J/A+A/661/A63 Precise radial velocities of giant stars, XVI. (Wolthoff+, 2022)
Precise radial velocities of giant stars.
XVI. Planet occurrence rates from the combined analysis of the Lick, EXPRESS,
and PPPS giant star surveys.
Wolthoff V., Reffert S., Quirrenbach A., Jones M.I., Wittenmyer R.A.,
Jenkins J.S.
<Astron. Astrophys., 661, A63 (2022)>
=2022A&A...661A..63W 2022A&A...661A..63W (SIMBAD/NED BibCode)
ADC_Keywords: Stars, double and multiple ; Exoplanets ; Radial velocities ;
Optical
Keywords: planets and satellites: detection - techniques: radial velocities -
brown dwarfs - planetary systems
Abstract:
Radial velocity surveys of evolved stars allow us to probe a higher
stellar mass range, on average, compared to main-sequence samples.
Hence, differences between the planet populations around the two
target classes can be caused by either the differing stellar mass or
stellar evolution. To properly disentangle the effects of both
variables, it is important to characterize the planet population
around giant stars as accurately as possible.
Our goal is to investigate the giant planet occurrence rate around
evolved stars and determine its dependence on stellar mass,
metallicity, and orbital period.
We combine data from three different radial velocity surveys targeting
giant stars: the Lick giant star survey, the radial velocity program
EXoPlanets aRound Evolved StarS (EXPRESS), and the Pan-Pacific Planet
Search (PPPS), yielding a sample of 482 stars and 37 planets. We
homogeneously rederived the stellar parameters of all targets and
accounted for varying observational coverage, precision and stellar
noise properties by computing a detection probability map for each
star via injection and retrieval of synthetic planetary signals. We
then computed giant planet occurrence rates as a function of period,
stellar mass, and metallicity, corrected for incompleteness.
Our findings agree with previous studies that found a positive
planet-metallicity correlation for evolved stars and identified a peak
in the giant planet occurrence rate as a function of stellar mass, but
our results place it at a slightly smaller mass of
(1.68±0.59)M☉. The period dependence of the giant planet
occurrence rate seems to follow a broken power-law or log-normal
distribution peaking at (718±226)days or (797±455)days,
respectively, which roughly corresponds to 1.6AU for a 1M☉ star
and 2.0 AU for a 2M☉ star. This peak could be a remnant from
halted migration around intermediate-mass stars, caused by stellar
evolution, or an artifact from contamination by false positives. The
completeness-corrected global occurrence rate of giant planetary
systems around evolved stars is 10.7-1.6+2.2% for the entire
sample, while the evolutionary subsets of RGB and HB stars exhibit
14.2-2.7+4.1% and 6.6-1.3+2.1%, respectively. However, both
subsets have different stellar mass distributions and we demonstrate
that the stellar mass dependence of the occurrence rate suffices to
explain the apparent change of occurrence with the evolutionary stage.
Description:
For our analysis, we combine observations from three RV surveys: the
Lick giant star survey (Reffert et al., 2006ApJ...652..661R 2006ApJ...652..661R), the
EXo-Planets aRound Evolved StarS (EXPRESS) survey (Jones et al.,
2011A&A...536A..71J 2011A&A...536A..71J, Cat. J/A+A/536/A71), and the Pan-Pacific Planet
Search (PPPS, Wittenmyer et al., 2011ApJ...743..184W 2011ApJ...743..184W, Cat.
J/ApJ/743/184).
In total, 48 planets in 42 systems have been detected and published
around all 650 stars from the target lists of Lick, EXPRESS, and PPPS.
They are listed in Table 1 including their detection reference.
