Paper detail

The Keck Planet Search: Detectability and the Minimum Mass and Orbital Period Distribution of Extrasolar Planets

We analyze 8 years of precise radial velocity measurements from the Keck Planet Search, characterizing the detection threshold, selection effects, and completeness of the survey. We carry out a systematic search for planets by assessing the false alarm probability associated with Keplerian orbit fits to the data. This allows us to understand the detection threshold for each star in terms of the number and time baseline of the observations, and size of measurement errors and stellar jitter. We show that all planets with orbital periods <2000 days, velocity amplitudes >20 m/s, and eccentricities <0.6 have been announced, and summarize the candidates at lower amplitudes and longer orbital periods. For the remaining stars, we calculate upper limits on the velocity amplitude of a companion, typically 10 m/s, and use the non-detections to derive completeness corrections at low amplitudes and long orbital periods. We give the fraction of stars with a planet as a function of planet mass and orbital period, and extrapolate to long period orbits and low planet masses. A power law fit for planet masses >0.3 Jupiter masses and periods <2000 days gives a mass-period distribution dN=C M^αP^βdlnM dlnP with α=-0.31 \pm 0.2, β=0.26\pm 0.1, and the normalization constant C such that 10.5% of solar type stars have a planet with mass in the range 0.3-10 Jupiter masses and orbital period 2-2000 days. The orbital period distribution shows an increase in the planet fraction by a factor of 5 for orbital periods beyond 300 days. Extrapolation gives 17-20% of stars having gas giant planets within 20 AU. Finally, taking into account differences in detectability, we find that M dwarfs are 3 to 10 times less likely to harbor a Jupiter mass planet than solar type stars.

preprint2008arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 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.