adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Giant Outer Transiting Exoplanet Mass (GOT ’EM) Survey. III. Recovery and Confirmation of a Temperate, Mildly Eccentric, Single-transit Jupiter Orbiting TOI-2010
Authors: Christopher R. Mann, Paul A. Dalba, David Lafrenière, Benjamin J. Fulton, Guillaume Hébrard, Isabelle Boisse, Shweta Dalal, Magali Deleuil, Xavier Delfosse, Olivier Demangeon, Thierry Forveille, Neda Heidari, Flavien Kiefer, Eder Martioli, Claire Moutou, Michael Endl, William D. Cochran, Phillip MacQueen, Franck Marchis, Diana Dragomir, Arvind F. Gupta, Dax L. Feliz, Belinda A. Nicholson, Carl Ziegler, Steven Villanueva, Jason Rowe, Geert Jan Talens, Daniel Thorngren, Daryll LaCourse, Tom Jacobs, Andrew W. Howard, Allyson Bieryla, David W. Latham, Markus Rabus, Tara Fetherolf, Coel Hellier, Steve B. Howell, Peter Plavchan, Michael Reefe, Deven Combs, Michael Bowen, Justin Wittrock, George R. Ricker, S. Seager, Joshua N. Winn, Jon M. Jenkins, Thomas Barclay, David Watanabe, Karen A. Collins, Jason D. Eastman, Eric B. Ting
Figure caption: PDCSAP data of the TESS transit detection in Sector 15 (left) and Sector 56 (right). Sector 15 was imaged with a 120 s cadence, while Sector 56 included a 20 s cadence. All bins are 60 minutes.
Paper: Giant Outer Transiting Exoplanet Mass (GOT ’EM) Survey. III. Recovery and Confirmation of a Temperate, Mildly Eccentric, Single-transit Jupiter Orbiting TOI-2010
Authors: Christopher R. Mann, Paul A. Dalba, David Lafrenière, Benjamin J. Fulton, Guillaume Hébrard, Isabelle Boisse, Shweta Dalal, Magali Deleuil, Xavier Delfosse, Olivier Demangeon, Thierry Forveille, Neda Heidari, Flavien Kiefer, Eder Martioli, Claire Moutou, Michael Endl, William D. Cochran, Phillip MacQueen, Franck Marchis, Diana Dragomir, Arvind F. Gupta, Dax L. Feliz, Belinda A. Nicholson, Carl Ziegler, Steven Villanueva, Jason Rowe, Geert Jan Talens, Daniel Thorngren, Daryll LaCourse, Tom Jacobs, Andrew W. Howard, Allyson Bieryla, David W. Latham, Markus Rabus, Tara Fetherolf, Coel Hellier, Steve B. Howell, Peter Plavchan, Michael Reefe, Deven Combs, Michael Bowen, Justin Wittrock, George R. Ricker, S. Seager, Joshua N. Winn, Jon M. Jenkins, Thomas Barclay, David Watanabe, Karen A. Collins, Jason D. Eastman, Eric B. Ting
Figure caption: Population of confirmed giant (R > 0.5 R J) transiting planets with available insolation values and better than 50% uncertainties on mass and radius. Top: the dotted vertical line indicates the empirical inflation boundary (Demory & Seager 2011; Miller & Fortney 2011) where planet radii are seen to increase with insolation. TOI-2010 b is indicated with the cyan arrow, and Jupiter and Saturn are labeled toward the right. Bottom: the same population of giant planets separated into strongly and weakly irradiated subgroups according to the boundary in the above plot.
