J/AJ/156/83 Effect of stellar companions on planetary systems (Ziegler+, 2018)
Robo-AO Kepler Survey.
V. The effect of physically associated stellar companions on planetary systems.
Ziegler C., Law N.M., Baranec C., Howard W., Morton T., Riddle R.,
Duev D.A., Salama M., Jensen-Clem R., Kulkarni S.R.
<Astron. J., 156, 83-83 (2018)>
=2018AJ....156...83Z 2018AJ....156...83Z (SIMBAD/NED BibCode)
ADC_Keywords: Stars, double and multiple ; Exoplanets ; Spectral types ;
Stars, distances ; Photometry, ugriz ; Photometry, infrared ;
Stars, diameters
Keywords: binaries: close - instrumentation: adaptive optics -
methods: data analysis - methods: observational -
planets and satellites: fundamental parameters -
techniques: high angular resolution
Abstract:
The Kepler light curves used to detect thousands of planetary candidates
are susceptible to dilution due to blending with previously unknown nearby
stars. With the automated laser adaptive optics instrument, Robo-AO,
we have observed 620 nearby stars around 3857 planetary candidates
host stars. Many of the nearby stars, however, are not bound to the KOI.
We use galactic stellar models and the observed stellar density to
estimate the number and properties of unbound stars. We estimate the
spectral type and distance to 145 KOIs with nearby stars using multi-band
observations from Robo-AO and Keck-AO. Most stars within 1" of a Kepler
planetary candidate are likely bound, in agreement with past studies.
We use likely bound stars and the precise stellar parameters from the
California Kepler Survey to search for correlations between stellar
binarity and planetary properties. No significant difference between
the binarity fraction of single and multiple-planet systems is found, and
planet hosting stars follow similar binarity trends as field stars, many
of which likely host their own non-aligned planets. We find that hot
Jupiters are ∼4x more likely than other planets to reside in a binary
star system. We correct the radius estimates of the planet candidates
in characterized systems and find that for likely bound systems, the
estimated planetary radii will increase on average by a factor of 1.77,
if either star is equally likely to host the planet. Lastly, we find
the planetary radius gap is robust to the impact of dilution.
Description:
We use Robo-AO and Keck-AO to observe KOIs with detected nearby stars
in multiple bands to estimate the spectral type and distance to each
star. These properties allow us to quantify the probability of association
between the primary and secondary components in each system.
Observations in the survey were performed using the Robo-AO automated
laser adaptive optics system at Palomar and Kitt Peak (Baranec et al.
2014ApJ...790L...8B 2014ApJ...790L...8B, 2017arXiv170907103B 2017arXiv170907103B; Jensen-Clem et al.
2018AJ....155...32J 2018AJ....155...32J) that can efficiently perform large, high angular
resolution surveys. We obtained high angular resolution images of 3313 KOIs
with Robo-AO between 2012 July 16 and 2015 June 12 (UT) at the Palomar
1.5 m telescope. We observed 532 additional KOIs with Robo-AO between
2016 June 8 and 2016 July 15 (UT) at the Kitt Peak 2.1 m telescope. Further
follow-up observations in r', i', and z' bands of 145 KOIs with nearby
stars detected by Robo-AO in previous papers in the survey were performed
between 2017 March 16 and 2017 June 08 (UT) at Kitt Peak by Robo-AO.
We observed 10 candidate multiple systems in J, H, and K with the NIRC2
camera behind the Keck-II laser guide star adaptive optics system
(van Dam et al. 2006PASP..118..310V 2006PASP..118..310V; Wizinowich et al. 2006PASP..118..297W 2006PASP..118..297W),
on 2017 August 8-10 (UT). These 10 multiple KOI systems were targeted due
to uncertainty in association between the primary and secondary stars
with only Robo-AO visible-band photometry.
