialPERIODIC AND APERIODIC VARIABILITY IN THE MOLECULAR CLOUD ρ OPHIUCHUS
Parks, J. R., Plavchan, P. P., White, R. J., & Gee, A. H. (2014) · The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series · doi:10.1088/0067-0049/211/1/3 · Cited by 49
“93-394542.6 (’J1407’) (Mamajek et al. 2012).”
BackgroundInfluentialIdentification of Young Stellar Variables with KELT for K2. I. Taurus Dippers and Rotators
Rodriguez, J. E., Ansdell, M., Oelkers, R. J., Cargile, P. A., Gaidos, E. J., Cody, A. M., Stevens, D. J., Somers, G., James, D. J., Beatty, T. G., et al. (2017) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa8c78 · Cited by 47
“…to circumstellar extinction (Herbst et al. 1994; Chelli et al. 1999; Alencar et al. 2010), occultations by an orbiting body in Keplerian motion (Mamajek et al. 2012; Bouvier et al. 2013; Rodriguez et al. 2013, 2016b), or accretion — either in a disk or onto the star (Bertout et al. 1988;…”
BackgroundOPTIMIZED PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS ON CORONAGRAPHIC IMAGES OF THE FOMALHAUT SYSTEM
Meshkat, T., Kenworthy, M. A., Quanz, S. P., & Amara, A. (2013) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/780/1/17 · Cited by 44
“We convert the best 7σ detection contrast curve to an upper mass limit for planets using the Baraffe et al. (2003) and Spiegel & Burrows (2012) atmospheric models (Figure 8) assuming an age of 440 Myr (Mamajek et al. 2012).”
MethodSelf-citationCiardi, D. R., van Eyken, J. C., Barnes, J. W., Beichman, C., Carey, S. J., Crockett, C., Eastman, J. D., Johns‐Krull, C. M., Howell, S. B., Kane, S. R., et al. (2015) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/809/1/42 · Cited by 44
“Evidence has been found for extra-solar rings around a 16 Myr-old pre-main sequence star in the Upper Centaurus-Lupus subgroup of Sco-Cen, possibly indicative of early planet formation around a T Tauri star (Mamajek et al. 2012).”
BackgroundFaramaz, V., Krist, J., Stapelfeldt, K. R., Bryden, G., Mamajek, E. E., Matrà, L., Booth, M., Flaherty, K., Hales, A. S., Hughes, A. M., et al. (2019) · The Astronomical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab3ec1 · Cited by 43
“…time such a massive circumplanetary ring system has been detected, as a massive (0.4-8, and possibly up to 100 Moon’s masses) ring system has been inferred in the 2MASS J140747923945427 system through a complex series of eclipses of the host star (Mamajek et al. 2012; Kenworthy & Mamajek 2015).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationAnother deep dimming of the classical T Tauri star RW Aurigae A
Petrov, P. P., Gahm, G. F., Djupvik, A. A., et al. (2015) · Astronomy and Astrophysics · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201525845 · Cited by 40
“We note that a few other weakline TTS have shown more extended eclipses by foreground dust (see e.g., Grinin et al. 2008; ; Mamajek et al. 2012).”
BackgroundCORONAGRAPHIC OBSERVATIONS OF FOMALHAUT AT SOLAR SYSTEM SCALES
Kenworthy, M. A., Meshkat, T., Quanz, S. P., Girard, J. H., Meyer, M. R., & Kasper, M. E. (2013) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/764/1/7 · Cited by 37
“In Mamajek (2012) the companionship is further confirmed and an improved isochronal age increases the age to 440±40 Myr, which is the age we adopt in this paper.”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationGinski, C., Benisty, M., van Holstein, R. G., Juhász, A., Schmidt, T. O. B., Chauvin, G., de Boer, J., Wilby, M., Manara, C. F., Delorme, P., et al. (2018) · Astronomy and Astrophysics · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201732417 · Cited by 37
“93-394542.6 system (Mamajek et al. 2012; Kenworthy et al. 2015).”
InfluentialSelf-citationInsights into Planet Formation from Debris Disks
Wyatt, M. C., & Jackson, A. P. (2016) · Space Science Reviews · doi:10.1007/s11214-016-0248-1 · Cited by 40
“93-394542.6 (Mamajek et al. 2012; Kenworthy and Mamajek 2015).”
