A FIRST COMPARISON OF KEPLER PLANET CANDIDATES IN SINGLE AND MULTIPLE SYSTEMS

By D. Latham, J. Rowe, S. Quinn, N. Batalha, William J. Borucki, T. Brown, S. Bryson, Lars A. Buchhave, Douglas A. Caldwell, J. Carter and 23 more. 2011

150 citations recorded by the source corpus.

In this Letter, we present an overview of the rich population of systems with multiple candidate transiting planets found in the first four months of Kepler data. The census of multiples includes 115 targets that show two candidate planets, 45 with three, eight with four, and one each with five and six, for a total of 170 systems with 408 candidates. When compared to the 827 systems with only one candidate, the multiples account for 17% of the total number of systems, and one-third of all the planet candidates. We compare the characteristics of candidates found in multiples with those found in singles. False positives due to eclipsing binaries are much less common for the multiples, as expected. Singles and multiples are both dominated by planets smaller than Neptune; 69+2 − 3% for singles and 86+2 − 5% for multiples. This result, that systems with multiple transiting planets are less likely to include a transiting giant planet, suggests that close-in giant planets tend to disrupt the orbital inclinations of small planets in flat systems, or maybe even prevent the formation of such systems in the first place.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation, Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a5c387c0da6bde4b899f4a0efb44632390f9a2dd

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 Instrumentation

In Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

Citations in the corpus

VALIDATION OF KEPLER'S MULTIPLE PLANET CANDIDATES. III. LIGHT CURVE ANALYSIS AND ANNOUNCEMENT OF HUNDREDS OF NEW MULTI-PLANET SYSTEMS (2014, background): “They rarely occur when there is evidence of multiple transiting objects, a fact first noted by Latham et al. (2011).”
FUNDAMENTAL PROPERTIES OF KEPLER PLANET-CANDIDATE HOST STARS USING ASTEROSEISMOLOGY (2013, unknown): “Early results using Kepler planet candidates showed that single planets appear to be more common around hotter stars, while multiple planetary system are preferentially found around cooler stars (Latham et al. 2011).”
The Occurrence and Architecture of Exoplanetary Systems (2014, methodology): “Small planets are also more likely to be found in multiplanet systems than the giant planets (Latham et al. 2011), reinforcing the association between multiplanet systems and lower eccentricity.”
ARCHITECTURE AND DYNAMICS OF KEPLER'S CANDIDATE MULTIPLE TRANSITING PLANET SYSTEMS (2011, background): “Ragozzine & Holman (2010), Lissauer et al. (2011), and Latham et al. (2011) point out that KOIs of target stars with multiple planet candidates are less likely to be caused by astrophysical false positives than are KOIs of stars with single candidates, although the possibility that one of the…”
LOW FALSE POSITIVE RATE OF KEPLER CANDIDATES ESTIMATED FROM A COMBINATION OF SPITZER AND FOLLOW-UP OBSERVATIONS (2015, methodology): “The latter sample contains less than a percent of false positives (Latham et al. 2011; Lissauer et al. 2012, 2014).”
Transit timing observations from Kepler - III. : Confirmation of four multiple planet systems by a Fourier-domain study of anticorrelated transit timing variations (2012, background): “Generally speaking, it is difficult to construct astrophysical false positives that can mimic a multi-transiting system (Lissauer et al. 2011b; Latham et al. 2011; Ragozzine and Holman 2010).”
FRIENDS OF HOT JUPITERS. I. A RADIAL VELOCITY SEARCH FOR MASSIVE, LONG-PERIOD COMPANIONS TO CLOSE-IN GAS GIANT PLANETS (2013, background): “In contrast, the Kepler candidate multi-planet systems typically consist of tightlypacked sets of low-mass (smaller than Neptune) planets on orbits less than 100 days (e.g., Latham et al. 2011, Fabrycky et al. 2012, Steffen et al. 2013).”
VALIDATION OF KEPLER'S MULTIPLE PLANET CANDIDATES. II. REFINED STATISTICAL FRAMEWORK AND DESCRIPTIONS OF SYSTEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST (2014, background): “Kepler has found far more multiple planet candidate systems (multis) than would be the case if candidates were randomly distributed among target stars (Lissauer et al. 2011b; Latham et al. 2011).”
THE KEPLER-10 PLANETARY SYSTEM REVISITED BY HARPS-N: A HOT ROCKY WORLD AND A SOLID NEPTUNE-MASS PLANET (2014, background): “This result was not a surprise, because planet candidates in multi-transit systems are much less likely to be false positives than candidates in single-transit systems (Latham et al. 2011).”
TRANSIT TIMING OBSERVATIONS FROM KEPLER. IV. CONFIRMATION OF FOUR MULTIPLE-PLANET SYSTEMS BY SIMPLE PHYSICAL MODELS (2012, background): “A priori, it has been argued that planet candidates in multipleplanet systems have a higher fidelity than planet candidates that are by themselves, even before performing follow-up observations or analysis (Lissauer et al. 2011b; Latham et al. 2011, Lissauer et al. in press).”
Characterization of exoplanets from their formation - II. The planetary mass-radius relationship (2012, background): “It is further interesting that when Kepler candidates in multiple systems only are considered (Latham et al. 2011), then the observed radius distribution is bimodal.”
The California-Kepler Survey. V. Peas in a Pod: Planets in a Kepler Multi-planet System Are Similar in Size and Regularly Spaced (2017, background): “The Kepler Mission (Borucki et al. 2010) has enabled detailed statistics of hundreds of coplanar multi-planet systems (Latham et al. 2011; Lissauer et al. 2011; Lissauer et al. 2012; Fabrycky et al. 2014; Lissauer et al. 2014; Rowe et al. 2014).”
GIANT PLANETS ORBITING METAL-RICH STARS SHOW SIGNATURES OF PLANET–PLANET INTERACTIONS (2013, unknown): “(See also Latham et al. 2011.)”
CHARACTERISTICS OF PLANETARY CANDIDATES OBSERVED BY KEPLER. II. ANALYSIS OF THE FIRST FOUR MONTHS OF DATA (2011, background): “While Latham et al. (2011) and Lissauer et al. (2011b) present several arguments showing that candidates in multiples are more likely to be true planets, a thorough analysis of each system and a check of background binaries are required before any discovery can be claimed.”
The Derivation, Properties, and Value of Kepler’s Combined Differential Photometric Precision (2012, background): “…2011a; Howard et al. 2011; Youdin 2011; Catanzarite & Shao 2011) and trends, such as comparing single planet candidate systems to those with multiple planet candidates (Latham et al. 2011), and the environments of small planet candidates compared to large planet candidates (Buchhave et al. 2012).”
ALMOST ALL OF KEPLER'S MULTIPLE-PLANET CANDIDATES ARE PLANETS (2012, background): “Yet the fidelity of multiple planet candidates is likely to be higher than that for singles (Latham et al. 2011; Lissauer et al. 2011a).”
THE STATISTICS OF MULTI-PLANET SYSTEMS (2011, background): “Latham et al. (2011) have shown that Kepler systems with multiple tranets are less likely to include a giant planet (larger than Neptune) than systems with a single tranet.”