adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: The JWST/NIRISS Deep Spectroscopic Survey for Young Brown Dwarfs and Free-floating Planets
Authors: Adam B. Langeveld, Aleks Scholz, Koraljka Mužić, Ray Jayawardhana, Daniel Capela, Loïc Albert, René Doyon, Laura Flagg, Matthew de Furio, Doug Johnstone, David Lafrèniere, Michael Meyer
Figure caption: Example of the background subtraction process applied to the calibrated slope image cutouts between Stage 2 and Stage 3 of the JWST Science Calibration Pipeline. Top panel: cutout for one source showing the dispersion of the spectrum (central rows). Rows above and below the spectral trail have a purple hue indicative of the background, which increases in strength toward longer wavelengths. Bottom panel: following background subtraction, the cutout now only shows significant flux from the source. The color scale is the same for both panels. Data inside the shaded regions are ignored when analyzing the 1D spectrum in the following analysis. White pixels are “NaN” values that do not affect the spectral extraction.
Paper: The JWST/NIRISS Deep Spectroscopic Survey for Young Brown Dwarfs and Free-floating Planets
Authors: Adam B. Langeveld, Aleks Scholz, Koraljka Mužić, Ray Jayawardhana, Daniel Capela, Loïc Albert, René Doyon, Laura Flagg, Matthew de Furio, Doug Johnstone, David Lafrèniere, Michael Meyer
Figure caption: Comparison of the spectral type (left) and extinction A  J  (right) determined with our template fitting, with the average spectral type given in K. L. Luhman et al. (2016). Spectral types are coded as a linear scale, M5 is 5.0 and L2 is 12.0. The orange line marks the 1:1 relation, the shaded region corresponds to errors of 1 spectral subtype and 1 mag in J-band extinction. For two objects (blue points), we show two possible solutions (joined with dotted–dashed lines); based on magnitudes and colors, the solution with late-M spectral type is preferred.
Paper: The JWST/NIRISS Deep Spectroscopic Survey for Young Brown Dwarfs and Free-floating Planets
Authors: Adam B. Langeveld, Aleks Scholz, Koraljka Mužić, Ray Jayawardhana, Daniel Capela, Loïc Albert, René Doyon, Laura Flagg, Matthew de Furio, Doug Johnstone, David Lafrèniere, Michael Meyer
Figure caption: Spectra of six known brown dwarfs obtained from NIRISS WFSS (dark blue), in comparison with the previously published spectra obtained with Subaru/MOIRCS (dark orange) from A. Scholz et al. (2009, 2012a, 2012b). NIRISS spectra were normalized to the average flux between 1.39 and 1.41 μm. MOIRCS spectra were scaled to match the NIRISS F150W spectra—an offset between the NIRISS F200W data and the MOIRCS data is evident, but not consistent between objects. See Section 3.4 for further discussion.
Paper: The JWST/NIRISS Deep Spectroscopic Survey for Young Brown Dwarfs and Free-floating Planets
Authors: Adam B. Langeveld, Aleks Scholz, Koraljka Mužić, Ray Jayawardhana, Daniel Capela, Loïc Albert, René Doyon, Laura Flagg, Matthew de Furio, Doug Johnstone, David Lafrèniere, Michael Meyer
Figure caption: Dereddened K-band photometry vs. spectral type for objects in Table 1 after spectral fitting. Typical error bars would be ±1 subtype in the x-axis and ±0.3 mag in the y-axis. The relationship highlighted in orange is taken from A. Sanghi et al. (2023). Gray symbols mark the positions of confirmed young brown dwarfs in NGC1333, for comparison. The object below the relation at L1 spectral type is NN2. The one high above the line at L4 (labeled with a × symbol) is NN5, which shows clear infrared excess.
Paper: The JWST/NIRISS Deep Spectroscopic Survey for Young Brown Dwarfs and Free-floating Planets
Authors: Adam B. Langeveld, Aleks Scholz, Koraljka Mužić, Ray Jayawardhana, Daniel Capela, Loïc Albert, René Doyon, Laura Flagg, Matthew de Furio, Doug Johnstone, David Lafrèniere, Michael Meyer
Figure caption: Six binary system candidates identified in the NIRISS F150W and F200W images of NGC1333 with a separation of <1.″ Each pair is shown in the world coordinate system, with the F150W image on the left and the F200W image on the right. The color scales are normalized differently for each pair to clearly see the companion objects. Thus, the difference in brightness between the images for two pairs is not representative of their comparative flux. The primary objects for binaries NN7 and NN10 are saturated in the images. See Table 2 for measured coordinates and separations.