InfluentialMass and period limits on the ringed companion transiting the young star J1407
Kenworthy, M. A., Lacour, S., Kraus, A., Triaud, A. H. M. J., Mamajek, E. E., Scott, E. L., Ségransan, D., Ireland, M., Hambsch, F.-J., Reichart, D. E., et al. (2015) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2067 · Cited by 36
“The measured RV is consistent with J1407’s membership in the UCL subgroup of Sco–Cen, as proposed by Mamajek et al. (2012).”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialSelf-citationA giant planet transiting a 3-Myr protostar with a misaligned disk
Barber, M. G., Mann, A. W., Vanderburg, A. M., Krolikowski, D. M., Kraus, A. L., Ansdell, M., Pearce, L., Mace, G. N., Andrews, S. M., Boyle, A. W., et al. (2024) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-024-08123-3 · Cited by 44
“It also demonstrates that a planet at this age can be a spherical object with a sharply defined photosphere (forming a trapezoid-like transit) rather than a cloud of dust and gas or a still-forming ring-like system 17 .”
The transiting dust clumps in the evolved disc of the Sun-like UXor RZ Psc
Kennedy, G. M., Kenworthy, M. A., Pepper, J. A., Rodriguez, J. E., Siverd, R. J., Stassun, K. G., & Wyatt, M. C. (2017) · Royal Society Open Science · doi:10.1098/rsos.160652 · Cited by 33
“[16,17]) and as a side-effect of large-scale surveys for transiting planets [18,19].”
Self-citationAN ALMA CONSTRAINT ON THE GSC 6214-210 B CIRCUM-SUBSTELLAR ACCRETION DISK MASS
Bowler, B., Andrews, S., Kraus, A., Ireland, M., Herczeg, G., Ricci, L., Carpenter, J., & Brown, M. E. (2015) · The Astrophysical Journal Letters · doi:10.1088/2041-8205/805/2/l17 · Cited by 28
“93–394542.6 (Mamajek et al. 2012; Kenworthy et al. 2014), and perhaps Fomalhaut b (Kalas et al. 2008).”
InfluentialAnother deep dimming of the classical T Tauri star RW Aurigae A
Петров, П. П., Gahm, G. F., Djupvik, A. A., et al. (2015) · Springer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology) · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201525845/pdf · Cited by 34
Tiscareno, M. S. (2013) · Planets, Stars and Stellar Systems · doi:10.1007/978-94-007-5606-9_7 · Cited by 37
On the viability of the magnetorotational instability in circumplanetary disks
Fujii, Y. I., 奥住聡, Okuzumi, S., Tanigawa, T., Inutsuka, & S.-I. (2019) · Tokyo Tech Research Repository (Tokyo Institute of Technology) · Cited by 31
A SEARCH FOR RINGED EXOPLANETS USINGKEPLERPHOTOMETRY
Heising, M. Z., Marcy, G. W., & Schlichting, H. E. (2015) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/814/1/81 · Cited by 32
“There has been one claim of a discovery of an extrasolar ringlike structure (Mamajek et al. 2012) yet it is unlike any object in our solar system; it has an outer edge extending to 0.6 AU (Kenworthy & Mamajek 2015) and is thought not to be a stable planetary ring but rather a disk in which either…”
BackgroundInfluentialRodriguez, J. E., Pepper, J. A., Stassun, K. G., Siverd, R. J., Cargile, P. A., Weintraub, D. A., Beatty, T. G., Gaudi, B. S., Mamajek, E. E., & Sanchez, N. N. (2015) · The Astronomical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-6256/150/1/32 · Cited by 38
“…as of yet are unexplained, that may also be caused by circumstellar material (Carroll et al. 1991; Kearns & Herbst 1998; Chiang & Murray-Clay 2004; Winn et al. 2004; Bouvier et al. 2007; Grinin et al. 2008; Plavchan et al. 2008; Kloppenborg et al. 2010; Mamajek et al. 2012; Rattenbury et al. 2014).”
