Paper detail

Probabilistic Mass-Radius Relationship for Sub-Neptune-Sized Planets

The Kepler Mission has discovered thousands of planets with radii $<4\ R_\oplus$, paving the way for the first statistical studies of the dynamics, formation, and evolution of these sub-Neptunes and super-Earths. Planetary masses are an important physical property for these studies, and yet the vast majority of Kepler planet candidates do not have theirs measured. A key concern is therefore how to map the measured radii to mass estimates in this Earth-to-Neptune size range where there are no Solar System analogs. Previous works have derived deterministic, one-to-one relationships between radius and mass. However, if these planets span a range of compositions as expected, then an intrinsic scatter about this relationship must exist in the population. Here we present the first probabilistic mass-radius relationship (M-R relation) evaluated within a Bayesian framework, which both quantifies this intrinsic dispersion and the uncertainties on the M-R relation parameters. We analyze how the results depend on the radius range of the sample, and on how the masses were measured. Assuming that the M-R relation can be described as a power law with a dispersion that is constant and normally distributed, we find that $M/M_\oplus=2.7(R/R_\oplus)^{1.3}$, a scatter in mass of $1.9\ M_\oplus$, and a mass constraint to physically plausible densities, is the &#34;best-fit&#34; probabilistic M-R relation for the sample of RV-measured transiting sub-Neptunes ($R_{pl}<4\ R_\oplus$). More broadly, this work provides a framework for further analyses of the M-R relation and its probable dependencies on period and stellar properties.

preprint2016arXivOpen 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.