adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Mass Transfer as an Explanation for the Lifetime Travel Time Discrepancy in IT Librae
Authors: Peter Wysocki, Douglas Gies, Katherine Shepard, Kathryn Lester, and Jerome Orosz
Figure caption: IT Lib’s position over time in terms of height above the Galactic plane z and the distance from the Galactic center R. The solid black line marks the Galactic plane. The red point is IT Lib’s current position, the blue line shows positions where IT Lib was in the past, and the green point is where IT Lib’s primary star should have left the MS according to MESA (if born around the time of ejection). The purple tick marks on the blue curve show 1 million year increments measured backward from IT Librae’s current position.
Paper: Mass Transfer as an Explanation for the Lifetime Travel Time Discrepancy in IT Librae
Authors: Peter Wysocki, Douglas Gies, Katherine Shepard, Kathryn Lester, and Jerome Orosz
Figure caption: The changes in component masses over time in a BPASS model for Case A mass transfer (i.e., during core H burning of the mass donor). This model predicts binary properties like those of IT Lib at an age of 36 Myr. The current secondary is the mass donor star in this scenario.
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: Geometric illustration for the different timescales. The wobbling line shows the position of the major image with respect to the unlensed position of the source at the same epoch. During the event, the major images move along this line in a clockwise or counterclockwise direction (clockwise for the shown event). The wobbling motion is caused by the parallactic motion of the lens. The black dashed and solid circles are centered on the origin, and the position of the major image at the epoch of the closest approach. Both have a radius of 0.1 mas. taml describes the duration where the major image is outside of the dashed circle (orange + green, part of the line). t0.1 mas describes the duration between entering the solid circle and reaching the center (green part of the line). Similar to t0.1 mas, t50% describes how long it would take if the circle had a radius of 0.5δθ+.
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: Illustration of the selection process. The search for astrometric-microlensing events is divided into four major parts. The selection of good HPMSs (blue), the selection of good background stars (green), the exclusion of co-moving stars (red), and the determination of the closest approach and estimation of the expected microlensing effect (black). The search for close-by BGSs is performed on the sample of ∼500,000 HPMSs, and the selections of good HPMSs and BGSs are performed independently from each other. The illustration lists the different selection criteria, showing the number of excluded HPMSs, BGSs, candidates, or events. In each process, stars can be excluded due to multiple criteria. The small rectangular boxes indicate locations where the major computation is performed.
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: Proper motions (μtot) and parallaxes (ϖ) for all used HPMSs (blue), excluded HPMSs (red), and BGSs (green). The high number of HPMSs excluded with small parallaxes is due to the selection of HPMSs with ϖ/σϖ > 5. The BGSs and HPMSs show a clear separation, the few BGSs μtot > 100 mas yr−1 are passed by HPMSs with even higher proper motions.
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: Number of photometric observations by Gaia (nobs) and significance of the G flux (﹩{G}_{\mathrm{flux}}/{\sigma }_{{G}_{\mathrm{flux}}}﹩) for all potential HPMSs. The black squares indicate the HPMSs rejected in the GCNS. The HPMSs with low fidelity values also cluster in the bottom-left region. The excluded HPMSs are plotted in red, and the HPMSs that passes this criterion are plotted in blue.
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: Illustration of the rectangular box used in our search for background stars. The thick solid blue line indicates the direction of the lens proper motion (red star), and the origin is set to the J2016.0 position of the lens. The blue dashed line indicates the real motion, which includes the parallax (only five years are shown, and not to scale). The real size is defined by the position of the lens in J2010.5 and J2066.0 and a half-width of w = 7″. When the J2016.0 position of a background star (yellow star) is within our rectangle, it is considered a candidate. To account for the proper motion of the BGSs, the widening shape (dotted black line) would be more physically accurate. This plot was taken from K18b.
