Paper detail

Observational biases in determining extrasolar planet eccentricities in single-planet systems

We investigate potential biases in the measurements of exoplanet orbital parameters obtained from radial velocity observations for single-planet systems. We create a mock catalog of radial velocity data, choosing input planet masses, periods, and observing patterns from actual radial velocity surveys and varying input eccentricities. We apply Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) simulations and compare the resulting orbital parameters to the input values. We find that a combination of the effective signal-to-noise ratio of the data, the maximal gap in phase coverage, and the total number of periods covered by observations is a good predictor of the quality of derived orbit parameters. As eccentricity is positive definite, we find that eccentricities of planets on nearly circular orbits are preferentially overestimated, with typical bias of 1-2 times the median eccentricity uncertainty in a survey (e.g., 0.04 in the Butler et al. 2006 catalog). When performing population analysis, we recommend using the mode of the marginalized posterior eccentricity distribution to minimize potential biases. While the Butler et al. (2006) catalog reports eccentricities below 0.05 for just 17% of single-planet systems, we estimate that the true fraction of e < 0.05 orbits is about f(0.05)=38\pm 9%. For planets with P > 10 days, we find f(0.05)=28\pm 8% versus 10% from Butler et al. (2006). These planets either never acquired a large eccentricity or were circularized following any significant eccentricity excitation.

preprint2010arXivOpen 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.