Access to Astronomical Catalogues

← Click to display the menu
J/ApJ/809/25   Stellar and planet properties for K2 candidates   (Montet+, 2015)

Stellar and planetary properties of K2 campaign 1 candidates and validation of 17 planets, including a planet receiving earth-like insolation. Montet B.T., Morton T.D., Foreman-Mackey D., Johnson J.A., Hogg D.W., Bowler B.P., Latham D.W., Bieryla A., Mann A.W. <Astrophys. J., 809, 25 (2015)> =2015ApJ...809...25M (SIMBAD/NED BibCode)
ADC_Keywords: Stars, double and multiple ; Planets ; Photometry, UBVRIJKLMNH ; Stars, masses ; Stars, diameters ; Abundances, [Fe/H] Keywords: catalogs - planetary systems - planets and satellites: detection - stars: fundamental parameters Abstract: The extended Kepler mission, K2, is now providing photometry of new fields every three months in a search for transiting planets. In a recent study, Foreman-Mackey and collaborators presented a list of 36 planet candidates orbiting 31 stars in K2 Campaign 1. In this contribution, we present stellar and planetary properties for all systems. We combine ground-based seeing-limited survey data and adaptive optics imaging with an automated transit analysis scheme to validate 21 candidates as planets, 17 for the first time, and identify 6 candidates as likely false positives. Of particular interest is K2-18 (EPIC 201912552), a bright (K=8.9) M2.8 dwarf hosting a 2.23±0.25 R{earth} planet with Teq=272±15 K and an orbital period of 33 days. We also present two new open-source software packages which enable this analysis. The first, isochrones, is a flexible tool for fitting theoretical stellar models to observational data to determine stellar properties using a nested sampling scheme to capture the multimodal nature of the posterior distributions of the physical parameters of stars that may plausibly be evolved. The second is vespa, a new general-purpose procedure to calculate false positive probabilities and statistically validate transiting exoplanets. Description: In this paper, we present stellar and planetary parameters for each system. We also analyze the false positive probability (FPP) of each system using vespa, a new publicly available, general-purpose implementation of the Morton (2012ApJ...761....6M) procedure to calculate FPPs for transiting planets. Through this analysis, as well as archival imaging, ground-based seeing-limited survey data, and adaptive optics imaging, we are able to confirm 21 of these systems as transiting planets at the 99% confidence level. Additionally, we identify six systems as false positives. File Summary:
FileName Lrecl Records Explanations
ReadMe 80 . This file table1.dat 130 31 *Photometry for All Objects of Interest table2.dat 118 31 *Stellar Properties for All Objects of Interest table3.dat 112 36 *Planet Properties for All Objects of Interest table4.dat 79 31 Detected Companions to Candidate Host Stars table5.dat 75 36 False Positive Probability Calculation Results
Note on table1.dat: These data are available in interactive form at Note on table2.dat: The values and their uncertainties are derived from MULTINEST analysis and the numbers are computed as the 0.158, 0.500, and 0.842 posterior sample quantiles. Note on table3.dat: These values and uncertainties are given by the mean and standard deviation of MCMC posterior samplings.
See also: II/246 : 2MASS All-Sky Catalog of Point Sources (Cutri+ 2003) I/322 : UCAC4 Catalogue (Zacharias+, 2012) II/328 : AllWISE Data Release (Cutri+ 2013) J/ApJ/738/170 : False positive Kepler planet candidates (Morton+, 2011) J/ApJS/197/8 : Kepler's candidate multiple transiting planets (Lissauer+, 2011) J/ApJ/783/4 : Properties of Kepler multi-planet candidate systems (Wang+, 2014) J/A+A/582/A33 : K2-19b light curve (Armstrong+, 2015) J/A+A/594/A100 : K2 new planetary and EB candidates (Barros+, 2016) J/AJ/152/18 : Robo-AO Kepler planetary candidate survey. II. (Baranec+, 2016) J/ApJS/224/2 : K2 EPIC stellar properties for 138600 targets (Huber+, 2016) J/ApJS/224/12 : Kepler planetary candidates. VII. 48-month (Coughlin+, 2016) Byte-by-byte Description of file: table1.dat