Paper: Giant Outer Transiting Exoplanet Mass (GOT ’EM) Survey. III. Recovery and Confirmation of a Temperate, Mildly Eccentric, Single-transit Jupiter Orbiting TOI-2010
Authors: Christopher R. Mann, Paul A. Dalba, David Lafrenière, Benjamin J. Fulton, Guillaume Hébrard, Isabelle Boisse, Shweta Dalal, Magali Deleuil, Xavier Delfosse, Olivier Demangeon, Thierry Forveille, Neda Heidari, Flavien Kiefer, Eder Martioli, Claire Moutou, Michael Endl, William D. Cochran, Phillip MacQueen, Franck Marchis, Diana Dragomir, Arvind F. Gupta, Dax L. Feliz, Belinda A. Nicholson, Carl Ziegler, Steven Villanueva, Jason Rowe, Geert Jan Talens, Daniel Thorngren, Daryll LaCourse, Tom Jacobs, Andrew W. Howard, Allyson Bieryla, David W. Latham, Markus Rabus, Tara Fetherolf, Coel Hellier, Steve B. Howell, Peter Plavchan, Michael Reefe, Deven Combs, Michael Bowen, Justin Wittrock, George R. Ricker, S. Seager, Joshua N. Winn, Jon M. Jenkins, Thomas Barclay, David Watanabe, Karen A. Collins, Jason D. Eastman, Eric B. Ting
Figure caption: Comparison of expected signal strengths for the same planet population shown in Figure 9. TOI-2010 b is indicated with the triangle marker. Panel (a): TSM. The TSM provides an S/N estimate for a JWST/NIRISS transit observation. Panel (b): ESM. The ESM provides an S/N estimate for a JWST/MIRI eclipse observation. Panel (c): RM signal amplitude. The TOI-2010 b value in this plot uses ﹩v\sin {i}_{\star }=2.8﹩ km s−1, derived from the TESS and WASP light-curve modulations.
Paper: Giant Outer Transiting Exoplanet Mass (GOT ’EM) Survey. III. Recovery and Confirmation of a Temperate, Mildly Eccentric, Single-transit Jupiter Orbiting TOI-2010
Authors: Christopher R. Mann, Paul A. Dalba, David Lafrenière, Benjamin J. Fulton, Guillaume Hébrard, Isabelle Boisse, Shweta Dalal, Magali Deleuil, Xavier Delfosse, Olivier Demangeon, Thierry Forveille, Neda Heidari, Flavien Kiefer, Eder Martioli, Claire Moutou, Michael Endl, William D. Cochran, Phillip MacQueen, Franck Marchis, Diana Dragomir, Arvind F. Gupta, Dax L. Feliz, Belinda A. Nicholson, Carl Ziegler, Steven Villanueva, Jason Rowe, Geert Jan Talens, Daniel Thorngren, Daryll LaCourse, Tom Jacobs, Andrew W. Howard, Allyson Bieryla, David W. Latham, Markus Rabus, Tara Fetherolf, Coel Hellier, Steve B. Howell, Peter Plavchan, Michael Reefe, Deven Combs, Michael Bowen, Justin Wittrock, George R. Ricker, S. Seager, Joshua N. Winn, Jon M. Jenkins, Thomas Barclay, David Watanabe, Karen A. Collins, Jason D. Eastman, Eric B. Ting
Figure caption: Lomb–Scargle periodogram of RV data. False-alarm probabilities (FAPs) are shown in gray. The red solid line indicates the fitted period of TOI-2010 b, and the dotted red line is the 3/2 harmonic. The top panel periodogram shows results of the unaltered data set, whereas data used for the bottom panel has had the 141.8 day signal removed. With the removal of planet b’s signal, no other significant power remains at any searchable period.
Paper: Giant Outer Transiting Exoplanet Mass (GOT ’EM) Survey. III. Recovery and Confirmation of a Temperate, Mildly Eccentric, Single-transit Jupiter Orbiting TOI-2010
Authors: Christopher R. Mann, Paul A. Dalba, David Lafrenière, Benjamin J. Fulton, Guillaume Hébrard, Isabelle Boisse, Shweta Dalal, Magali Deleuil, Xavier Delfosse, Olivier Demangeon, Thierry Forveille, Neda Heidari, Flavien Kiefer, Eder Martioli, Claire Moutou, Michael Endl, William D. Cochran, Phillip MacQueen, Franck Marchis, Diana Dragomir, Arvind F. Gupta, Dax L. Feliz, Belinda A. Nicholson, Carl Ziegler, Steven Villanueva, Jason Rowe, Geert Jan Talens, Daniel Thorngren, Daryll LaCourse, Tom Jacobs, Andrew W. Howard, Allyson Bieryla, David W. Latham, Markus Rabus, Tara Fetherolf, Coel Hellier, Steve B. Howell, Peter Plavchan, Michael Reefe, Deven Combs, Michael Bowen, Justin Wittrock, George R. Ricker, S. Seager, Joshua N. Winn, Jon M. Jenkins, Thomas Barclay, David Watanabe, Karen A. Collins, Jason D. Eastman, Eric B. Ting
Figure caption: Visual comparison of TESS photometry and nearby Gaia stars. Only one notable Gaia star contaminates the aperture (labeled “2”) with a separation of 1.″9 and fainter by Δm ∼ 5. The TESS PDCSAP flux values account for this very minor dilution.