BackgroundSelf-citationPossible Photometric Signatures of Moderately Advanced Civilizations: The Clarke Exobelt
Socas‐Navarro, H. (2018) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaae66 · Cited by 30
“93394542.6 (Mamajek et al. 2012), has a disk that is much larger than the planet’s Roche lobe and should probably be considered a transient protosatellite moon rather than a stable ring system (Hatchett et al. 2018).”
BackgroundInfluentialOccultation of the T Tauri Star RW Aurigae A by its Tidally Disrupted DiskPreprint
Rodriguez, J. E., Stassun, K. G., Siverd, R. J., Cargile, P. A., Beatty, T. G., & Gaudi, B. S. (2016) · Cited by 29
Analysis of 1SWASP J140747.93−394542.6 eclipse fine-structure: hints of exomoons
van Werkhoven, T. I. M., Kenworthy, M. A., & Mamajek, E. E. (2014) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stu725 · Cited by 29
“The minimum speeds derived only from the light-curve slopes, stellar radius and limb darkening are incompatible with both the minimum period of 2.3 yr found by Mamajek et al. (2012), in spite of the large uncertainties on stellar properties.”
BackgroundResultInfluentialSelf-citationLazzoni, C., Zurlo, A., Desidera, S., Mesa, D., Fontanive, C., Bonavita, M., Ertel, S., Rice, K., Vigan, A., Boccaletti, A., et al. (2020) · Astronomy & Astrophysics · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201937290 · Cited by 18
“93-394542.6 from a complex photometric dimming event (Mamajek et al. 2012), there has been no exomoon, or exoring, confirmed yet.”
BackgroundInfluentialThe peculiar dipping events in the disc-bearing young-stellar object EPIC 204278916
Scaringi, S., Manara, C. F., Barenfeld, S. A., Groot, P., Isella, A., Kenworthy, M. A., Knigge, C., Maccarone, T. J., Ricci, L., & Ansdell, M. (2016) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2155 · Cited by 28
“In May 2007 a series of rapid fluctuations was seen over a 56 day period (Mamajek et al. 2012) and interpreted as a giant ring system filling the Hill sphere of the unseen secondary companion (Kenworthy et al. 2015; Kenworthy & Mamajek 2015).”
BackgroundSelf-citationDeep long asymmetric occultation in EPIC 204376071
Rappaport, S., Zhou, G., Vanderburg, A., Mann, A., Kristiansen, M. H., Oláh, K., Jacobs, T. L., Newton, E., Omohundro, M. R., LaCourse, D., et al. (2019) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stz537 · Cited by 27
“93-394542.6 (hereafter ‘J1407’; see Mamajek et al. 2012; Kenworthy et al. 2015a; Kenworthy & Mamajek 2015b).”
BackgroundInfluentialLodieu, N., Alonso, R., Hernández, J. I. G., Sanchis-Ojeda, R., Narita, N., Kawashima, Y., Kawauchi, K., Mascareño, A. S., Deeg, H., Arranz, J. P., et al. (2015) · Astronomy and Astrophysics · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527464 · Cited by 26
“…a significant number of low-mass stars and brown dwarfs eclipsing solar-type stars (Deleuil et al. 2008; Bakos et al. 2009; Irwin et al. 2010; Siverd et al. 2012; Steffen et al. 2012; Mamajek et al. 2012; Kenworthy et al. 2015) or giants (Bouchy et al. 2011; Mitchell et al. 2003; Liu et al. 2008).”
BackgroundPeriodic eclipses of the young star PDS 110 discovered with WASP and KELT photometry
Osborn, H. P., Rodriguez, J. E., Kenworthy, M. A., Kennedy, G. M., Mamajek, E. E., Robinson, C. E., Espaillat, C. C., Armstrong, D. J., Shappee, B. J., Bieryla, A., et al. (2017) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1249 · Cited by 26
“The rapid changes seen in eclipse, reminiscent of J1407 (Mamajek et al. 2012), could be interpreted as the passage of a Hill sphere filling ring system around a secondary companion, passing across the line of sight of the star.”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationA Transient Transit Signature Associated with the Young Star RIK-210
David, T. J., Petigura, E. A., Hillenbrand, L. A., Cody, A. M., Cameron, A. C., Stauffer, J. R., Fulton, B. J., Isaacson, H. T., Howard, A. W., Howell, S. B., et al. (2017) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/168 · Cited by 24
“…leading tails (Rappaport et al. 2012, 2014; Sanchis-Ojeda et al. 2015; Vanderburg et al. 2015), swarms of rocky or cometary debris (Boyajian et al. 2016), circumplanetary rings (Mamajek et al. 2012), or a precessing planet transiting a star with non-uniform surface brightness (Barnes et al. 2013).”
