J/MNRAS/491/5287 Exoplanet evaporation in multitransiting systems (Owen+, 2020)
Testing exoplanet evaporation with multitransiting systems.
Owen J.E., Campos Estrada B.
<Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 491, 5287-5297 (2020)>
=2020MNRAS.491.5287O 2020MNRAS.491.5287O (SIMBAD/NED BibCode)
ADC_Keywords: Exoplanets ; Models
Keywords: planets and satellites: atmospheres -
planets and satellites: interiors -
planets and satellites: physical evolution - planet-star interactions
Abstract:
The photoevaporation model is one of the leading explanations for the
evolution of small, close-in planets and the origin of the
radius-valley. However, without planet mass measurements, it is
challenging to test the photoevaporation scenario. Even if masses are
available for individual planets, the host star's unknown EUV/X-ray
history makes it difficult to assess the role of photoevaporation. We
show that systems with multiple transiting planets are the best in
which to rigorously test the photoevaporation model. By scaling one
planet to another in a multitransiting system, the host star's
uncertain EUV/X-ray history can be negated. By focusing on systems
that contain planets that straddle the radius-valley, one can estimate
the minimum masses of planets above the radius-valley (and thus are
assumed to have retained a voluminous hydrogen/helium envelope). This
minimum mass is estimated by assuming that the planet below the
radius-valley entirely lost its initial hydrogen/helium envelope, then
calculating how massive any planet above the valley needs to be to
retain its envelope. We apply this method to 104 planets above the
radius gap in 73 systems for which precise enough radii measurements
are available. We find excellent agreement with the photoevaporation
model. Only two planets (Kepler-100c and 142c) appear to be
inconsistent, suggesting they had a different formation history or
followed a different evolutionary pathway to the bulk of the
population. Our method can be used to identify TESS systems that
warrant radial-velocity follow-up to further test the photoevaporation
model.
Description:
The CKS sample of planets by Petigura et al. (2017AJ....154..107P 2017AJ....154..107P,
Cat. J/AJ/154/107) and Johnson et al. (2017AJ....154..108J 2017AJ....154..108J, Cat.
J/AJ/154/108) contains 457 multiplanet systems (Weiss et al.
2018AJ....155...48W 2018AJ....155...48W, Cat. J/AJ/155/48), 190 of which contain planets
that straddle the gap with their mean radii (which we fix to occur at
1.85R⊕, independent of period, for the CKS sample) and have
mini-Neptunes with radius of <6R⊕. Only 63 of these systems
contain planets which straddle the gap within 2σ when accounting
for radius errors, of which two were already analysed in the
asteroseismic sample. This leaves us 88 mini-Neptunes to perform our
analysis on. The results of our analysis are shown in Table 2.
File Summary:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FileName Lrecl Records Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ReadMe 80 . This file
table2.dat 75 90 Multiplanet systems from the CKS sample
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See also:
J/ApJ/728/117 : Kepler planetary candidates. I. (Borucki+, 2011)
J/AJ/154/107 : California-Kepler Survey (CKS). I. 1305 stars
(Petigura+, 2017)
J/AJ/154/108 : California-Kepler Survey (CKS). II. Properties
(Johnson+, 2017)
J/AJ/155/48 : California-Kepler Survey (CKS). V. Masses and radii
(Weiss+, 2018)
Byte-by-byte Description of file: table2.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- 5 A5 --- Kepler Kepler identifier (NNNNa)
7- 13 F7.2 --- KOI KOI identifier (NNNN.NN)
15 A1 --- l_Mmin Limit flag on Mmin
17- 22 F6.2 Mgeo Mmin ? Predicted minimum mass obtained using
EvapMass (https://github.com/jo276/EvapMass)
24 A1 --- f_Mmin [a*] Flag on Mmin (1)
26 A1 --- l_Mass Limit flag on Mass
28- 33 F6.2 Mgeo Mass ? Measured mass
35- 39 F5.2 Mgeo E_Mass ? Upper error on Mass
41- 45 F5.2 Mgeo e_Mass ? Lower error on Mass
47 I1 --- r_Mass ? Reference for Mass (2)
49- 55 A7 --- rockypl Rocky planet name (3)
57- 65 A9 --- n_rockypl Note on rockypl (4)
67- 70 F4.2 Mgeo Mrockypl Rocky planet mass
72- 75 F4.2 Mgeo e_Mrockypl Error on Mrockypl
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note (1): Flag as follows:
a = No solution
* = 0.5 per cent upper limit
Note (2): References as follows:
1 = Hadden & Lithwick (2014A&A...572A...2B 2014A&A...572A...2B)
2 = Bonomo et al. (2014A&A...572A...2B 2014A&A...572A...2B)
3 = Hadden & Lithwick (2017AJ....154....5H 2017AJ....154....5H, Cat. J/AJ/154/5)
4 = Buchhave et al. (2016AJ....152..160B 2016AJ....152..160B, Cat. J/AJ/152/160)
5 = Marcy et al. (2014ApJS..210...20M 2014ApJS..210...20M, Cat. J/ApJS/210/20)
6 = Xie (2014ApJS..210...25X 2014ApJS..210...25X, Cat. J/ApJS/210/25)
7 = Steffen et al. (2013MNRAS.428.1077S 2013MNRAS.428.1077S)
8 = MacDonald et al. (2016AJ....152..105M 2016AJ....152..105M, Cat. J/AJ/152/105)
Note (3): Letters b,c,d,e,f for Kepler identifiers and NNNN.NN for
KOI identifiers
Note (4): The planet candidate KOI1860.04 was subsequently determined to have a
false positive probability of 71 per cent
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
History:
From electronic version of the journal
(End) Ana Fiallos [CDS] 23-Feb-2023