Paper: The JWST/NIRISS Deep Spectroscopic Survey for Young Brown Dwarfs and Free-floating Planets
Authors: Adam B. Langeveld, Aleks Scholz, Koraljka Mužić, Ray Jayawardhana, Daniel Capela, Loïc Albert, René Doyon, Laura Flagg, Matthew de Furio, Doug Johnstone, David Lafrèniere, Michael Meyer
Figure caption: Results of the spectroscopic survey for object NIRISS-NGC1333-2 (NN2). Panels shown are the same as in Figure 5. Most of the F200W spectrum had to be discarded since the spectral trail in the slope image cutout overlapped with a diffuse background region. This is possibly the reason for the excess flux seen around 1.45 μm.
Paper: The JWST/NIRISS Deep Spectroscopic Survey for Young Brown Dwarfs and Free-floating Planets
Authors: Adam B. Langeveld, Aleks Scholz, Koraljka Mužić, Ray Jayawardhana, Daniel Capela, Loïc Albert, René Doyon, Laura Flagg, Matthew de Furio, Doug Johnstone, David Lafrèniere, Michael Meyer
Figure caption: Results of the spectroscopic survey for object NIRISS-NGC1333-4 (NN4). Panels shown are the same as in Figure 5.
Paper: The JWST/NIRISS Deep Spectroscopic Survey for Young Brown Dwarfs and Free-floating Planets
Authors: Adam B. Langeveld, Aleks Scholz, Koraljka Mužić, Ray Jayawardhana, Daniel Capela, Loïc Albert, René Doyon, Laura Flagg, Matthew de Furio, Doug Johnstone, David Lafrèniere, Michael Meyer
Figure caption: Results of the spectroscopic survey for object NIRISS-NGC1333-3 (NN3). Panels shown are the same as in Figure 5.
Paper: Asteroid Period Solutions from Combined Dense and Sparse Photometry
Authors: Michael Gowanlock, David E. Trilling, Andrew McNeill, Daniel Kramer, Maria Chernyavskaya
Figure caption: The same as Figure 9, but showing the differential heatmap. Because there are only 182 objects in the sample, the differential heatmap is poorly sampled and is thus very sparse. Consequently, we plot the heatmap using large bins such that we may obtain a significant number of objects in each bin. Caution is warranted, as the number of objects in the bins remains low (e.g., there are no objects with 800 hr < p < 1200 hr and an LSP power 0–0.333).
Paper: Asteroid Period Solutions from Combined Dense and Sparse Photometry
Authors: Michael Gowanlock, David E. Trilling, Andrew McNeill, Daniel Kramer, Maria Chernyavskaya
Figure caption: Cumulative heatmaps showing the rotation period match fraction (and number) of objects in LCDB∩SS1∩TESSC1 as a function of both the number of observations and the LSP power. The heatmap uses the data from the combined optimizations outlined in Table 3 with ﹩{p}_{\min }\,=\,3\,\mathrm{hr}﹩. Panels (a) and (c) show the exact rotation period match and number, respectively. Panels (b) and (d) are the same as panels (a) and (c) but include the aliased rotation periods as well.
Paper: Asteroid Period Solutions from Combined Dense and Sparse Photometry
Authors: Michael Gowanlock, David E. Trilling, Andrew McNeill, Daniel Kramer, Maria Chernyavskaya
Figure caption: Light-curve amplitude distributions in 0.1 mag bins. (a) Amplitudes of the 3168 objects in the SS1∩TESSC1 data set. (b) Amplitudes of the 222 objects in the LCDB∩SS1∩TESSC1 data set. (c) Same as panel (b), except limited to the 174 exact matches to the LCDB, and so panels (b) and (c) are plotted on the same scale for comparison purposes.