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: Goodness-of-fit for Gaia’s astrometry vs. number of good astrometric observations. BGSs with an ruwe less than 2 are plotted in green. These show a sharp edge, which we used to determine a limit for stars that do not have a five-parameter solution. Such sources that pass this criterion are shown in blue, and the excluded BGSs are plotted in red.
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: Difference in the proper motion between HPMSs and BGSs. The left panel shows the stars with a proper motion listed in Gaia eDR3, while in the right panel, we used the positional displacement between DR2 and DR3 as an estimate for the proper motion. The excluded candidates are plotted in red. The sparsely scattered candidates with large differences in the right panel are excluded, since the absolute value of the proper motions is similar.
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: Cutouts from DSS, Pan-STARRS, 2MASS, and VVV used in the visual inspections. The sources are indicated as red circles, and the lens are indicated as green squares epoch. All close-by Gaia eDR3 sources are marked by a yellow hexagon. If Gaia lists a proper motion, we show the positions at the epoch of the image (∼2012.5 for Pan-STARRS, ∼1990.0 for DSS, ∼2015.75 for VVV, and ∼1998.5 for 2MASS). The first image (a) shows a “candidate” that was identified as binary star using the displacement between Gaia DR2 (black cross) and eDR3 (yellow cross). The Gaia DR2 positions are shown as a black cross. We also plotted the “BGS” as a square, and used the displacement to determine the position at the image epoch ∼2013. The other two images (e) and (i) in the first column are labeled as bad images since the source should be visible in the Pan-STARRS or DSS images. The second column contains images where we were not able to confirm or rule out the existence of the BGS. These are either highly blended by or within the saturated core of the lens stars (b) and (f), too faint to be seen in the DSS image (j). Further, in some cases, the field is too crowded to identify the source. For all three cases, we removed the event from our results. In the third column, we show examples where the source could be identified. Those are contained in our result. Finally, in the fourth column, we show a comparison between DSS (d), Pan-STARRS (h), and VVV (l) for the same microlensing event. The BGS is visible in VVV's H-band images but blended by the HPMS in the DSS and Pan-STARRS images. The Gaia sources perfectly align with sources or features seen in the VVV image even though they are in the saturated areas of the Pan-STARRS and DSS image. There is a second candidate marked by the magenta diamond, which is aligned with a spike of the lens and hence was removed.
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: Absolute value of the magnitude difference (ΔG) vs. angular separation (Δϕ) for the cross-match between Gaia eDR3 and DR2, as listed in the DR2-neighborhood catalog. The gray dots in the background show the distribution for a random sample. The green dots (Δϕ > 400 mas) are interpreted as false matches (these are ignored), while the good matches are shown in blue. The population of stars with Δϕ around 100 mas is interpreted as comprising co-moving stars, without a five-parameter solution in Gaia DR2. The red dots indicate sources excluded due to a mismatch in the magnitudes. The orange lines indicate the limits for our classification. We note that including more false matches leads to a stricter selection of candidates.
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: Approximate proper motion from the position difference Gaia DR2 minus eDR3 vs. the actual proper motion given in Gaia eDR3. For most BGSs, these two are in good agreement, especially if a five-parameter solution exists in Gaia DR2 (green dots). The few dozen candidates with large discrepancy are most likely mismatches.
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: Ψ vs. G magnitude. Top: the distribution for all potential BGSs. BGSs that would not pass the criterion defined by McGill et al. (2020) are shown in red. BGSs that had passed all of our selection criteria are plotted in yellow. Only a few dozen of those would not have passed the criterion of McGill et al. (2020). A sample of randomly selected stars is shown in gray, and 90% of those are below the orange line. We note that our sample has slightly larger Ψ values compared to those of the random sample. Bottom: in blue, the BGSs of all predicted events are shown. The ones excluded after the visual inspection are plotted as red (δ > −30°) and magenta (δ < −30°) squares. The excluded candidates below the orange line were inspected since Gaia eDR3 does not provide proper motions, and they were not found in DR2. The gray dots indicate the random sample as for the top panel, with the 90th percentile shown as the orange line.