File Summary:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FileName Lrecl Records Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ReadMe 80 . This file
table1.dat 114 48 *Planetary systems identified around stars from
all three surveys
refs.dat 92 33 References
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note on table1.dat: Lick giant star survey (Reffert et al.,
2006ApJ...652..661R 2006ApJ...652..661R), the EXo-Planets aRound Evolved StarS (EXPRESS) survey
(Jones et al., 2011A&A...536A..71J 2011A&A...536A..71J, Cat. J/A+A/536/A71), and the Pan-Pacific
Planet Search (PPPS, Wittenmyer et al., 2011ApJ...743..184W 2011ApJ...743..184W,
Cat. J/ApJ/743/184)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See also:
J/A+A/536/A71 : Atmospheric parameters of nearby giant stars (Jones+, 2011)
J/ApJ/743/184 : Pan-Pacific Planet Search (PPPS) I. 7 CMa (Wittenmyer+, 2011)
Byte-by-byte Description of file: table1.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 A1 --- Code [ABC] Code (1)
3- 8 I6 --- HIP HIP number
10- 12 F3.1 Msun M* Stellar mass (2)
14- 16 F3.1 Msun e_M* Stellar mass error (2)
18- 20 F3.1 [cm/s2] logg Surface gravity (2)
22- 24 F3.1 [cm/s2] e_logg Surface gravity error (2)
26- 30 F5.1 Lsun L* Stellar luminosity (2)
32- 35 F4.1 Lsun e_L* Stellar luminosity error (2)
37- 41 F5.2 [-] [Fe/H] Metallicity (2)
43- 46 F4.2 [-] e_[Fe/H] Metallicity error (2)
48- 50 A3 --- Stage [HB RGB] Evolution stage (2)
52- 55 F4.1 Mjup MPsini Planet mass, MPsini (2)
57- 59 F3.1 Mjup e_MPsini ? Planet mass, MPsini error (2)
61- 66 F6.1 d P Period (2)
68- 72 F5.1 d e_P Period error (2)
74- 78 F5.1 m/s KRV Radial velocity (2)
80- 83 F4.1 m/s e_KRV Radial velocity error (2)
85- 87 F3.1 AU a Semi-major axis (2)
89- 91 F3.1 AU e_a ? Semi-major axis error (2)
93- 96 F4.2 --- e Eccentricity (2)
98-101 F4.2 --- e_e Eccentricity error (2)
103-105 I3 % fR ? Recovery fraction
107-108 I2 % fC ? Completeness fraction
110-114 A5 --- Ref Detection reference in refs.dat file
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note (1): Code as follows:
A = The 37 systems considered for the analysis
B = The host stars are removed by our cuts (#RVs ≤10 or - in the cases of
HIP 40526 and HIP 53261 - logg≤1.5).
C = our data do not allow for detection with comparable confidence to the
systems for Code = A; they are hence excluded from the analysis
(this includes the outer planet in the multiple system around HIP 19011).
Note (2): The stellar parameters are derived with the method of Stock et al.
(2018A&A...616A..33S 2018A&A...616A..33S, Cat. J/A+A/616/A33).
For Code = A, we quote the orbital parameters as determined from our RV data
with RVLIN (Wright & Howard, 2009ApJS..182..205W 2009ApJS..182..205W), and the completeness
fraction fc and recovery rate fR used for the incompleteness corrections
(see Sect. 6). Uncertainties on the orbital parameters are determined via
bootstrapping using the BOOTTRAN package (Wang et al.,
2012ApJ...761...46W 2012ApJ...761...46W, Cat. J/ApJ/761/46).
For completeness, we also list the orbital parameters of the planets for
Code = B and C as given in their respective reference.
For simplicity, asymmetric uncertainties were averaged into a single error
estimate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Byte-by-byte Description of file: refs.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- 2 I2 --- Ref Reference number
4- 22 A19 --- BibCode BibCode
24- 40 A17 --- Aut Author's name
42- 92 A51 --- Com Comments
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
History:
From electronic version of the journal
References:
Hekker et al., Paper I 2006A&A...454..943H 2006A&A...454..943H
Reffert et al., Paper II 2006ApJ...652..661R 2006ApJ...652..661R
Hekker & Melendez, Paper III 2007A&A...475.1003H 2007A&A...475.1003H, Cat. J/A+A/475/1003
Hekker et al., Paper IV 2008A&A...480..215H 2008A&A...480..215H
Mitchell et al., Paper V 2013A&A...555A..87M 2013A&A...555A..87M
Trifonov et al., Paper VI 2014A&A...568A..64T 2014A&A...568A..64T
Reffert et al., Paper VII 2015A&A...574A.116R 2015A&A...574A.116R, Cat. J/A+A/574/A116
Trifonov et al., Paper VIII 2015A&A...582A..54T 2015A&A...582A..54T
Ortiz et al., Paper IX 2016A&A...595A..55O 2016A&A...595A..55O
Stock et al., Paper X 2018A&A...616A..33S 2018A&A...616A..33S
Quirrenbach et al., Paper XI 2019A&A...624A..18Q 2019A&A...624A..18Q
Reichert et al., Paper XII 2019A&A...625A..22R 2019A&A...625A..22R
Luque et al., Paper XIII 2019A&A...631A.136L 2019A&A...631A.136L
Tala Pinto et al., Paper XIV 2020A&A...644A...1T 2020A&A...644A...1T
Heeren et al., Paper XV 2021A&A...647A.160H 2021A&A...647A.160H, Cat. J/A+A/647/A160
(End) Patricia Vannier [CDS] 24-Aug-2022