Paper: Asteroid Period Solutions from Combined Dense and Sparse Photometry
Authors: Michael Gowanlock, David E. Trilling, Andrew McNeill, Daniel Kramer, Maria Chernyavskaya
Figure caption: (a) The fraction of rotation period matches (exact and including aliased) with LCDB as a function of the amplitude threshold. (b) The number of objects corresponding to panel (a). The dashed blue horizontal line demarcates amplitudes at 0.1 mag as described in the text accompanying Figure 6.
Paper: Asteroid Period Solutions from Combined Dense and Sparse Photometry
Authors: Michael Gowanlock, David E. Trilling, Andrew McNeill, Daniel Kramer, Maria Chernyavskaya
Figure caption: Rotation period distribution of SS1∩TESSC1 comparing the baseline approach to the set of optimizations “{1, 3, 5, 7} Combined” with p ≥ 3 hr from Table 3.
Paper: Asteroid Period Solutions from Combined Dense and Sparse Photometry
Authors: Michael Gowanlock, David E. Trilling, Andrew McNeill, Daniel Kramer, Maria Chernyavskaya
Figure caption: The same histogram as in Figure 6(a), except where two example models are shown that hypothesize the distribution of asteroids with amplitudes <0.1 mag. The red dashed curve shows the scenario where spherical-like objects are the most abundant. Using a β-distribution, the black dotted curve shows the scenario where there are fewer objects at <0.1 mag than at 0.1–0.2 mag.
Paper: Asteroid Period Solutions from Combined Dense and Sparse Photometry
Authors: Michael Gowanlock, David E. Trilling, Andrew McNeill, Daniel Kramer, Maria Chernyavskaya
Figure caption: The precision as a function of accuracy for the grid search described in the text. There are a total of 7128 configurations that were searched to find those that optimize the precision metric. Many of the configurations yield the same pair of precision and accuracy values, and so the markers on the plot are translucent such that those with greater intensity denote duplicate configurations. The red dashed lines show an example configuration with a precision of 0.957 and an accuracy of 0.714.
Paper: Asteroid Period Solutions from Combined Dense and Sparse Photometry
Authors: Michael Gowanlock, David E. Trilling, Andrew McNeill, Daniel Kramer, Maria Chernyavskaya
Figure caption: Cumulative heatmaps showing the rotation period match fraction (and number) of objects in SS1 as a function of both the number of observations and the LSP power. In the sample, there are a total of 1810 objects, which are those that are found in LCDB (U = 3) and SS1. (a) The exact rotation period match; (b) the number of objects in the bins shown in panel (a).
Paper: Asteroid Period Solutions from Combined Dense and Sparse Photometry
Authors: Michael Gowanlock, David E. Trilling, Andrew McNeill, Daniel Kramer, Maria Chernyavskaya
Figure caption: The fraction of exact and aliased matches is shown as a function of mask width. Masks are applied at p ∈ {16, 24, 48} hr. The mask ranges are reported as ± the mask width on the horizontal axis. For example, a mask width of 0.1 around the 16 hr alias refers to masking the range 15.9–16.1 hr. The mask width of 0 refers to the match fraction without any masking. For clarity, the exact and aliased match fractions without masking are shown as the black dotted and red dashed horizontal lines, respectively.