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
1- 9 I9 --- Star Star's name (EPIC NNNNNNNNN in Simbad) 11- 15 F5.2 mag Bmag ? APASS DR6 B-band magnitude (1) 17- 20 F4.2 mag e_Bmag ? Uncertainty in Bmag (1) 22- 26 F5.2 mag Vmag ? APASS DR6 V-band magnitude (1) 28- 31 F4.2 mag e_Vmag ? Uncertainty in Vmag (1) 33- 37 F5.2 mag gmag APASS DR6 g-band magnitude (1) 39- 42 F4.2 mag e_gmag Uncertainty in gmag (1) 44- 48 F5.2 mag rmag APASS DR6 r-band magnitude (1) 50- 53 F4.2 mag e_rmag Uncertainty in rmag (1) 55- 59 F5.2 mag imag APASS DR6 i-band magnitude (1) 61- 64 F4.2 mag e_imag Uncertainty in imag (1) 66- 70 F5.2 mag Jmag 2MASS J-band magnitude (2) 72- 75 F4.2 mag e_Jmag Uncertainty in Jmag (2) 77- 81 F5.2 mag Hmag 2MASS H-band magnitude (2) 83- 86 F4.2 mag e_Hmag Uncertainty in Hmag (2) 88- 92 F5.2 mag Kmag 2MASS K-band magnitude (2) 94- 97 F4.2 mag e_Kmag Uncertainty in Kmag (2) 99-103 F5.2 mag W1mag AllWISE W1-band magnitude (3) 105-108 F4.2 mag e_W1mag Uncertainty in W1mag (3) 110-114 F5.2 mag W2mag AllWISE W2-band magnitude (3) 116-119 F4.2 mag e_W2mag Uncertainty in W2mag (3) 121-125 F5.2 mag W3mag ? AllWISE W3-band magnitude (3) 127-130 F4.2 mag e_W3mag ? Uncertainty in W3mag (3)
Note (1): Magnitude from the AAVSO Photometric All-sky Survey (APASS) DR6 (Henden & Munari 2014CoSka..43..518H) as reported in the UCAC4 Catalog (Zacharias et al. 2012yCat.1322....0Z, Cat. I/322). Note (2): Magnitude from the 2MASS All-sky Catalog of Point Sources (Cutri et al. 2003, Cat. II/246). Note (3): Magnitude from the ALLWise Data Release (Cutri et al. 2013, Cat. II/328).
Byte-by-byte Description of file: table2.dat
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
1- 9 I9 --- Star Star's name (EPIC NNNNNNNNN in Simbad) 11- 15 A5 --- Other Other name (K2-NN) 16 A1 --- n_Other [a] Note on Other (G1) 18- 27 F10.6 deg RAdeg Right Ascension in decimal degrees (J2000) (1) 29- 37 F9.6 deg DEdeg Declination in decimal degrees (J2000) (1) 39- 43 F5.3 Msun Mass Stellar mass 45- 49 F5.3 Msun E_Mass Upper limit uncertainty in Mass 51- 55 F5.3 Msun e_Mass Lower limit uncertainty in Mass 57- 62 F6.3 Rsun Rad Stellar radius 64- 68 F5.3 Rsun E_Rad Upper limit uncertainty in Rad 70- 74 F5.3 Rsun e_Rad Lower limit uncertainty in Rad 76- 79 I4 K Teff Effective temperature 81- 83 I3 K E_Teff Upper limit uncertainty in Teff 85- 87 I3 K e_Teff Lower limit uncertainty in Teff 89- 93 F5.2 [-] [Fe/H] Stellar metallicity (in dex) 95- 98 F4.2 [-] E_[Fe/H] Upper limit uncertainty in [Fe/H] 100-103 F4.2 [-] e_[Fe/H] Lower limit uncertainty in [Fe/H] 105-108 I4 pc Dist Distance 110-113 I4 pc E_Dist Upper limit uncertainty in Dist 115-118 I4 pc e_Dist Lower limit uncertainty in Dist
Note (1): The coordinates are retrieved directly from the EPIC (Huber et al. 2016, J/ApJS/224/2).
Byte-by-byte Description of file: table3.dat
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
1- 12 F12.2 --- Planet Planet candidate name (EPIC NNNNNNNNN.NN in Simbad) 14- 19 A6 --- Other Other name (K2-NNa) 21 A1 --- n_Other [a] Note on Other (G1) 23- 30 F8.5 d Per ? Period 32- 38 F7.5 d e_Per ? Uncertainty in Per 40- 46 F7.4 d Epoch ? Epoch (BJD-2456808) 48- 53 F6.4 d e_Epoch ? Uncertainty in Epoch 55- 60 F6.2 Rgeo Rad ? Planet radius 62- 66 F5.2 Rgeo e_Rad ? Uncertainty in Rad 68- 72 F5.2 --- a/R* ? Semi-major axis to stellar radius ratio 74- 78 F5.2 --- e_a/R* ? Uncertainty in a/R* 80- 85 F6.4 AU a ? Semi-major axis in AU 87- 92 F6.4 AU e_a ? Uncertainty in a 94- 97 I4 K Teq ? Equilibrium temperature 99-101 I3 K e_Teq ? Uncertainty in Teq 103-111 A9 --- Disp Disposition (Planet,Candidate,FP=False Positive) 112 A1 --- n_Disp [b] Note on Disp (1)
