Paper detail

A Goldilocks principle for modeling radial velocity noise

The doppler measurements of stars are diluted and distorted by stellar activity noise. Different choices of noise models and statistical methods have led to much controversy in the confirmation of exoplanet candidates obtained through analysing radial velocity data. To quantify the limitation of various models and methods, we compare different noise models and signal detection criteria for various simulated and real data sets in the Bayesian framework. According to our analyses, the white noise model tend to interpret noise as signal, leading to false positives. On the other hand, the red noise models are likely to interprete signal as noise, resulting in false negatives. We find that the Bayesian information criterion combined with a Bayes factor threshold of 150 can efficiently rule out false positives and confirm true detections. We further propose a Goldilocks principle aimed at modeling radial velocity noise to avoid too many false positives and too many false negatives. We propose that the noise model with RHK-dependent jitter is used in combination with the moving average model to detect planetary signals for M dwarfs. Our work may also shed light on the noise modeling for hotter stars, and provide a valid approach for finding similar principles in other disciplines.

preprint2016arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.