4.7 Article

The Gemini Deep Planet Survey

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 670, 期 2, 页码 1367-1390

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1086/522826

关键词

binaries : close; planetary systems; stars : imaging; stars : low-mass; brown dwarfs

资金

  1. Science and Technology Facilities Council [PP/C50352X/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present the results of the Gemini Deep Planet Survey, a near-infrared adaptive optics search for giant planets and brown dwarfs around 85 nearby young stars. The observations were obtained with the Altair adaptive optics system at the Gemini North telescope, and angular differential imaging was used to suppress the speckle noise of the central star. Typically, the observations are sensitive to angular separations beyond 0.5 '' with 5 sigma contrast sensitivities in magnitude difference at 1.6 mu m of 9.5 at 0.5 '', 12.9 at 1 '', 15.0 at 2 '', and 16.5 at 5 ''. These sensitivities are sufficient to detect planets more massive than 2 M-J with a projected separation in the range 40-200 AU around a typical target. Second-epoch observations of 48 stars with candidates (out of 54) have confirmed that all candidates are unrelated background stars. Adetailed statistical analysis of the survey results is presented. Assuming a planet mass distribution dn/dm proportional to m(-1.2) and a semimajor-axis distribution dn/da proportional to a(-1), the 95% credible upper limits on the fraction of stars with at least one planet of mass 0.5-13 M-J are 0.28 for the range 10-25 AU, 0.13 for 25-50 AU, and 0.093 for 50-250 AU; this result is weakly dependent on the semimajor-axis distribution power-law index. The 95% credible interval for the fraction of stars with at least one brown dwarf companion having a semimajor axis in the range 25-250 AU is 0.019(-0.015)(+0.083), irrespective of any assumption on the mass and semimajor-axis distributions. The observations made as part of this survey have resolved the stars HD 14802, HD 166181, and HD 213845 into binaries for the first time.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据