Reddit 用户用 Claude Code 在 TESS 数据中发现候选系外行星，获 TESS DDT 第 100 号观测批准

There is an awful lot of absolute shite made with the use of AI, I mean nearly all of it is useless shite at the end of the day. But this... this is fucking incredible. Well done.

hahaha thank you!! that genuinely means a lot to me

10 more replies

24 more replies

TargP

This is really excellent work and an impressive and worthwhile use of this incredible tool. Would you mind if I covered this in a University module I teach on the practical use of AI?

of course, I’d be honored! just one small request, if possible, please credit me as Pavel Rabtsevich :)

which university is this for btw? it genuinely means a lot to me that you’d want to show this in a class

13 more replies

6 more replies

OliverAlden

•18h ago

This is very cool!

•18h ago

thanks!) i spent the whole month with AI agents to make it work

3 more replies

flurbol

•18h ago

Awesome! You did an amazing job, needless to say I hope you will get your confirmation. Definitely something to be proud

thank you so much, really appreciate it! I really hope I can get the confirmation :)

Image 13: u/Meshyai avatar u/Meshyai•Ad

Meshy 7 is live—a new Image-to-3D foundation model, not a settings update.

meshy.ai

AggressiveStock2138

If it is a planet, do you get to name it? If so, what’s are you going to call it?

Very cool project! Good luck.

unfortunately I don't think I will be allowed to name it 😄 according to astronomic rules

but sure, I already have a few names in my head haha

23 more replies

4 more replies

Kryptk9

This is really great work and looks very promising!

I happen to do astrophysics research and could try connecting you to some of the exoplanet people here at my university if you’d be interested in that?

yes, I'd really love that, thank you!

right now I'm turning all these scripts into one tool so this kind of search is easier to run. having people who actually work on exoplanets look at it would help me a lot

just dm me on X or LinkedIn

9 more replies

•14h ago

small note: I wrote this while being way too excited about the whole thing, so yeah, some parts probably sound a bit AI-ish haha, sorry about that

if you want the more personal version, I told the story in Twitter here: https://x.com/p_rabtsevich/status/2107803696058822742

6 more replies

Ridcully

•11h ago

I looked at that a while back (LAMOST M-star pass as obsid 259815007) and my setup disregarded it, masking the telluric O₂ band or the blue edge (and some other non-M-star data in that type of data set).

Thanks for the post, I am looking at it again. I used a combination of GPU based existing software and Claude to modify it for what I wanted. I have been mining Green Bank, Parkes, LAMOST, VASCO, WISE, ASAS-SN + NEOWISE, Lick, CARMENES, HARPS, and TESS for a while now. Some cool things are out there.

However, be careful - make sure you check your nulls to make sure your solution is working. The more nulls you have, the more sure you can be of the results.

•10h ago

thanks for info!) i will share tomorrow with u all the insights

HybridPigeon

I'm curious about your background in this area. Do you work in a related field, or is this just something you're exploring as a hobby?

I work in tech, mostly product management, with a lot of my recent work around LLMs, search and AI optimization.

Astronomy is a hobby for me, but I’m pretty technical, so I tend to approach it more like an engineering problem than just casual stargazing :)

4 more replies

JeffVanGully

You should post this to r/space

i was a bit afraid, coz they a pretty much toxic about AI usage))

11 more replies

twotootstotucson

•16h ago• Edited 13h ago

EDIT: the following text is ai generated as im at work and finding someone else doing this is super exciting and deserving of a comprehensive update Congrats, genuinely. Getting DDT time approved off an independent candidate is a big deal, and publishing the transit times before Sector 110 is exactly the right move. I read the preprint and the prereg on Zenodo and found the program on the DDT page. Nice work. Im doing the same project in my lab here https://brokenbranch.dev/windowsill

I've spent the last couple of months on almost the same thing: a small TESS transit survey run mostly through Claude Code, with Codex and fresh read-only sessions as reviewers. My best candidate went the other way, so here's the cautionary half.

It was TIC 374861595. Deep, clean, periodic, and it survived everything I threw at it early on. Then I refit 24 sectors with a stellar radius I derived myself (2MASS + Gaia) instead of copying the catalog value. The impact parameter came out at b = 1.05 ± 0.13 (grazing), the radius got less constrained, and the transit-derived stellar density disagreed with the measured star at 7.7σ. Because I'd measured R★ myself, "the catalog radius is wrong" was off the table. What was left was eccentricity, the wrong branch of the grazing solution, or an unresolved blend. I stopped calling it a planet. (It also turned out SPOC had flagged it before me, which was its own humbling lesson about cross-matching early.)

On your actual question, how to audit agent-written analysis that looks convincing, here's what bit me:

Ask what the test would look like if you were wrong, and whether it would look any different. A check that passes for every hypothesis you care about is decoration.
Make every check go red once on purpose. If a guard has never failed, you don't know it isn't return True. Agents are very good at writing tests that pass.
Price the false-alarm rate from your own null, and re-check it. My search threshold was justified by a null-distribution max quoted from an old note (84,500 draws, max ~8.05). The live null had grown to 325,000 draws with a max of ~8.65, so the threshold sat below the null's own maximum and nothing flagged it. I withdrew that run and re-preregistered it.
Re-derive numbers from the raw output, never from a summary the agent wrote. Three of my headline numbers were wrong exactly this way.
Watch which way a guard fails. The recurring bug was an empty list wired to "pass". A check that visited nothing looks identical to one that found nothing.

A couple of friendly questions about your candidate, since at ~500 ppm on 21″ pixels the blend scenario is the one I'd worry about most:

The held-out-year test is great for showing the signal is real and periodic, but a background eclipsing binary would pass it just as well. What does the difference-image centroid show, and how faint a neighbor can you rule out within a pixel or two? (A 50%-deep EB about 7.5 mag fainter gives ~500 ppm.)
The TRICERATOPS FPP of 0.03–0.04 sits above the usual 0.015 validation bar. Is that driving the DDT ask, and is high-res imaging on the list?
Were Sectors 6 and 32 FFI-only? At 30-minute cadence a 2-hour transit only gets a handful of points per event, so I'm curious how the odd/even and shape tests held up there.

Either way I'll be watching for Sector 110. Fingers crossed the dips land on your times!

Dry_Grapefruit_8050

•15h ago

Both this comment and the OP have hallmarks of AI generated text.

u/This_Cell_1829 - great work, but I think you will lose credibility using an AI generated write-up without an edit to remove some of the more common “AI ticks”, unless you say right up front that the write-up is AI generated.

Not sure what the best practice is, but it is a turnoff to read AI generated stuff being passed off as human, and it degrades my trust that any of this is real.

8 more replies

IndianITGuy796

•14h ago

Really cool stuff mate , just curious what is your specialization , are you someone who works in astronomy or a dev whose hobby is this . Just wanted to know . Hope you dont mind me asking 🙂

•14h ago

not at all! I'm in tech, mostly product management, lately a lot of work around LLMs and search. astronomy is a hobby for me, I just tend to treat it like an engineering problem :)

3 more replies

1 more reply

skr_u