Paper detail

An a priori investigation of astrophysical false positives in ground-based transiting planet surveys

Astrophysical false positives due to stellar eclipsing binaries pose one of the greatest challenges to ground-based surveys for transiting Hot Jupiters. We have used known properties of multiple star systems and Hot Jupiter systems to predict, a priori, the number of such false detections and the number of genuine planet detections recovered in two hypothetical but realistic ground-based transit surveys targeting fields close to the galactic plane (b~10 degrees): a shallow survey covering a magnitude range 10<V<13, and a deep survey covering a magnitude range 15<V<19. Our results are consistent with the commonly-reported experience of false detections outnumbering planet detections by a factor of ~10 in shallow surveys, while in our synthetic deep survey we find ~1-2 false detections for every planet detection. We characterize the eclipsing binary configurations that are most likely to cause false detections and find that they can be divided into three main types: (i) two dwarfs undergoing grazing transits, (ii) two dwarfs undergoing low-latitude transits in which one component has a substantially smaller radius than the other, and (iii) two eclipsing dwarfs blended with one or more physically unassociated foreground stars. We also predict that a significant fraction of Hot Jupiter detections are blended with the light from other stars, showing that care must be taken to identify the presence of any unresolved neighbors in order to obtain accurate estimates of planetary radii. This issue is likely to extend to terrestrial planet candidates in the CoRoT and Kepler transit surveys, for which neighbors of much fainter relative brightness will be important.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.