TEN NEW AND UPDATED MULTIPLANET SYSTEMS AND A SURVEY OF EXOPLANETARY SYSTEMS

By Jason T. Wright, Shailesh Upadhyay, G. Marcy, Debra A. Fischer, Eric B. Ford, J. Johnson. 2008

259 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We present the latest velocities for ten multiplanet systems, including a re-analysis of archival Keck and Lick data, resulting in improved velocities that supersede our previously published measurements. We derive updated orbital fits for 10 Lick and Keck systems, including two systems (HD 11964, HD 183263) for which we provide confirmation of second planets only tentatively identified elsewhere, and two others (HD 187123 and HD 217107) for which we provide a major revision of the outer planet's orbit. We compile orbital elements from the literature to generate a catalog of the 28 published multiple-planet systems around stars within 200 pc. From this catalog we find several intriguing patterns emerging: (1) including those systems with long-term radial velocity trends, at least 28% of known planetary systems appear to contain multiple planets; (2) planets in multiple-planet systems have somewhat smaller eccentricities than single planets; and (3) the distribution of orbital distances of planets in multiplanet systems and single planets are inconsistent: single-planet systems show a pileup at P ∼ 3 days and a jump near 1 AU, while multiplanet systems show a more uniform distribution in log-period. In addition, among all planetary systems we find the following. (1) There may be an emerging, positive correlation between stellar mass and giant-planet semimajor axis. (2) Exoplanets with M sin i > 1 MJup more massive than Jupiter have eccentricities broadly distributed across 0 < e < 0.5, while lower mass exoplanets exhibit a distribution peaked near e = 0.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fca73abc11de0989dce6e9ff41712ec376f600a1

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

1. D. Charbonneau
2. Timothy Morton
3. Jon Fortney
4. J. Johnson
5. J. Winn
6. G. Marcy
7. Andrew W. Howard
8. Sara Seager

Citations in the corpus

• Search for brown-dwarf companions of stars (2010, methodology): “(1) Minniti et al. (2009); (2) Nidever et al. (2002); (3) Perrier et al. (2003); (4) Wright et al. (2009); (5) Jenkins et al. (2009). only for the visualisation and not during the orbit adjustment.”
• The Exoplanet Orbit Database (2010, background): “Many of these features have been explored in the literature, especially in Wright et al. (2009) and Wright (2009).”
• FRIENDS OF HOT JUPITERS. I. A RADIAL VELOCITY SEARCH FOR MASSIVE, LONG-PERIOD COMPANIONS TO CLOSE-IN GAS GIANT PLANETS (2013, background): “The sample of radial velocity planets provides a better basis for comparison, as it includes many systems with long-term radial velocity monitoring capable of detecting massive companions on long-period orbits (e.g., Fischer et al. 2001; Wright et al. 2007, 2009).”
• EFFICIENT FITTING OF MULTIPLANET KEPLERIAN MODELS TO RADIAL VELOCITY AND ASTROMETRY DATA (2009, methodology): “Fitting Kepelerian Curves The discovery of over 27 multiple-planet systems in recent years (Wright et al. 2009) has required algorithms for disentangling the radial-velocity signature of such complex systems.”
• PLANET OCCURRENCE WITHIN 0.25 AU OF SOLAR-TYPE STARS FROM KEPLER (2011, background): “However, we do see modest evidence among the Kepler giant planets of the pileup of hot Jupiters at orbital periods near 3 days (Figures 4 and 6) as is dramatically obvious from Doppler surveys of stars in the solar neighborhood (Marcy et al. 2008; Wright et al. 2009).”
• ALMOST ALL OF KEPLER'S MULTIPLE-PLANET CANDIDATES ARE PLANETS (2012, background): “…and periods are adequate for transits to be detected often come in multiples, as is the case for planets detected by radial velocity variations (Wright et al. 2009), and/or if planetary systems tend to be flat, so geometry leads to higher transit probabilities for other planets if one planet…”
• ECCENTRICITY FROM TRANSIT PHOTOMETRY: SMALL PLANETS IN KEPLER MULTI-PLANET SYSTEMS HAVE LOW ECCENTRICITIES (2015, background): “RV surveys also found evidence that orbital eccentricities for sub-Jovian planets reach up to 0.45 (Wright et al. 2009; Mayor et al. 2011).”
• THE CALIFORNIA PLANET SURVEY. I. FOUR NEW GIANT EXOPLANETS (2010, background): “Moreover, planet-planet interactions among giant planets must be predicted and compared with the distributions of orbital elements (especially eccentricity) for systems containing multiple giant planets, e.g. Wright et al. (2009); Ford & Chiang (2007); Ford & Rasio (2008); Jurić & Tremaine (2008).”
• ARCHITECTURE AND DYNAMICS OF KEPLER'S CANDIDATE MULTIPLE TRANSITING PLANET SYSTEMS (2011, background): “We know from radial velocity observations that planets frequently come in multiple systems (Wright et al. 2009), whereas astrophysical false positives are expected to be nearly random.”
• The Occurrence and Architecture of Exoplanetary Systems (2014, methodology): “Wright et al. (2009) used Doppler data to show that systems with more than one detected giant planet rarely include a hot Jupiter, and Steffen et al. (2012) used Kepler data to show that hot Jupiters are less likely than longer-period giants to show evidence for somewhat more distant planetary…”
• THE STATISTICS OF MULTI-PLANET SYSTEMS (2011, background): “Wright et al. (2009) point out that this difference may be amplified by an unmodeled survey selection effect—stars hosting planets tend to be observed more frequently, thereby enhancing the chance of discovering additional low-mass planets.”
• Limits on Planetary Companions from Doppler Surveys of Nearby Stars (2016, background): “HD 9826 (HIP 7513; programs: C, A)—υ Andromedae hosts three known planets with masses of 0.67, 1.9, and 4.1MJ with orbital periods of 4.6, 241, and 1278 days (Butler et al. 1997, 1999; Wright et al. 2009).”
• THE ORBITAL EVOLUTION OF GAS GIANT PLANETS AROUND GIANT STARS (2009, background): “…of the most important trends that these surveys have revealed is the lack of close-in planets orbiting stars with masses M > 1.5 M (Johnson et al. 2007b; Sato et al. 2008; Wright et al. 2009) despite the fact that these planets are found around ≈20% of the main-sequence (MS) stars with M < 1.2 M .”