Paper: The OATMEAL Survey. I. Low Stellar Obliquity in the Transiting Brown Dwarf System GPX-1
Authors: Steven Giacalone, Fei Dai, J. J. Zanazzi, Andrew W. Howard, Courtney D. Dressing, Joshua N. Winn, Ryan A. Rubenzahl, Theron W. Carmichael, Noah Vowell, Aurora Kesseli, Samuel Halverson, Howard Isaacson, Max Brodheim, William Deich, Benjamin J. Fulton, Steven R. Gibson, Grant M. Hill, Bradford Holden, Aaron Householder, Stephen Kaye, Russ R. Laher, Kyle Lanclos, Joel Payne, Erik A. Petigura, Arpita Roy, Christian Schwab, Abby P. Shaum, Martin M. Sirk, Chris Smith, Guðmundur Stefánsson, Josh Walawender, Sharon X. Wang, Lauren M. Weiss, Sherry Yeh
Figure caption: Sky-projected stellar obliquity (∣λ∣) vs. stellar effective temperature (T eff) for systems with low-mass hot Jupiters (light gray dots), massive hot Jupiters (dark gray squares), and close-in brown dwarfs (blue circles). GPX-1 is the yellow star. The dashed vertical red line and surrounding shaded area is the Kraft break regime (we adopt T Kraft = 6250 K). The data for the hot Jupiters were taken from Tables A1 and A2 of S. H. Albrecht et al. (2022), which were originally sourced from TEPCat (J. Southworth 2011). The four previously characterized transiting brown dwarf systems are WASP-30 (T eff = 6208 ± 85 K, ∣λ∣ = 7°﹩{}_{-27}^{+19};﹩ A. H. M. J. Triaud et al. 2013), KELT-1 (T eff = 6471 ± 50 K, ∣λ∣ = 2 ± 16°; R. J. Siverd et al. 2012), CoRoT-3 (T eff = 6558 ± 50 K, ∣λ∣ = 38°﹩{}_{-22}^{+10};﹩ A. H. M. J. Triaud et al. 2009), HATS-70 (T eff = 7930 ± 180 K, ∣λ∣ = 8.°9﹩{}_{-4.5}^{+5.6};﹩ G. Zhou et al. 2019a), and TOI-2533 (﹩{T}_{\mathrm{eff}}={6183}_{-84}^{+16}﹩ K, ∣λ∣ = 7 ± 14°; T. Ferreira et al. 2024). Note that WASP-30 and TOI-2533 are overlapping. GPX-1 contributes to growing trend for hot stars with close-in brown dwarfs and massive hot Jupiters to have lower values of λ than hot stars with low-mass hot Jupiters, although the sample size is still too small to claim that these populations differ in a statistically significant way.
Paper: The OATMEAL Survey. I. Low Stellar Obliquity in the Transiting Brown Dwarf System GPX-1
Authors: Steven Giacalone, Fei Dai, J. J. Zanazzi, Andrew W. Howard, Courtney D. Dressing, Joshua N. Winn, Ryan A. Rubenzahl, Theron W. Carmichael, Noah Vowell, Aurora Kesseli, Samuel Halverson, Howard Isaacson, Max Brodheim, William Deich, Benjamin J. Fulton, Steven R. Gibson, Grant M. Hill, Bradford Holden, Aaron Householder, Stephen Kaye, Russ R. Laher, Kyle Lanclos, Joel Payne, Erik A. Petigura, Arpita Roy, Christian Schwab, Abby P. Shaum, Martin M. Sirk, Chris Smith, Guðmundur Stefánsson, Josh Walawender, Sharon X. Wang, Lauren M. Weiss, Sherry Yeh
Figure caption: Simulated evolution of λ in the GPX-1 system using the resonance locking framework from J. J. Zanazzi et al. (2024) for four different initial misaligned values of λ. These simulations assume that the orbit of the brown dwarf begins close in and circular (i.e., we ignore the tidal evolution of semimajor axis and eccentricity). The red dashed line is the approximate main-sequence lifetime for GPX-1 and the blue dotted line is the reported age of GPX-1 (with 1σ uncertainties; P. Benni et al. 2021). The model predicts that GPX-1 has undergone negligible λ evolution during its lifetime, primarily because the g-mode frequencies of GPX-1-like stars only evolve significantly after the first Gyr. This supports the notion that GPX-1 b arrived at its short-period orbit in an already-aligned state. We note that this simulation neglects differences in internal stellar structure during the pre-main-sequence and post-main-sequence phases, which are likely more conducive to rapid spin–orbit realignment.