BackgroundSelf-citationConstraints on the size and dynamics of the J1407b ring system
Rieder, S., & Kenworthy, M. A. (2016) · Astronomy & Astrophysics · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629567 · Cited by 23
“…Myr-old star J1407 showed a complex series of eclipses in 2007, lasting a total of 56 days, and a series of papers investigating the J1407 system (Mamajek et al. 2012; Van Werkhoven et al. 2014; Kenworthy et al. 2015; Kenworthy & Mamajek 2015) conclude that there is a secondary substellar…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationExtended transiting discs and rings around planets and brown dwarfs: theoretical constraints
Zanazzi, J. J., & Lai, D. (2017) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2629 · Cited by 21
“Mamajek et al. (2012) discovered that the light curve of a young (∼ 16 Myr) K5 star 1 SWASP J140747-354542 (hereafter J1407) exhibited a complex series of eclipses that lasted 56 days around the month of April 2007.”
BackgroundInfluentialAn Alma Constraint on the GSC 6214-210 B Circum-Substellar Accretion Disk Mass
Brown, M. E. (2016) · Texas ScholarWorks (Texas Digital Library) · doi:10.15781/t2930nx8q · Cited by 20
Lodieu, N., Alonso, R., Hernández, J. I. G., Sanchis-Ojeda, R., Narita, N., Kawashima, Y., Kawauchi, K., Mascareño, A. S., Deeg, H. J., Prieto-Arranz, J., et al. (2015) · Springer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology) · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527464/pdf · Cited by 19
The EBLM Project—From False Positives to Benchmark Stars and Circumbinary Exoplanets
Maxted, P., Triaud, A., & Martin, D. V. (2023) · Universe · doi:10.3390/universe9120498 · Cited by 6
“…have led to the discovery of almost 200 transiting exoplanets [78] and have been used to discover and characterise a wide variety of variable stars including stripped red giant stars [79,80], an extrasolar ring system transiting a young solar-type star [81] and hundreds of pulsating Am stars [82].”
BackgroundZakhozhay, O. V., Osorio, M. R. Z., Béjar, V. J. S., & Boehler, Y. (2016) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2308 · Cited by 17
“Mamajek et al. (2012) and van Werkhoven et al. (2014) suggested that the 16-Myr old star 1SWASPJ140747.”
BackgroundWHY ARE DENSE PLANETARY RINGS ONLY FOUND BETWEEN 8 AND 20 AU?
Hedman, M. M. (2015) · The Astrophysical Journal Letters · doi:10.1088/2041-8205/801/2/l33 · Cited by 18
“…rings is not just an artifact of small number statistics and incomplete data, then this might have implications for both the architectures of the giant planet systems and the distribution of rings orbiting extrasolar planets (Barnes & Fortney 2004; Schlichting & Chang 2011; Mamajek et al. 2012).”
BackgroundInfluentialOGLE-BLG182.1.162852: an eclipsing binary with a circumstellar disc
Rattenbury, N. J., Wyrzykowski, Ł., Kostrzewa-Rutkowska, Z., et al. (2014) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Letters · doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slu176 · Cited by 18
“It is worth noting that Mamajek et al. (2012) similarly found no infra-red excess in the 2MASS photometry associated for disk-eclipse event J1407.”
BackgroundAizawa, M., Masuda, K., Kawahara, H., & Suto, Y. (2018) · The Astronomical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aab9a1 · Cited by 17
“Mamajek et al. (2012) found a series of interesting photometric variations during a single transit of a 5 NASA Sagan Fellow.”
