Paper detail

Implicit biases in transit models using stellar pseudo-density

The transit technique is responsible for the majority of exoplanet discoveries to date. Characterizing these planets involves careful modeling of their transit profiles. A common technique involves expressing the transit duration using a density-like parameter, $\tildeρ$, often called the "circular density." Most notably, the Kepler project -- the largest analysis of transit lightcurves to date -- adopted a linear prior on $\tildeρ$. Here, we show that such a prior biases measurements of impact parameter, $b$, due to the non-linear relationship between $\tildeρ$ and transit duration. This bias slightly favors low values ($b \lesssim 0.3$) and strongly disfavors high values ($b \gtrsim 0.7$) unless transit signal-to-noise ratio is sufficient to provide an independent constraint on $b$, a criterion that is not satisfied for the majority of Kepler planets. Planet-to-star radius ratio, $r$, is also biased due to $r{-}b$ covariance. Consequently, the median Kepler DR25 target suffers a $1.6\%$ systematic underestimate of $r$. We present a techniques for correcting these biases and for avoiding them in the first place.

preprint2022arXivOpen 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.