Paper detail

The Exoplanet Mass-Ratio Function from the MOA-II Survey: Discovery of a Break and Likely Peak at a Neptune Mass

We report the results of the statistical analysis of planetary signals discovered in MOA-II microlensing survey alert system events from 2007 to 2012. We determine the survey sensitivity as a function of planet-star mass ratio, $q$, and projected planet-star separation, $s$, in Einstein radius units. We find that the mass ratio function is not a single power-law, but has a change in slope at $q \sim 10^{-4}$, corresponding to $\sim 20 M_{\oplus}$ for the median host star mass of $\sim 0.6 M_{\odot}$. We find significant planetary signals in 23 of the 1474 alert events that are well characterized by the MOA-II survey data alone. Data from other groups are used only to characterize planetary signals that have been identified in the MOA data alone. The distribution of mass ratios and separations of the planets found in our sample are well fit by a broken power-law model of the form $dN_{\rm pl}/(d{\rm log} q\ d{\rm log} s) = A (q/q_{\rm br})^n s^m \, {\rm dex}^{-2}$ for $q > q_{\rm br}$ and $dN_{\rm pl}/(d{\rm log} q\ d{\rm log} s) = A (q/q_{\rm br})^p s^m \, {\rm dex}^{-2}$ for $q < q_{\rm br}$, where $q_{\rm br}$ is the mass ratio of the break. We also combine this analysis with the previous analyses of Gould et al. and Cassan et al., bringing the total sample to 30 planets. This combined analysis yields $A = 0.61^{+0.21}_{-0.16}$, $n =-0.93\pm 0.13$, $m = 0.49_{-0.49}^{+0.47}$ and $p = 0.6^{+0.5}_{-0.4}$ for $q_{\rm br}\equiv 1.7\times 10^{-4}$. The unbroken power law model is disfavored with a $p$-value of 0.0022, which corresponds to a Bayes factor of 27 favoring the broken power-law model. These results imply that cold Neptunes are likely to be the most common type of planets beyond the snow line.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access29 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.

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.