Paper: The OATMEAL Survey. I. Low Stellar Obliquity in the Transiting Brown Dwarf System GPX-1
Authors: Steven Giacalone, Fei Dai, J. J. Zanazzi, Andrew W. Howard, Courtney D. Dressing, Joshua N. Winn, Ryan A. Rubenzahl, Theron W. Carmichael, Noah Vowell, Aurora Kesseli, Samuel Halverson, Howard Isaacson, Max Brodheim, William Deich, Benjamin J. Fulton, Steven R. Gibson, Grant M. Hill, Bradford Holden, Aaron Householder, Stephen Kaye, Russ R. Laher, Kyle Lanclos, Joel Payne, Erik A. Petigura, Arpita Roy, Christian Schwab, Abby P. Shaum, Martin M. Sirk, Chris Smith, Guðmundur Stefánsson, Josh Walawender, Sharon X. Wang, Lauren M. Weiss, Sherry Yeh
Figure caption: Relative realignment timescales using the scaling relation from J. P. Zahn (1975, 1977; i.e., Equation (3)), normalized to that of GPX-1. Only hot Jupiters and brown dwarfs orbiting hot (T eff > 6250 K) stars are included, with the exception of the transiting brown dwarf system WASP-30, which straddles the Kraft break. From lowest to highest τ RA, the brown-dwarf-hosting stars are KELT-1, HATS-70 (partially obstructed by GPX-1), WASP-30, CoRoT-3, and TOI-2533. We note that the timescales for WASP-30 and TOI-2533 may not be fully representative of realignment in those systems because they likely have convective envelopes, but we include them for the sake of completeness. GPX-1 has a predicted timescale roughly 100× longer than KELT-1, which is believed to have undergone significant tidal evolution (R. J. Siverd et al. 2012), and roughly equal to HATS-70 (partially hidden underneath GPX-1 in the figure), which is thought to have undergone relatively little tidal evolution (G. Zhou et al. 2019a).
Paper: The OATMEAL Survey. I. Low Stellar Obliquity in the Transiting Brown Dwarf System GPX-1
Authors: Steven Giacalone, Fei Dai, J. J. Zanazzi, Andrew W. Howard, Courtney D. Dressing, Joshua N. Winn, Ryan A. Rubenzahl, Theron W. Carmichael, Noah Vowell, Aurora Kesseli, Samuel Halverson, Howard Isaacson, Max Brodheim, William Deich, Benjamin J. Fulton, Steven R. Gibson, Grant M. Hill, Bradford Holden, Aaron Householder, Stephen Kaye, Russ R. Laher, Kyle Lanclos, Joel Payne, Erik A. Petigura, Arpita Roy, Christian Schwab, Abby P. Shaum, Martin M. Sirk, Chris Smith, Guðmundur Stefánsson, Josh Walawender, Sharon X. Wang, Lauren M. Weiss, Sherry Yeh
Figure caption: Left: residuals of the stellar line profile across the transit of GPX-1 b. The dotted lines indicate the confines of the transit and the ﹩v\sin {i}_{\star }﹩ of the star. The transit occurs between −1 and 1 hr from midtransit. The diagonal blue line is visible in transit is the Doppler shadow of the brown dwarf. The gap in the data near transit egress was due to a guiding malfunction that temporarily prevented data acquisition. Right: the best-fit model of the line profile residuals, which are consistent with a sky-projected stellar obliquity of λ = 6.°9 ± 1.°7. However, we ultimately adopted λ = 6.°9 ± 10.°0 to account for systematic uncertainty in the model.
Paper: Fishing for Planets: A Comparative Analysis of EPRV Survey Performance in the Presence of Correlated Noise
Authors: Arvind F. Gupta, Megan Bedell
Figure caption: Expected semiamplitude uncertainty, σ  K , for a K = 10 cm s−1 signal and an orbital period of P = 100 days as a function of total nightly time cost (as calculated via Equation (18)). We calculate σ  K  for simulated observing schedules with 100 nights of observations distributed across 500 total nights, wherein the observations on each night are distributed according to each of the five strategies depicted in the top left panel. These strategies are described in Section 4.1. In the remaining panels, we show the impact of contributions from various combinations of photon noise and correlated noise from oscillations and granulation. We also include inset plots to highlight the performance of each multiexposure strategy relative to the single continuous exposure strategy for nightly time costs of less than an hour.
Paper: Fishing for Planets: A Comparative Analysis of EPRV Survey Performance in the Presence of Correlated Noise
Authors: Arvind F. Gupta, Megan Bedell
Figure caption: Expected Earth-analog detection significance, ﹩{[K\,/\,{\sigma }_{K}]}_{\oplus }﹩, as a function of number of visits for each of our survey simulations. The darker lines that terminate in filled circles correspond to the results for the 20-star simulations, and the lighter lines that terminate in open circles correspond to the results for the 40-star simulations. The size of each circle scales with stellar mass. We note that each of these lines exhibits a relatively smooth dependence on number of observations within an observing season, but that these smooth changes are interrupted by sharper kinks between observing seasons. Dashed vertical lines mark the expected number of observations per star for an idealized observing schedule, i.e., 1000 total observations for each of the 40-star simulations and 2000 total observations for each of the 20-star simulations. The final distributions of ﹩{[K\,/\,{\sigma }_{K}]}_{\oplus }﹩ values for each survey are shown as histograms in the narrow panels to the right of the main panels.