Note (1): Note as follows: b = Declared a false positive due to noise modeling systematics (see Section 5.2).
Byte-by-byte Description of file: table4.dat
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
1- 9 I9 --- Star Primary star name (EPIC NNNNNNNNN in Simbad) 11- 14 F4.1 arcsec Aper Aperture used to create the K2 stellar light curve 16- 25 F10.6 deg RAdeg ? Right Ascension in decimal degrees (J2000) (1) 27- 35 F9.6 deg DEdeg ? Declination in decimal degrees (J2000) (1) 37- 43 A7 --- Detec Dataset used to detect the imaged companion 45- 49 F5.2 arcsec Sep ? Separation (2) 51- 54 F4.2 arcsec e_Sep ? Uncertainty in Sep 55 A1 --- n_Sep [hi] Note on Sep (3) 57- 60 F4.2 mag drmag ? Difference in r-band magnitude between the primary K2 target star and the companion 62- 65 F4.2 mag e_drmag ? Uncertainty in drmag 66 A1 --- n_drmag [j] Note on drmag (4) 68- 72 F5.1 10-3 Depth1 ? Observed "transit" depth (in parts per thousand, ppt) (5) 74- 79 F6.2 10-3 Depth Observed transit depth in the K2 dataset (in parts per thousand, ppt) (6)
Note (1): Position of imaged companion. Note (2): Distance between the primary K2 target star and companion, in the dataset in which the companion is detected. Note (3): Note as follows: h = Separation from AO imaging; i = Separation from SDSS photometry. Note (4): Note as follows: j = Δr inferred from JHK relative photometry. Note (5): If the imaged companion's flux were fully contained in the aperture and if it were an equal-mass eclipsing binary, leading to an eclipse depth of 50%. This is the maximum possible false positive eclipse depth, as described in Section 4.3. Note (6): If larger than the "max depth", this transit event cannot be caused by eclipses of the background star.
Byte-by-byte Description of file: table5.dat
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
1- 12 F12.2 --- Planet Planet candidate name (EPIC NNNNNNNNN.NN in Simbad) 14- 19 A6 --- Other Other name (K2-NNa) 21- 24 F4.2 10-3 delta Maximum depth of potential secondary eclipse signal (in parts per thousand, ppt) 26 A1 --- AO [Y-] Adaptive optics observation presented in this paper ? 28 A1 --- l_PrEB [<] Limit flag on PrEB 29- 34 E6.2 --- PrEB ? Relative probability for this false positive scenario : undiluted eclipsing binary 36 A1 --- l_PrBEB [<] Limit flag on PrBEB 37- 42 E6.2 --- PrBEB ? Relative probability for this false positive scenario : chance-aligned background (/foreground) eclipsing binary 44 A1 --- l_PrHEB [<] Limit flag on PrHEB 45- 50 E6.2 --- PrHEB ? Relative probability for this false positive scenario : hierarchical triple eclipsing binary 52- 55 F4.2 --- fp ? Integrated planet occurrence rate (1) 57 A1 --- l_FPP [<] Limit flag on FPP 58- 63 E6.2 --- FPP ? False positive probability (2) 65- 73 A9 --- Disp Disposition (Planet,Candidate,FP=False Positive) 75 A1 --- n_Disp [defg] Note on Disp (3)
Note (1): Assumed between 0.7x and 1.3x the candidate radius. Note (2): Candidates are declared to be validated planets if FPP<0.01. Note (3): Note as follows: d = Despite low FPP, returned to candidate status out of abundance of caution due to secondary star detection within or near photometric aperture. e = Declared a false positive due to noise modeling systematics (see Section 5.2). f = Identified as planets by Crossfield et al. (2015ApJ...804...10C). g = Identified as planets by Armstrong et al. (2015, J/A+A/582/A33).
Global notes: Note (G1): Note as follows: a = Parameters inferred from spectroscopic observations.
History: From electronic version of the journal
(End) Prepared by Tiphaine Pouvreau [CDS] 21-Sep-2017
The document above follows the rules of the Standard Description for Astronomical Catalogues.From this documentation it is possible to generate f77 program to load files into arrays or line by line

catalogue service

© Université de Strasbourg/CNRS

    • Contact