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: Color–magnitude diagram of all potential lenses (gray) with full Gaia eDR3 photometry of G, GRP, and GBp. The blue dots indicate the lenses of the predicted events. All stars above the green line are considered to be RGs, and all sources below the red line are considered to be WDs.
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: Top: expected maximum shifts for all astrometric-microlensing events with a magnitude difference ΔG < 6 mag. The gray dots indicate the events where the proper motion and parallax of the source are unknown. The blue dots show the events with a five-parameter solution for the BGS, as well as the determined standard errors. On the x-axis, the epoch of closest approach TCA is displayed. The apparent paucity of events during the Gaia mission time is due to the angular resolution limit of Gaia eDR3. Bottom: number of predicted events per year. The red bars show the events with ΔG < 3 mag, the red + blue bars show the events with ΔG < 6 mag, and the red + blue + gray bars show all predicted events.
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: Top: maximum shifts for all expected astrometric-microlensing events between 2014 and 2032 and a magnitude difference ΔG < 6 mag, with (blue) and without (gray) five-parameter solutions for the BGS in Gaia eDR3. Bottom: number of events per year (counted in half-year bins and multiplied by a factor of two) for all events (gray + blue + red), events with a magnitude difference ΔG < 6 mag (blue + red), and events with a magnitude difference ΔG < 3 mag (red).
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: Distribution of taml (blue), t0.1 mas(green), and t50% (red). The trends of the distribution for taml and t0.1 mas continue toward longer timescales. Note the logarithmic scale.
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: Maximum shifts for all expected events caused by a WD, with (blue) and without (gray) five-parameter solution for the BGS in Gaia eDR3.
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: Expected maximum magnification for all astrometric-microlensing events with photometric signature. Except for one (gray dot), all events have a five-parameter solution for the BGS in Gaia eDR3.
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: H − J − Y colored cutout from VVV centered on the position of the BGS (red circle) The high-proper-motion lens star is indicated by the green square (2010 November). Its motion between 2010 and 2030 is indicated by the yellow line, and its J2016.0 and J2021.5 positions are given by the green dot and star, respectively. The small wobbling is due to its parallax. The binary companion is marked by the black cross. The background star for the close encounter in 2036 is marked by the cyan hexagon.
Paper: Prediction of Astrometric-microlensing Events from Gaia eDR3 Proper Motions    
Authors: Jonas Klüter, Ulrich Bastian, Markus Demleitner, and Joachim Wambsganss
Figure caption: Top: expected shift of the major image (blue line), for the combined center of light using the G flux ratio (red solid line), and for the combined center of light using the Ks flux ratio (red dotted line). The 0.1 and 0.5 mas levels are indicated by the dashed lines. Bottom: angular separation between lens and source.
Paper: Revisiting Kepler Transiting Systems: Unvetting Planets and Constraining Relationships among Harmonics in Phase Curves
Authors: Prajwal Niraula, Avi Shporer, Ian Wong, and Julien de Wit
Figure caption: Top left: histogram of the ratio ﹩\bar{R}﹩ between the TIC-based and KIC-based stellar radius for confirmed Kepler planet-hosting stars. About 3.5% of hosts had their radius over- or underestimated by a factor larger than 2 in the KIC. Top right: TIC-to-KIC radius ratio as a function of the distance listed in the TIC. Cases with larger ratios typically correspond to targets that lie at heliocentric distances greater than 1250 pc. Bottom left: a direct comparison of the TIC-based planetary radii vs. the KIC-based planetary radii. The 1:1 line is shown in green for guidance. The four previously validated candidates with the largest TIC radius values are marked in red. Bottom right: plot of planet radius vs. insolation calculated assuming a circular orbit, which shows the radius inflation trend beyond an insolation flux of around 2 × 105 W m−2 (Demory & Seager 2011). The data were obtained from the NASA Exoplanet Archive in 2021 November. It is evident that four of our targets—Kepler-854 b, Kepler-840 b, Kepler-699 b, and Kepler-747 b—have discrepant radii, especially the latter two, given their insolation levels. This indicates that these companions are not planetary in nature. Kepler-447 b, NGTS-1 b, and TOI-1130 c, which lie near Kepler-747 b in this plot, are grazing planets with larger than typical radius uncertainties.