BackgroundbRing: An observatory dedicated to monitoring the β Pictoris b Hill sphere transit
Stuik, R., Bailey, J. I., Dorval, P., Talens, G. J., Laginja, I., Mellon, S. N., Lomberg, B. B. D., Crawford, S. M., Ireland, M., Mamajek, E. E., et al. (2017) · Astronomy and Astrophysics · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201731679 · Cited by 21
“93-394542.6, also now designated V1400 Cen (Mamajek et al. 2012), is hypothesised to be a giant ring system filling most of the Hill sphere of an as yet undetected substellar secondary companion (Kenworthy et al. 2015).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationOGLE-LMC-ECL-11893: THE DISCOVERY OF A LONG-PERIOD ECLIPSING BINARY WITH A CIRCUMSTELLAR DISK
Dong, S., Katz, B., Prieto, J. L., et al. (2014) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/788/1/41 · Cited by 17
“An additional diskeclipse candidate with one occurrence of eclipse was suggested by Mamajek et al. (2012).”
BackgroundOGLE-LMC-ECL-11893: THE DISCOVERY OF A LONG-PERIOD ECLIPSING BINARY WITH A CIRCUMSTELLAR DISK
Dong, S., Katz, B., Prieto, J. L., Udalski, A., Kozłowski, S., Street, R. A., Bramich, D. M., Tsapras, Y., Hundertmark, M., Snodgrass, C., et al. (2014) · Cited by 16
The Breakthrough Listen Exotica Catalog: Supplementary Materials
Lacki, B. C., Brzycki, B., Croft, S., Czech, D. J., DeBoer, D. R., DeMarines, J., Gajjar, V., Isaacson, H. T., Lebofsky, M., MacMahon, D. H. E., et al. (2021) · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · doi:10.5281/zenodo.4726253 · Cited by 21
The β Pictoris b Hill sphere transit campaign
Kenworthy, M. A., Mellon, S. N., Bailey, J. I., Stuik, R., Dorval, P., Talens, G. J., Crawford, S. M., Mamajek, E. E., Laginja, I., Ireland, M., et al. (2021) · Astronomy and Astrophysics · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202040060 · Cited by 19
Self-citationOn the Detection of Extrasolar Moons and Rings
Heller, R. (2017) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-55333-7_35 · Cited by 16
Characterizing exo-ring systems around fast-rotating stars using the Rossiter–McLaughlin effect
de Mooij, E., Watson, C. A., & Kenworthy, M. A. (2017) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2142 · Cited by 16
“Larger ring systems, such as that present around J1407b, may spawn more massive moons detectable by transit surveys.”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationVVV-WIT-08: the giant star that blinked
Smith, L. C., Koposov, S. E., Lucas, P. W., Sanders, J. L., Minniti, D., Udalski, A., Evans, N. W., Aguado, D. S., Ivanov, V. D., Saito, R. K., et al. (2021) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1211 · Cited by 15
Angular Momentum Evolution of Young Stars in the nearby Scorpius–Centaurus OB Association
Mellon, S. N., Mamajek, E. E., Oberst, T. E., & Pecaut, M. J. (2017) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa77fb · Cited by 18
“This study was also designed to discover and characterize new circumsecondary eclipsing disk/ring systems like the one found around J1407 (V1400 Cen; Mamajek et al. 2012; Scott et al. 2014; Kenworthy & Mamajek 2015) and new examples of rare pre-MS eclipsing binary stars (e.g. Morales-Calderón et…”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationThe most variable VVV sources: eruptive protostars, dipping giants in the nuclear disc and others
Lucas, P. W., Smith, L. C., Guo, Z., et al. (2024) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3929 · Cited by 14
Lazzoni, C., Zurlo, A., Desidera, S., Mesa, D., Fontanive, C., Bonavita, M., Ertel, S., Rice, K., Vigan, A., Boccaletti, A., et al. (2020) · Springer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology) · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201937290/pdf · Cited by 14
Mentel, R. T., Kenworthy, M. A., Cameron, D. A., Scott, E. L., Mellon, S. N., Hudec, R., Birkby, J. L., Mamajek, E. E., Schrimpf, A., Reichart, D. E., et al. (2018) · Astronomy & Astrophysics · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201834004 · Cited by 14
“2 This is in good agreement with earlier kinematic distance estimates (128± 13 pc; Mamajek et al. 2012), and the mean distance to the UCL subgroup of Sco–Cen (142 pc; de Zeeuw et al. 1999).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialSelf-citationHazy with a Chance of Star Spots: Constraining the Atmosphere of Young Planet K2-33b
Thao, P. C., Mann, A. W., Gao, P., Owens, D. A., Vanderburg, A. M., Newton, E. R., Tang, Y., Fields, M. J., David, T. J., Irwin, J. M., et al. (2022) · The Astronomical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aca07a · Cited by 14
“A possibility we did not explore was a transiting ringed system (Mamajek et al. 2012).”
