Paper detail

Characterization of the Kepler-101 planetary system with HARPS-N. A hot super-Neptune with an Earth-sized low-mass companion

We report on the characterization of the Kepler-101 planetary system, thanks to a combined DE-MCMC analysis of Kepler data and forty radial velocities obtained with the HARPS-N spectrograph. This system was previously validated by Rowe et al. (2014) and is composed of a hot super-Neptune, Kepler-101b, and an Earth-sized planet, Kepler-101c. These two planets orbit the slightly evolved and metal-rich G-type star in 3.49 and 6.03 days, respectively. With mass $M_{\rm p}=51.1_{-4.7}^{+5.1}~M_{\oplus}$, radius $R_{\rm p}=5.77_{-0.79}^{+0.85}~R_{\oplus}$, and density $ρ_{\rm p}=1.45_{-0.48}^{+0.83} \rm g\;cm^{-3}$, Kepler-101b is the first fully-characterized super-Neptune, and its density suggests that heavy elements make up a significant fraction of its interior; more than $60\%$ of its total mass. Kepler-101c has a radius of $1.25_{-0.17}^{+0.19}~R_{\oplus}$, which implies the absence of any H/He envelope, but its mass could not be determined due to the relative faintness of the parent star for highly precise radial-velocity measurements ($K_{\rm p}=13.8$) and the limited number of radial velocities. The $1~σ$ upper limit, $M_{\rm p} < 3.8~M_{\oplus}$, excludes a pure iron composition with a $68.3\%$ probability. The architecture of the Kepler-101 planetary system - containing a close-in giant planet and an outer Earth-sized planet with a period ratio slightly larger than the 3:2 resonance - is certainly of interest for planet formation and evolution scenarios. This system does not follow the trend, seen by Ciardi et al. (2013), that in the majority of Kepler systems of planet pairs with at least one Neptune-size or larger planet, the larger planet has the longer period.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access35 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.

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.