Paper: Giant Outer Transiting Exoplanet Mass (GOT ’EM) Survey. III. Recovery and Confirmation of a Temperate, Mildly Eccentric, Single-transit Jupiter Orbiting TOI-2010
Authors: Christopher R. Mann, Paul A. Dalba, David Lafrenière, Benjamin J. Fulton, Guillaume Hébrard, Isabelle Boisse, Shweta Dalal, Magali Deleuil, Xavier Delfosse, Olivier Demangeon, Thierry Forveille, Neda Heidari, Flavien Kiefer, Eder Martioli, Claire Moutou, Michael Endl, William D. Cochran, Phillip MacQueen, Franck Marchis, Diana Dragomir, Arvind F. Gupta, Dax L. Feliz, Belinda A. Nicholson, Carl Ziegler, Steven Villanueva, Jason Rowe, Geert Jan Talens, Daniel Thorngren, Daryll LaCourse, Tom Jacobs, Andrew W. Howard, Allyson Bieryla, David W. Latham, Markus Rabus, Tara Fetherolf, Coel Hellier, Steve B. Howell, Peter Plavchan, Michael Reefe, Deven Combs, Michael Bowen, Justin Wittrock, George R. Ricker, S. Seager, Joshua N. Winn, Jon M. Jenkins, Thomas Barclay, David Watanabe, Karen A. Collins, Jason D. Eastman, Eric B. Ting
Figure caption: Results of the planet’s bulk metallicity analysis. Here mass is reported in Jupiter units, Z  P  is the bulk metal mass fraction of the planet, and the age is given in gigayears. The small inset table shows the input priors used.
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: Same as Figure 3 for 0.87 mm data of the ambiguous disks. We show the UV data in 45 kλ bins.
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: Same as Figure 17 for the ambiguous disks, from left to right GSS 30 IRS 1, Elias 29, IRS 44, and VLA 1623 West. For IRS 44, we do not show the individual offset Gaussian component on this brightness vs. radius plot as it is an isolated, localized feature, which does not exist all around the disk at a particular radius; it is localized.
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: Same as Figure 1 for 0.87 mm data of the structured disks. We show the UV data in 45 kλ bins.
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: Structured disks best-fit model intensity profiles and their components. From left to right, GSS 30 IRS 3, IRS 63, Oph-emb-6, and Oph-emb-9. The top row shows the 1.3 mm best-fit models, and the bottom row shows the 0.87 mm models.
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: Spectral index maps of the protostellar disk sample. GSS 30 IRS 3 does not have a spectral index map since the 0.87 mm observations are so far off the primary beam center; these are not adequate to reliably evaluate a spectral index.
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: Same as Figure 17 for the nonstructured disks, from left to right IRS 37-A and Oph-emb-1.
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: Same as Figure 2 for 0.87 mm data of the nonstructured disks. We show the UV data in 45 kλ bins.
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: 1.3 mm integrated flux per disk type evaluated from the best-fit protostellar disk model. Sources are grouped according to their disk substructure. The integrated flux and corresponding uncertainties shown as error bars are in Table 5. The uncertainties calculated represent the 68% inclusion interval from the MCMC runs (see Section 3) and do not include flux calibration uncertainties.
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: The ratio of the Gaussian ring location (loc R ) to the disk size (R 90%) is shown in orange, and the ratio Gaussian ring width (σ  R ) to the disk size (R 90%) is in blue. Both are based on the 1.3 mm best-fit disk models and parameters in Table 5. The error bars displayed are the quadrature sum of the errors associated with σ  R  and R 90% to represent the general uncertainty.
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: The 1.3 mm contrast of the structured disk features from the protostellar disk sample (in blue) compared to protoplanetary disks (in red) observed by DSHARP (Huang et al. 2018). IRS 63 and several protoplanetary disks have multiple data points, given the presence of two or more ring features identified in the disks. Given that the two methods to evaluate this parameter differ, we do not plot the error bars for the contrast. Given a 10% uncertainty for ALMA, fluxes are generally expected and consequently conservatively estimate that errors for the contrast should be <20%, as for the protoplanetary disks, a 10% uncertainty is generally reported by Huang et al. (2018).
