Paper detail

Period Error Estimation for the Kepler Eclipsing Binary Catalog

The Kepler Eclipsing Binary Catalog (KEBC)describes 2165 eclipsing binaries identified in the 115 deg^2 Kepler Field based on observations from Kepler quarters Q0, Q1, and Q2. The periods in the KEBC are given in units of days out to six decimal places but no period errors are provided. We present the PEC (Period Error Calculator) algorithm which can be used to estimate the period errors of strictly periodic variables observed by the Kepler Mission. The PEC algorithm is based on propagation of error theory and assumes that observation of every light curve peak/minimum in a long time-series observation can be unambiguously identified. The PEC algorithm can be efficiently programmed using just a few lines of C computer language code. The PEC algorithm was used to develop a simple model which provides period error estimates for eclipsing binaries in the KEBC with periods less than 62.5 days. KEBC systems with periods >=62.5 days have KEBC period errors of about 0.0144 days. Periods and period errors of 7 eclipsing binary systems in the KEBC were measured using the NASA Exoplanet Archive Periodogram Service and compared to period errors estimated using the PEC algorithm.

preprint2013arXivOpen 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.