4.7 Article

EMERGING TRENDS IN A PERIOD-RADIUS DISTRIBUTION OF CLOSE-IN PLANETS

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 763, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/763/1/12

Keywords

planets and satellites: general; stars: abundances

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation (NSF) through an Astronomy and Astrophysics Grant (AAG)
  2. Argentina Research Council-CONICET
  3. Universidad Nacional de Cordoba
  4. Division Of Astronomical Sciences
  5. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [1008890] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We analyze the distribution of extrasolar planets (both confirmed and Kepler candidates) according to their orbital periods P and planetary radii R. Among confirmed planets, we find compelling evidence for a paucity of bodies with 3 R-circle plus < R < 10 R-circle plus, where R. is Earth's radius and P < 2-3 days. We have christened this region a sub-Jovian Pampas. The same trend is detected in multiplanet Kepler candidates. Although approximately 16 Kepler single-planet candidates inhabit this Pampas, at least 7 are probable false positives (FPs). This last number could be significantly higher if the ratio of FPs is higher than 10%, as suggested by recent studies. In a second part of the paper we analyze the distribution of planets in the (P, R) plane according to stellar metallicities. We find two interesting trends: (1) a lack of small planets (R < 4 R-circle plus) with orbital periods P < 5 days in metal-poor stars and (2) a paucity of sub-Jovian planets (4 R-circle plus < R < 8 R-circle plus) with P < 100 days, also around metal-poor stars. Although all these trends are preliminary, they appear statistically significant and deserve further scrutiny. If confirmed, they could represent important constraints on theories of planetary formation and dynamical evolution.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available