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: Same as Figure 4 for the protostellar disk size evaluated as R 90% based on the 1.3 mm best-fit disk models. GSS 30 IRS 3 is found to have large uncertainties on the disk size owing to the uncertainties on the location of the ring feature thus propagating into the error calculations for R 90%; we thus artificially limit the uncertainty to 50%.
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: Same as Figure 4 for the protostellar source surface density gradient per disk type from the 1.3 mm best-fit PLCT models. IRS 37-A and VLA 1623 West are fit with a Gaussian disk and a flat-topped Gaussian model, respectively, since the best-fit PLCT γ parameter goes to zero for these two sources. The 0.87 mm data show consistent results.
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: IRS 44 imaged residuals after subtracting a best-fit PLCT and Gaussian envelope model from the observations. The white contours ±3σ, 5σ, 10σ residuals and black dotted contours are for the observed source emission with 20σ, 50σ, 100σ, 200σ.
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: The 1.3 mm ring location to disk size ratio of the structured protostellar disk sample (in red) compared to protoplanetary disks (in blue) observed by DSHARP (Huang et al. 2018).
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: The 1.3 mm ring width to disk size ratio of the structured protostellar disk sample (in red) compared to the protoplanetary disks (in blue) observed by DSHARP (Huang et al. 2018).
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: Imaged residuals of the four structured protostellar disks after subtracting a smooth disk (PLCT) model, from left to right GSS 30 IRS 3, IRS 63, Oph-emb-6, Oph-emb-9.
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: Best-fit disk models applied to the 1.3 mm data for the structured disks, GSS 30 IRS 3, IRS 63, Oph-emb-6, and Oph-emb-9. The left column compares the real UV-visibility data binned in 40 kλ bins with different disk models. The statistically favored fit, as evaluated by AIC and BIC parameters, is always given in red. The three other columns are images of the observed data, the best-fit disk model, and the residuals. All images were made using tCLEAN with a briggs = 0.5 weighting. In the residuals plots, the black contours represent ±3σ, 5σ, 10σ, 15σ residuals where σ is source dependent; see Table 2.
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: Same as Figure 3, but for the ambiguous disks, Elias 29, GSS 30 IRS 1, IRS 44, VLA 1623 West.
Paper: Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Authors: Arnaud Michel, Sarah I. Sadavoy, Patrick D. Sheehan, Leslie W. Looney, Erin G. Cox, John J. Tobin, Nienke van der Marel, Dominique M. Segura-Cox
Figure caption: Same as Figure 2, but for the nonstructured disks, IRS 37 and Oph-emb-1.
Paper: Mitigating Worst-case Exozodiacal Dust Structure in High-contrast Images of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Miles H. Currie, Christopher C. Stark, Jens Kammerer, Roser Juanola-Parramon, Victoria S. Meadows
Figure caption: A sample of scattered light images of exozodiacal dust disks including worst-case-scenario resonant structure used in this work. Each row represents a disk with 1, 10, or 100 zodis and includes a color bar representing the contrast of 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° inclined disks. The blue dot represents an Earth-like planet at 1 au away from the star, and the star is located in the center of the image. The structure appears less pronounced for the >1 zodi cases because it accounts for a smaller percentage of the total surface brightness due to enhanced collisional destruction of grains in denser disks. The disks in this figure are shown after the dithering and Mie theory artifact mitigation steps.
Paper: Mitigating Worst-case Exozodiacal Dust Structure in High-contrast Images of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Miles H. Currie, Christopher C. Stark, Jens Kammerer, Roser Juanola-Parramon, Victoria S. Meadows
Figure caption: Upper panel: contrast curves for different grain size lists. Ringing Mie theory artifacts are present when using the original coarse grain size list, and are reduced by using a subresolved or partially subresolved grain size list. The run time of an individual dustmap call is significantly improved by using a partially subresolved grain size list. Lower panel: fractional difference of the contrast curves produced by using the partially subresolved grain size list and the fully subresolved grain size list. The resulting contrast curve using the partially subresolved grain size list exhibits negligible differences (<0.1%) when compared to the contrast curve of the fully subresolved grain size list.