File Summary:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FileName Lrecl Records Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ReadMe 80 . This file
table2.dat 134 153 Photometric parallax estimates of KOIs and
nearby stars
table3.dat 109 210 Implications on derived radius of Kepler
planetary candidates
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See also:
II/314 : UKIDSS-DR8 LAS, GCS and DXS Surveys (Lawrence+ 2012)
II/349 : The Pan-STARRS release 1 (PS1) Survey - DR1 (Chambers+, 2016)
J/ApJ/791/35 : Detection of 715 Kepler planet candidates host stars
(Law+, 2014)
J/AJ/152/8 : Impact of stellar multiplicity on planetary systems I.
(Kraus+, 2016)
J/AJ/152/18 : Robo-AO Kepler planetary candidate survey. II. (Baranec+, 2016)
J/AJ/153/25 : Near-infrared observations of 84 KOI systems (Atkinson+, 2017)
J/AJ/153/66 : Robo-AO Kepler Planetary Candidate Survey. III. (Ziegler+, 2017)
J/AJ/155/161 : Stars nearby Robo-AO Kepler planetary candidates
(Ziegler+, 2018)
Byte-by-byte Description of file: table2.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- 4 I4 --- KOI [1/7572] KOI number (KOI-NNNN in Simbad)
6- 9 F4.2 arcsec Sep [0.38/4.11] Separation
10 A1 --- n_Sep [g] Note on Sep (1)
12- 13 A2 --- SpType1 Estimated spectral type of the primary (2)
15- 18 I4 pc Dist1 [31/1752] Distance of the primary
20- 22 I3 pc e_Dist1 [6/354] Lower limit uncertainty in Dist1
24- 26 I3 pc E_Dist1 [5/295] Upper limit uncertainty in Dist1
28- 29 A2 --- SpType2 Estimated spectral type of the secondary (2)
31- 35 I5 pc Dist2 [54/83457] Distance of the secondary
37- 41 I5 pc e_Dist2 [8/13101] Lower limit uncertainty in Dist2
43- 47 I5 pc E_Dist2 [2/18239] Upper limit uncertainty in Dist2
49- 53 F5.2 --- sigma [0.01/10.8] Probability of unassociated nearby
stars σunassoc
55- 59 F5.2 mag Dgmag [-0.96/6.85]? Differential g' band magnitude
(3)
61- 64 F4.2 mag e_Dgmag [0.01/0.71]? Uncertainty in Dgmag (3)
66- 70 F5.2 mag Drmag [-0.6/6.92]? Differential r' band magnitude
(G1)
72- 75 F4.2 mag e_Drmag [0.01/0.72]? Uncertainty in Drmag (G1)
76 A1 --- n_Drmag [h] Note on Drmag (1)
78- 82 F5.2 mag Dimag [-0.52/6.62]? Differential i' band magnitude
(G1)
84- 87 F4.2 mag e_Dimag [0.01/0.61]? Uncertainty in Dimag (G1)
89- 92 F4.2 mag Dzmag [0.04/6.58]? Differential z' band magnitude
(G1)
94- 97 F4.2 mag e_Dzmag [0.01/0.49]? Uncertainty in Dzmag (G1)
98 A1 --- n_Dzmag [gh] Note on Dzmag (1)
100-104 F5.2 mag DJmag [-0.52/6.65]? Differential J band magnitude (4)
106-109 F4.2 mag e_DJmag [0.01/0.49]? Uncertainty in DJmag (4)
110 A1 --- n_DJmag [fg] Note on DJmag (1)
112-116 F5.2 mag DHmag [-0.41/4.83]? Differential H band magnitude (4)
118-121 F4.2 mag e_DHmag [0.01/0.71]? Uncertainty in DHmag (4)
122 A1 --- n_DHmag [fg] Note on DHmag (1)
124-128 F5.2 mag DKmag [-0.35/6.51]? Differential K band magnitude (4)
130-133 F4.2 mag e_DKmag [0.01/0.47]? Uncertainty in DKmag (4)
134 A1 --- n_DKmag [efg] Note on DKmag (1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note (1): Note as follows:
e = From Kraus et al. (2016, J/AJ/152/8);
f = From Atkinson et al. (2017, J/AJ/153/25);
g = From Keck NIRC-2 observations, as described in Section 2.2;
h = Blended Robo-AO photometry of close binary resolved with Keck-AO, not used
in stellar characterization.