Paper: Fishing for Planets: A Comparative Analysis of EPRV Survey Performance in the Presence of Correlated Noise
Authors: Arvind F. Gupta, Megan Bedell
Figure caption: Expected exoplanet detection sensitivity limits as calculated using our Fisher information framework for a typical target star with approximately 100 observations per year for 10 yr and the Centered internight observing strategy. We include contributions from photon noise, oscillations, granulation, and stellar activity. We plot K/σ  K  as a function of minimum mass, ﹩{M}_{p}\sin i﹩, and orbital period, P. For reference, we also plot the 3, 5, and 10σ detection significance contours, and we indicate the locations of the solar system planets Venus, Earth, and Jupiter with the ⊙ symbol. The green cross and green dashed box indicate the mass and period values and ranges we use to define an Earth analog for the ﹩{[K/{\sigma }_{K}]}_{\oplus }﹩ and D ⊕ survey success metrics, respectively. Results for the quasi-periodic activity kernel are shown on the left, and results for the Matérn-5/2 activity kernel are shown on the right.
Paper: Fishing for Planets: A Comparative Analysis of EPRV Survey Performance in the Presence of Correlated Noise
Authors: Arvind F. Gupta, Megan Bedell
Figure caption: Covariance between pairs of observations as a function of separation in time for the quasi-periodic kernel for rotationally modulated stellar activity (Equation (15); left) and for the Matérn-5/2 kernel for rotationally modulated stellar activity (Equation (16); right). While the covariance for both kernels persists across many nights, we note that the curves differ significantly in amplitude and shape.
Paper: Fishing for Planets: A Comparative Analysis of EPRV Survey Performance in the Presence of Correlated Noise
Authors: Arvind F. Gupta, Megan Bedell
Figure caption: Expected semiamplitude uncertainty, σ  K , for a K = 10 cm s−1 signal and an orbital period of P = 300 days as a function of number of observations per year. We calculate σ  K  for simulated observing schedules with 10 yr of observations and a 240 days annual observing season, wherein the observations for each season are distributed according to each of the strategies depicted in Figure 4 and described in Section 4.3. We include correlated noise contributions from rotationally modulated stellar activity represented by a quasi-periodic kernel (dotted–dashed lines) and by a Matérn-5/2 kernel (solid lines).
Paper: Fishing for Planets: A Comparative Analysis of EPRV Survey Performance in the Presence of Correlated Noise
Authors: Arvind F. Gupta, Megan Bedell
Figure caption: Simulated internight observing schedules over a single observing season. We show the idealized distribution of observations across a 240-night baseline for each of the strategies described in Section 4.3. Isolated points represent individual observing nights, and lines represent blocks of consecutive observing nights. For each strategy, we show the distribution of observing nights for different numbers of annual observations, increasing in the vertical direction from 60 to 240 in increments of 20 observations per year.
Paper: Fishing for Planets: A Comparative Analysis of EPRV Survey Performance in the Presence of Correlated Noise
Authors: Arvind F. Gupta, Megan Bedell
Figure caption: Dependence of expected Earth-analog detection significance on stellar mass for each of our simulated surveys. On the left, we show that for the quasi-periodic kernel ﹩{[K\,/\,{\sigma }_{K}]}_{\oplus }﹩ follows a ﹩K\propto {M}_{\star }^{-2/3}﹩ curve for every strategy. That is, σ  K  is independent of stellar mass. On the right, we show that the ﹩{[K\,/\,{\sigma }_{K}]}_{\oplus }﹩ has a much steeper dependence on M ⋆, suggesting that σ  K  depends on stellar mass as well.
Paper: Fishing for Planets: A Comparative Analysis of EPRV Survey Performance in the Presence of Correlated Noise
Authors: Arvind F. Gupta, Megan Bedell
Figure caption: Covariance between pairs of observations as a function of separation in time for the GP kernels for stellar oscillations (Equation (12); left) and for stellar surface granulation (Equation (14); right). We assume instantaneous exposures for both kernels. We show that oscillations and granulation only introduce significant RV noise on short timescales of less than a single night.