Paper detail

High-resolution imaging of $Kepler$ planet host candidates. A comprehensive comparison of different techniques

The Kepler mission has discovered thousands of planet candidates. Currently, some of them have already been discarded; more than 200 have been confirmed by follow-up observations, and several hundreds have been validated. However, most of them are still awaiting for confirmation. Thus, priorities (in terms of the probability of the candidate being a real planet) must be established for subsequent observations. The motivation of this work is to provide a set of isolated (good) host candidates to be further tested by other techniques. We identify close companions of the candidates that could have contaminated the light curve of the planet host. We used the AstraLux North instrument located at the 2.2 m telescope in the Calar Alto Observatory to obtain diffraction-limited images of 174 Kepler objects of interest. The lucky-imaging technique used in this work is compared to other AO and speckle imaging observations of Kepler planet host candidates. We define a new parameter, the blended source confidence level (BSC), to assess the probability of an object to have blended non-detected eclipsing binaries capable of producing the detected transit. We find that 67.2% of the observed Kepler hosts are isolated within our detectability limits, and 32.8% have at least one visual companion at angular separations below 6 arcsec. We find close companions (below 3 arcsec) for the 17.2% of the sample. The planet properties of this sample of non-isolated hosts are revised. We report one possible S-type binary (KOI-3158). We also report three possible false positives (KOIs 1230.01, 3649.01, and 3886.01) due to the presence of close companions. The BSC parameter is calculated for all the isolated targets and compared to both the value prior to any high-resolution image and, when possible, to observations from previous high-spatial resolution surveys in the Kepler sample.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.