BackgroundFast and precise light-curve model for transiting exoplanets with rings
Rein, E., & Ofir, A. (2019) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2556 · Cited by 13
The weird detector: flagging periodic, coherent signals of arbitrary shape in time-series photometry
Wheeler, A., & Kipping, D. (2019) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stz775 · Cited by 13
“…(Rappaport et al. 2012), photoevaporation (Vidal-Madjar et al. 2003), circumstellar material (Vanderburg et al. 2015), proto-satellite disks (Mamajek et al. 2012), bow shocks (Llama et al. 2013), gravity darkening (Barnes 2009), planetary oblateness (Seager & Hui 2002), atmospheric…”
BackgroundAnomalous light curves of young tilted exorings
Sucerquia, M., Alvarado-Montes, J. A., Ramírez, V., & Zuluaga, J. I. (2017) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Letters · doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slx151 · Cited by 13
“Mamajek et al. (2012) found a single transit which has been interpreted as a colossal ring around a sub-stellar object orbiting the star J1407.”
BackgroundMelis, C., Olofsson, J., Song, I., Sarkis, P., Weinberger, A. J., Kennedy, G. M., & Krumpe, M. (2021) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac2603 · Cited by 12
“93-394542.6, KIC 8462852, or similar stars; Mamajek et al. 2012; Boyajian et al. 2016, 2018; David et al. 2017; Meng et al. 2017; Mentel et al. 2018; Ansdell et al. 2019; Rappaport et al. 2019; Saito et al. 2019) while occultations in the light curve provide detailed information on its opacity and…”
BackgroundInfluentialDiscovery of δ Scuti Pulsations in the Young Hybrid Debris Disk Star HD 156623
Mellon, S. N., Mamajek, E. E., Zwintz, K., David, T. J., Stuik, R., Talens, G. J., Dorval, P., Burggraaff, O., Kenworthy, M. A., Bailey, J. I., et al. (2019) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf008 · Cited by 14
“In addition to exoplanets, these surveys are sensitive to photometric variability due to eclipsing binaries, rotation periods, pulsations, amongst others (e.g., Mamajek et al. 2012; Mellon et al. 2017; Oberst et al. 2017; Burggraaff et al. 2018).”
BackgroundSelf-citationDetecting Planetary Oblateness in the Era of JWST: A Case Study of Kepler-167e
刘, Q. 权. L., Zhu, W., Zhou, Y., et al. (2025) · The Astronomical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad9b8c · Cited by 11
“Similar to the Solar System giants, giant exoplanets at relatively wide orbits may also harbour ring and moon systems (e.g., Mamajek et al. 2012; Kipping et al. 2022), and these structures can lead to detectable signatures in the transit light curve (e.g., Barnes & Fortney 2004; Kipping et al.…”
Ohno, K., Thao, P. C., Mann, A. W., et al. (2022) · The Astrophysical Journal Letters · doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac9f3f · Cited by 11
“…detected yet, though several studies have suggested a few candidates (for a review, see Heller 2018), such as a putative ringed planet J1407b (e.g., Mamajek et al. 2012; van Werkhoven et al. 2014; Kenworthy & Mamajek 2015), and a cool extremely low-density giant planet HIP 41378f (Santerne et al.…”
BackgroundOsborn, H., Kenworthy, M., Rodriguez, J., de Mooij, E. J. W., Kennedy, G., Relles, H., Gomez, E., Hippke, M., Banfi, M., Barbieri, L., et al. (2019) · Monthly notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stz283 · Cited by 8
Self-citationExploring exomoon atmospheres with an idealized general circulation model
Haqq-Misra, J. D., & Heller, R. (2018) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1630 · Cited by 11
“With the first tentative detection of exomoons or exorings recently claimed in the literature (Mamajek et al. 2012; Bennett et al. 2014; Udalski et al. 2015; Aizawa et al. 2017; Hill et al. 2017; Teachey et al. 2018; Rodenbeck et al. 2018), a first unambiguous discovery could thus be imminent.”