Paper: Revisiting Kepler Transiting Systems: Unvetting Planets and Constraining Relationships among Harmonics in Phase Curves
Authors: Prajwal Niraula, Avi Shporer, Ian Wong, and Julien de Wit
Figure caption: Top: the phase-curve signal extracted from the light curve of Kepler-854 b. The first panel shows the phase-folded, binned, and systematics-corrected light curve, with the best-fit model plotted in red. The second panel is a zoomed-in view of the phase modulation highlighting different components. The bottom panel is the residuals from the best-fit model, along with a histogram of the residuals. The large ellipsoidal variation amplitude (3519 ± 30 ppm) indicates that the companion is not of planetary mass. Middle left: primary transit of Kepler-840 b from four years of Kepler data. Middle right: secondary eclipse of Kepler-840 b, with a measured depth of 1060 ± 220 ppm. Bottom left: transit light curve of Kepler-699 b, along with the best-fit model and corresponding residuals. Bottom right: results from the transit light-curve fit for Kepler-747 b.
Paper: Revisiting Kepler Transiting Systems: Unvetting Planets and Constraining Relationships among Harmonics in Phase Curves
Authors: Prajwal Niraula, Avi Shporer, Ian Wong, and Julien de Wit
Figure caption: The distribution of our sample of 20 Kepler eclipsing binary systems (red circles) plotted on top of a color map showing the distribution of ∼200,000 targets from the Kepler mission, which primarily looked for planets around Sun-like stars. For the Kepler targets, the plotted parameters were taken from the KIC, whereas for our 20 selected EB systems, we used the more recent values from the TIC.
Paper: Revisiting Kepler Transiting Systems: Unvetting Planets and Constraining Relationships among Harmonics in Phase Curves
Authors: Prajwal Niraula, Avi Shporer, Ian Wong, and Julien de Wit
Figure caption: Left: a comparison of the measured second- (B2) and third-harmonic (B3) cosine amplitudes among our sample of Kepler eclipsing binaries and planet-hosting systems, demonstrating a strong power-law relation between the two. The symbols indicate the method by which the system mass ratio q was determined—from the RV signal or the simultaneously measured beaming amplitude A1. The color scheme corresponds to the effective temperature of the primary star. The error bars are typically smaller than the markers. Right: same, but for the second- and fourth-harmonic cosine amplitudes. The two targets for which the signals are not statistically significant are not included.
Paper: Revisiting Kepler Transiting Systems: Unvetting Planets and Constraining Relationships among Harmonics in Phase Curves
Authors: Prajwal Niraula, Avi Shporer, Ian Wong, and Julien de Wit
Figure caption: Left: a comparison of the measured and expected second-harmonic cosine phase-curve amplitudes (B2), showing good agreement. The two systems (KIC 6449358 and KIC 3735597) that show a larger than 3σ discrepancy are marked with red outlines and labeled. Right: same, but for the third-harmonic cosine amplitudes (B3). There are three additional outliers marked in red.
Paper: Revisiting Kepler Transiting Systems: Unvetting Planets and Constraining Relationships among Harmonics in Phase Curves
Authors: Prajwal Niraula, Avi Shporer, Ian Wong, and Julien de Wit
Figure caption: Observation of the expected linear relation between the ratio of second- and third-harmonic cosine amplitudes ∣B2/B3∣ against a term containing the scaled semimajor axis, inclination, limb-darkening coefficients, and gravity-darkening coefficients (see Equation (9)). The best-fit line has a slope of 2.24 ± 0.48, shown in blue, which is consistent with the theoretically expected value of 2.4. The shaded region shows the 1σ range of the fitted model. Three targets with statistically insignificant third harmonics are excluded from the fit.