Paper: Mitigating Worst-case Exozodiacal Dust Structure in High-contrast Images of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Miles H. Currie, Christopher C. Stark, Jens Kammerer, Roser Juanola-Parramon, Victoria S. Meadows
Figure caption: Measured planetary S/N (first and third rows) and measured noise relative to the expected Poisson noise (second and fourth rows) as a function of the applied high-pass filter size for an 8 m mirror configuration. The high-pass filter size is the FWHM of a 2D Gaussian in units of λ /D convolved with ADI (upper two rows) and RDI (lower two rows) PSF-subtracted images. Each panel includes all zodi levels considered in this work. The horizontal dotted line represents either the input planetary S/N or the Poisson noise limit. For most cases, an optimal high-pass filter size exists when the measured noise in the filtered image is equal to the expected Poisson noise; the planetary S/N measured in the optimally filtered image is our fiducial S/N measurement.
Paper: Mitigating Worst-case Exozodiacal Dust Structure in High-contrast Images of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Miles H. Currie, Christopher C. Stark, Jens Kammerer, Roser Juanola-Parramon, Victoria S. Meadows
Figure caption: Standard deviation of a 7 × 7 pixel region centered on the planet location in the smoothed dustmap image as a function of the number of dithers in both the longitudinal (top panel) and radial (bottom panel) directions. For both dimensions, 10 dithers is adequate to smooth over N-body particle noise in scattered light images generated using dustmap.
Paper: Mitigating Worst-case Exozodiacal Dust Structure in High-contrast Images of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Miles H. Currie, Christopher C. Stark, Jens Kammerer, Roser Juanola-Parramon, Victoria S. Meadows
Figure caption: Comparison of the nominal disk model and the calibration disk model assuming observations with an 8 m mirror architecture. The planet in the nominal system is located in a region of disk structure, while the planet in the calibration disk model has a smoothly varying background. The lower panel shows azimuthally averaged disk-to-star contrast as a function of radius for the nominal and calibration disks.
Paper: Mitigating Worst-case Exozodiacal Dust Structure in High-contrast Images of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Miles H. Currie, Christopher C. Stark, Jens Kammerer, Roser Juanola-Parramon, Victoria S. Meadows
Figure caption: ADI PSF subtraction for an 8 m mirror configuration of a 1 zodi face-on exozodiacal disk, pdisk, before (left) and after (right) convolution with a 5 λ /D high-pass filter, fHP(5λ/D)).
Paper: Mitigating Worst-case Exozodiacal Dust Structure in High-contrast Images of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Miles H. Currie, Christopher C. Stark, Jens Kammerer, Roser Juanola-Parramon, Victoria S. Meadows
Figure caption: Schematic showing the regions used to measure noise for RDI (left) and ADI (right) PSF-subtracted images for an 8 m mirror configuration.
Paper: Mitigating Worst-case Exozodiacal Dust Structure in High-contrast Images of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Miles H. Currie, Christopher C. Stark, Jens Kammerer, Roser Juanola-Parramon, Victoria S. Meadows
Figure caption: Upper panel: ratio of measured noise in the nominal disk model to calibration disk model as a function of zodi level. Markers within ±5% of the horizontal dotted line (with an “x” in the center) indicate cases where the total measured noise in the nominal disk model is dominated by particle noise inherent to the N-body models. Lower panel: maximum measurable S/N for cases that include the nominal disk model. For most edge-on or high-zodi cases, the input S/N of 7 (dotted horizontal line) is not recoverable due to systematic noise associated with the physical disk properties. The results in this figure assume an 8 m primary mirror and ADI PSF subtraction.
Paper: Mitigating Worst-case Exozodiacal Dust Structure in High-contrast Images of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Miles H. Currie, Christopher C. Stark, Jens Kammerer, Roser Juanola-Parramon, Victoria S. Meadows
Figure caption: Measured noise relative to the expected Poisson noise (top row) and measured planetary S/N (bottom row) as a function of the zodi level of a system after optimizing the high-pass filter size to maximize S/N for an 8 m mirror architecture. The columns are the results for ADI and RDI PSF subtraction techniques. Each panel includes results using aperture photometry and PSF matching, designated by solid and dashed lines, respectively. Each panel shows results for all system inclinations considered in this work, as well as systems with uniform backgrounds for comparison. We find that applying a high-pass filter can subtract exozodiacal disk structure to the Poisson noise limit at the expense of signal for nearly all systems <90° inclined; however, edge-on systems remain challenging.