BackgroundKenworthy, M. A. (2017) · Nature Astronomy · doi:10.1038/s41550-017-0099 · Cited by 11
Self-citationScott, E. L., Mamajek, E. E., Pecaut, M. J., Quillen, A. C., Moolekamp, F., & Bell, C. P. M. (2014) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/797/1/6 · Cited by 14
“93394542.6, Mamajek et al. (2012) explored the possibility of finding other such systems, calculating the probability to be nonnegligable given continuous monitoring of a large number of young stars.”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationThe Structure and Stability of Extended, Inclined Circumplanetary Disc or Ring Systems
Speedie, J., & Zanazzi, J. J. (2020) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2068 · Cited by 10
“We also investigate if a disk orbiting the hypothesized J1407 companion could be misaligned by J1407b’s mass quadrupole, and extend to large enough radii to match the observed eclipse duration seen in Mamajek et al. (2012).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialVVV-WIT-07: another Boyajian’s star or a Mamajek’s object?
Saito, R. K., Minniti, D., Ivanov, V. D., Catelan, M., Gran, F., Baptista, R., Angeloni, R., Cáceres, C., & Beamín, J. C. (2018) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/sty3004 · Cited by 10
“Some of these objects are rare/unique in their nature, such as KIC 8462852 (the Boyajian’s star, Boyajian et al. 2016) and J1407 (= V1400 Cen, Mamajek et al. 2012).”
BackgroundResultRings beyond the giant planets
Sicardy, B., Moutamid, M. E., Quillen, A., Schenk, P., Showalter, M., & Walsh, K. (2016) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781316286791.007 · Cited by 9
“on of orientations. If disks ll a large fraction of a secondary’s Hill radius, then the probability that a sample of young stars star exhibits eclipses could reach as high as 10 4 (see equation 14 of Mamajek et al. 2012). With the discovery of the J1407 dimming event, it was argued from the number above that the proba…”
BackgroundResultInfluentialSelf-citationA Transient Transit Signature Associated with the Young Star RIK-210
David, T. J., Petigura, E. A., Hillenbrand, L. A., Cody, A. M., Cameron, A. C., Stauffer, J. R., Fulton, B., Isaacson, H. T., Howard, A. W., Howell, S. B., et al. (2017) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · Cited by 9
Self-citationData calibration for the MASCARA and bRing instruments
Talens, G. J., Deul, E. R., Stuik, R., Burggraaff, O., Lesage, A.-L., Spronck, J. F. P., Mellon, S. N., Bailey, J. I., Mamajek, E. E., Kenworthy, M. A., et al. (2018) · Astronomy and Astrophysics · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201834070 · Cited by 9
“(a)The cameras pointing towards zenith are identified with a “C” for “central”. exoplanet J 1407 b (Mamajek et al. 2012).”
BackgroundSelf-citationTilting Uranus via Spin–Orbit Resonance with Planet Nine
Lu, T., & Laughlin, G. (2022) · The Planetary Science Journal · doi:10.3847/psj/ac83c1 · Cited by 11
“Mamajek et al. (2012) estimate that the lifetime of a circumplantary disk at Uranus’ present-day orbit is of order 10 Myr - a timeframe in modest tension with the durations of our simulations.”