Paper: Revisiting Kepler Transiting Systems: Unvetting Planets and Constraining Relationships among Harmonics in Phase Curves
Authors: Prajwal Niraula, Avi Shporer, Ian Wong, and Julien de Wit
Figure caption: Kepler EB phase-folded light curves (black) with best-fit models overplotted (red). Each panel shows the full phased light curve (top panel), a zoom in on the phase-curve modulation (mid panel), and the residuals from the best-fit model (bottom panel).
Paper: Revisiting Kepler Transiting Systems: Unvetting Planets and Constraining Relationships among Harmonics in Phase Curves
Authors: Prajwal Niraula, Avi Shporer, Ian Wong, and Julien de Wit
Figure caption: Continuation of Figure 7.
Paper: The EXPRES Stellar Signals Project II. State of the Field in Disentangling Photospheric Velocities
Authors: Lily L. Zhao, Debra A. Fischer, Eric B. Ford, Alex Wise, Michaël Cretignier, Suzanne Aigrain, Oscar Barragan, Megan Bedell, Lars A. Buchhave, João D. Camacho, Heather M. Cegla, Jessi Cisewski-Kehe, Andrew Collier Cameron, Zoe L. de Beurs, Sally Dodson-Robinson, Xavier Dumusque, João P. Faria, Christian Gilbertson, Charlotte Haley, Justin Harrell, David W. Hogg, Parker Holzer, Ancy Anna John, Baptiste Klein, Marina Lafarga, Florian Lienhard, Vinesh Maguire-Rajpaul, Annelies Mortier, Belinda Nicholson, Michael L. Palumbo, Victor Ramirez Delgado, Christopher J. Shallue, Andrew Vanderburg, Pedro T. P. Viana, Jinglin Zhao, Norbert Zicher, Samuel H. C. Cabot, Gregory W. Henry, Rachael M. Roettenbacher, John M. Brewer, Joe Llama, Ryan R. Petersburg, and Andrew E. Szymkowiak
Figure caption: Perceived shift in LFC spectra in units of m s−1 across an hour of consecutive LFC exposures with a linear trend removed. These perceived shifts are attributed to variations in the instrument and therefore give a measure of how stable the instrument itself is. The rms of shifts across this hour is given in the top-left corner.
Paper: The EXPRES Stellar Signals Project II. State of the Field in Disentangling Photospheric Velocities
Authors: Lily L. Zhao, Debra A. Fischer, Eric B. Ford, Alex Wise, Michaël Cretignier, Suzanne Aigrain, Oscar Barragan, Megan Bedell, Lars A. Buchhave, João D. Camacho, Heather M. Cegla, Jessi Cisewski-Kehe, Andrew Collier Cameron, Zoe L. de Beurs, Sally Dodson-Robinson, Xavier Dumusque, João P. Faria, Christian Gilbertson, Charlotte Haley, Justin Harrell, David W. Hogg, Parker Holzer, Ancy Anna John, Baptiste Klein, Marina Lafarga, Florian Lienhard, Vinesh Maguire-Rajpaul, Annelies Mortier, Belinda Nicholson, Michael L. Palumbo, Victor Ramirez Delgado, Christopher J. Shallue, Andrew Vanderburg, Pedro T. P. Viana, Jinglin Zhao, Norbert Zicher, Samuel H. C. Cabot, Gregory W. Henry, Rachael M. Roettenbacher, John M. Brewer, Joe Llama, Ryan R. Petersburg, and Andrew E. Szymkowiak
Figure caption: EXPRES RVs for six quiet stars. Shown RVs are derived using a CBC forward-modeling scheme and binned by night. The rms of these nightly binned RVs are given in the top-right corner along with the average INS.