THE FREQUENCY OF HOT JUPITERS ORBITING NEARBY SOLAR-TYPE STARS

By Jason T. Wright, G. Marcy, Andrew W. Howard, J. Johnson, Timothy Morton, Debra A. Fischer. 2012

229 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We determine the fraction of F, G, and K dwarfs in the solar neighborhood hosting hot Jupiters as measured by the California Planet Survey from the Lick and Keck planet searches. We find the rate to be 1.2% ± 0.38%, which is consistent with the rate reported by Mayor et al. from the HARPS and CORALIE radial velocity (RV) surveys. These numbers are more than double the rate reported by Howard et al. for Kepler stars and the rate of Gould et al. from the OGLE-III transit search; however, due to small number statistics these differences are of only marginal statistical significance. We explore some of the difficulties in estimating this rate from the existing RV data sets and comparing RV rates to rates from other techniques.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/16ecb38d042f7db82a706b44af6847d9996b1d62

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

In Electrical and Electronic Engineering

In Instrumentation

Citations in the corpus

The Occurrence and Architecture of Exoplanetary Systems (2014, background): “The discrepancy might be attributable to differences in metallicity or the frequency of multiple-star systems between the two samples (Gould et al. 2006, Bayliss & Sackett 2011, Wright et al. 2012).”
SOPHIE velocimetry of Kepler transit candidates VII. A false-positive rate of 35% for Kepler close-in giant candidates (2012, background): “The occurrence rate of hot Jupiters around GK dwarfs when considering candidates from their measured transit depth appears to agree better with radial velocity surveys (see Wright et al. 2012, and reference therein) than selecting them according to their estimated radius.”
MAKE SUPER-EARTHS, NOT JUPITERS: ACCRETING NEBULAR GAS ONTO SOLID CORES AT 0.1 AU AND BEYOND (2014, background): “The prevalence of super-Earths is consonant with the rarity of Jupiters at these distances (e.g., Jones et al. 2003; Udry et al. 2003; Wright et al. 2012; Fressin et al. 2013; Dawson & Murray-Clay 2013).”
HOW ROCKY ARE THEY? THE COMPOSITION DISTRIBUTION OF KEPLER’S SUB-NEPTUNE PLANET CANDIDATES WITHIN 0.15 AU (2014, background): “…Dressing & Charbonneau 2013; Morton & Swift 2013; Petigura et al. 2013), the consistency between RV and transit surveys (Wolfgang & Laughlin 2012; Wright et al. 2012; Figueira et al. 2012), the Kepler eccentricity distribution (Moorhead et al. 2011; Kane et al. 2012; Wu & Lithwick 2013), and the…”
The California-Kepler Survey. IV. Metal-rich Stars Host a Greater Diversity of Planets (2017, methodology): “Wright et al. (2012) reported 10 hot Jupiters from a sample of 836 stars or a rate of 1.2± 0.4%, twice the rate presented here.”
GIANT PLANETS ORBITING METAL-RICH STARS SHOW SIGNATURES OF PLANET–PLANET INTERACTIONS (2013, background): “Approximately 1% of stars host hot Jupiters, ousted from their birthplaces to short-period orbits (Wright et al. 2012) via mechanisms that remain debated.”
VALIDATION OF KEPLER'S MULTIPLE PLANET CANDIDATES. II. REFINED STATISTICAL FRAMEWORK AND DESCRIPTIONS OF SYSTEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST (2014, background): “It may be that very close-in planets truly lack nearby planetary neighbors, as is the case for hot jupiters (Steffen et al. 2012, Wright et al. 2012), and/or that very close-in planets tend to have substantial orbital inclinations relative to more distant planets in their systems.”
AN EFFICIENT AUTOMATED VALIDATION PROCEDURE FOR EXOPLANET TRANSIT CANDIDATES (2012, background): “For KOI 552.01 I calculate FPP=0.90 (assuming a specific occurrence of 1%, appropriate for Jupiter-sized planets (Wright et al. 2012))—in other words, this procedure clearly identifies this signal as a very likely false positive using only the photometry, and no follow-up information at all.”
LSST: From Science Drivers to Reference Design and Anticipated Data Products (2008, methodology): “• Discovery and characterization of thousands of hot Jupiters in exoplanetary systems via the transit method (Wright et al. 2012).”
SOPHIE velocimetry of Kepler transit candidates XVII. The physical properties of giant exoplanets within 400 days of period (2015, result): “However, this value seems to be systematically different with the values measured independently by RV in the California Planet Survey (Wright et al. 2012) and the Swiss-led planet survey (Mayor et al. subm.).”
The NASA Exoplanet Archive: Data and Tools for Exoplanet Research (2013, methodology): “This includes high-resolution spectra from the N2K Consortium (Fischer et al. 2007), the M2K program (Fischer et al. 2012), and the California Planet search team (Wright et al. 2012).”
Imaging Extrasolar Giant Planets (2016, background): “…stellar host mass, the overall giant planet occurrence rate for the full sample of 384 stars is 0.6+0.7 −0.5%, which happens to be comparable to the frequency of hot Jupiters around FGK stars in the field (1.2 ± 0.4%; Wright et al. 2012) and in the Kepler sample (0.5 ± 0.1%; Howard et al. 2012).”
KELT-1b: A STRONGLY IRRADIATED, HIGHLY INFLATED, SHORT PERIOD, 27 JUPITER-MASS COMPANION TRANSITING A MID-F STAR (2012, methodology): “8) FGK dwarfs in the sky have been monitored using precision radial velocity surveys for many years, and as a result most of the giant planets with periods of less than a few years orbiting these stars have already been discovered (e.g., Wright et al. 2012).”
TERRESTRIAL PLANET OCCURRENCE RATES FOR THE KEPLER GK DWARF SAMPLE (2015, unknown): “…Field, CA 94035, USA 2005; Naef et al. 2005; Gould et al. 2006; Sahu et al. 2006; Cumming et al. 2008; Bowler et al. 2010; Howard et al. 2010; Bayliss & Sackett 2011; Mayor et al. 2011; van Saders & Gaudi 2011; Wright et al. 2012; Bonfils et al. 2013; Meibom et al. 2013; Clanton & Gaudi 2014).”
THE RADIUS DISTRIBUTION OF PLANETS AROUND COOL STARS (2013, background): “But not unlike many areas of astronomy, the first discoveries are not representative samples; rather, close-in giant planets are relatively rare (Wright et al. 2012; Howard et al. 2010) in comparison to the new populations of exoplanets now being revealed by the Kepler Mission (Borucki et al. 2011;…”
ON THE FORMATION OF HOT JUPITERS IN STELLAR BINARIES (2012, methodology): “Taking fb ≃ 0.3, estimated from the tail of the distribution in Duquennoy & Mayor (1991), and fp ≃ 0.07, consistent with the studies from Wright et al. (2012) and Marcy et al. (2005), we find f ≃ 0.0032.”
From thermal dissociation to condensation in the atmospheres of ultra hot Jupiters: WASP-121b in context (2018, background): “Ultra hot Jupiters are actually a rare outcome of planet formation (Wright et al. 2012), yet fortunately many are known mainly due to the excellent sky coverage of groundbased transit surveys like WASP (Pollacco et al. 2006), HATNet and HATSouth (Bakos 2018), KELT (Pepper et al. 2007), and MASCARA…”