BackgroundBright Southern Variable Stars in the bRing Survey
Mellon, S. N., Mamajek, E. E., Stuik, R., et al. (2019) · The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series · doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab3662 · Cited by 8
“The Art of Scientific Computing (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press) Pribulla, T., Kreiner, J. M., & Tremko, J. 2003, CoSka, 33, 38 Pribulla, T., Vaňko, M., Chochol, D., Hambálek, L., & Parimucha, Š. 2011, AN, 332, 607 Rabus, M., & Prieto, J. L. 2018, ATel, 11506, 1 Rimoldini, L., Dubath, P., Süveges, M., et al. 2012, M…”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationSOPHIE velocimetry of Kepler transit candidates
Hébrard, G., Bonomo, A. S., Díaz, R. F., et al. (2018) · Astronomy and Astrophysics · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201834333 · Cited by 8
Data calibration for the MASCARA and bRing instruments
Talens, G. J., Deul, E., Stuik, R., Burggraaff, O., Lesage, A.-L., Spronck, J. F. P., Mellon, S. N., Bailey, J. I., Mamajek, E. E., Kenworthy, M. A., et al. (2018) · Springer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology) · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201834070/pdf · Cited by 8
Self-citationDholakia, S., Dholakia, S., & Pope, B. J. S. (2025) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/addb4e · Cited by 7
“Opaque, face-on rings like in the long-period transiting system J1407 (Mamajek et al. 2012; Kenworthy et al. 2015) appear elliptical in projection, which could be modeled in the same way as oblateness; gapped or partially-transmissive rings can be represented as linear combinations of these transit…”
zu Westram, M. M., Oza, A., & Galli, A. (2024) · Journal of Geophysical Research Planets · doi:10.1029/2023je007935 · Cited by 7
“In 2007, the ∼ 20 M J companion 1SWASP J1407 b was observed to exhibit multiple and sporadic transits in continuum light, believed to be due to a large and extended ( a ≳ AU) exoring system fueled by exomoons (Kenworthy & Mamajek, 2015; Mamajek et al., 2012).”
BackgroundA pilot investigation to constrain the presence of ring systems around transiting exoplanets
Hatchett, W. T., Barnes, J. W., Ahlers, J. P., MacKenzie, S., & Hedman, M. M. (2017) · New Astronomy · doi:10.1016/j.newast.2017.11.001 · Cited by 7
“93–394542.6 (Mamajek et al., 2012), this ‘J1407b’ system is very large, with a radius on the order of 0.6 AU (Kenworthy and Mamajek, 2015).”
BackgroundInfluentialScholz, A., Mužić, K., & Geers, V. (2015) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stv838 · Cited by 7
“The estimated spectral type of M4 would correspond to an effective temperature of about 3400±200 K (Mužić et al. 2014) and a mass of around 0.4M , assuming an age of 1 Myr (BCAH isochrone; Baraffe et al. 1998).”
BackgroundInfluentialA search for eclipsing binaries that host discs
Meng, Z., Quillen, A. C., Bell, C. P. M., Mamajek, E. E., Scott, E. L., & Zhou, J. (2014) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stu854 · Cited by 7
“Because discs can be large, the probability that a randomly oriented system exhibits eclipses may be fairly high (Mamajek et al. 2012).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationALMA and NACO observations towards the young exoring transit system J1407 (V1400 Cen)
Kenworthy, M. A., Klaassen, P. D., Min, M., van der Marel, N., Bohn, A. J., Kama, M., Triaud, A., Hales, A., Monkiewicz, J., Scott, E., et al. (2020) · Astronomy & Astrophysics · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936141 · Cited by 5
“This indicates that the rings are geometrically thin (with a height-todiameter ratio hring/dring ≈ 0.001; Mamajek et al. 2012) We note that this estimate is only valid where large gradients in the light curve are seen; during the time of smallest projected separation of J1407 behind the disk…”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Mamajek, E. E., Quillen, A. C., Pecaut, M. J., Moolekamp, F., Scott, E. L., Kenworthy, M. A., Cameron, A. C., & Parley, N. R.
- Affiliations
- University of Rochester (US)
- Leiden University (NL)
- University of St Andrews (GB)
- ORCID
- Venue
- The Astronomical Journal
- Publisher
- American Astronomical Society
- Published
- 2012-02-10
- Volume
- 143
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 72
- ISSN
- 0004-6256 (ISSN-L)
- 1538-3881
- OpenAlex
- W2128350470
- Semantic Scholar
- 87cd84c7775fcd4d08c15d14c6a10cdcc3dff837
- Cited by
- 140
- References
- 107
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 6.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- The Astronomical Journal (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (1008908, 0907841)
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration
- California Institute of Technology
- University of Rochester
- University of Leicester
- Queen's University Belfast
- Queen's University
- Keele University
- Jet Propulsion Laboratory
- Science and Technology Facilities Council (PP/F000065/1)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astrophysics and Star Formation Studies
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Space and Planetary Science › Astro and Planetary Science
- Keywords
- circumplanetary disks, circumstellar disks, eclipses, stellar light curves, young Sun-like stars, pre-main-sequence stars, SuperWASP, planet formation, disk gaps, stellar kinematics
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