Note (2): Methodology described in Section 3.1.
Note (3): From PANSTARRs (Chambers et al. 2016, Cat. II/349).
Note (4): From UKIRT (Lawrence et al. 2007, Cat. II/314) unless noted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Byte-by-byte Description of file: table3.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- 7 F7.2 --- Planet [1.01/7572.01] Planetary candidate identifier
(KOI-NNNN.NN in Simbad)
9- 12 F4.2 arcsec Sep [0.38/4.11] Separation
14- 18 F5.2 mag Dimag [-0.52/6.62] Differential i' band magnitude
(G1)
20- 25 F6.4 --- Rp/R* [0.0034/0.3117] Diluted ratio of planet radius
to stellar radius (1)
27- 30 F4.2 Rsun R*(targ) [0.6/2.48] Radius of the target star
32- 35 F4.2 Rsun e_R*(targ) [0/0.39] Lower limit uncertainty in R*(targ)
37- 40 F4.2 Rsun E_R*(targ) [0/0.29] Upper limit uncertainty in R*(targ)
42- 45 F4.2 Rsun R*(sec) [0.56/2.48] Radius of the secondary
47- 50 F4.2 Rsun e_R*(sec) [0/0.29] Lower limit uncertainty in R*(sec)
52- 55 F4.2 Rsun E_R*(sec) [0/0.4] Upper limit uncertainty in R*(sec)
57- 61 F5.2 Rgeo RpO [0.35/95.2] Original planetary radius estimate
(1)
63- 67 F5.2 Rgeo e_RpO [0.01/61.4] Lower limit uncertainty in RpO
69- 73 F5.2 Rgeo E_RpO [0.02/19.2] Upper limit uncertainty in RpO
75- 79 F5.2 Rgeo Rp1 [0.35/97.5] Estimated eclipsing object radius
(2)
81- 85 F5.2 Rgeo e_Rp1 [0.01/62.9] Lower limit uncertainty in Rp1
87- 91 F5.2 Rgeo E_Rp1 [0.02/19.7] Upper limit uncertainty in Rp1
93- 97 F5.1 Rgeo Rp2 [0.7/802] Estimated eclipsing object radius
(3)
99-103 F5.1 Rgeo e_Rp2 [0/136] Lower limit uncertainty in Rp2
105-109 F5.1 Rgeo E_Rp2 [0/158] Upper limit uncertainty in Rp2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note (1): From NASA Exoplanet Archive
(http://exoplanetarchive.ipac.caltech.edu/).
Note (2): In the scenario where it is physically bound to the target star,
corrected for transit dilution caused by the presence of nearby stars.
Note (3): In the scenario where it is bound to the companion star, correcting
for transit dilution by nearby stars and using stellar radius estimates
derived from estimated spectral types in Table 2 and Habets & Heintze
(1981A&AS...46..193H 1981A&AS...46..193H).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Global notes:
Note (G1): From observations at Robo-AO KP described in Section 2.1.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
History:
From electronic version of the journal
References:
Law et al. Paper I. 2014ApJ...791...35L 2014ApJ...791...35L, Cat. J/ApJ/791/35
Baranec et al. Paper II. 2016AJ....152...18B 2016AJ....152...18B, Cat. J/AJ/152/18
Ziegler et al. Paper III. 2017AJ....153...66Z 2017AJ....153...66Z, Cat. J/AJ/153/66
Ziegler et al. Paper IV. 2018AJ....155..161Z 2018AJ....155..161Z, Cat. J/AJ/155/161
(End) Tiphaine Pouvreau [CDS] 13-Feb-2019