adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: The Spatial Distribution of Type Ia Supernovae within Host Galaxies
Authors: Christopher Pritchet, Karun Thanjavur, Connor Bottrell, Yan Gao
Figure caption: Definition of L inc and L acc. The upper panel shows an SN (in red) superimposed on its host galaxy. The red shaded area is the area used to calculate L inc; its boundary is defined by an isophote passing through the SN; this isophote is not necessarily elliptical. L acc is computed within an elliptical boundary with semimajor axis a = 1.959a 25 and semiminor axis b = 1.959b 25. This is the area within which an SN can be matched to its host; see Section 2.2. It should be noted that L inc and L acc are computed using the fitted model light distribution. The middle panel shows one simulation of 100 SNe in which SNe trace light (bin size 0.01). The lower panel shows 30 simulations of 100 SNe, plotted as cumulative distributions.
Paper: The Spatial Distribution of Type Ia Supernovae within Host Galaxies
Authors: Christopher Pritchet, Karun Thanjavur, Connor Bottrell, Yan Gao
Figure caption: Cumulative distribution of the radial offset of SNe Ia divided by the fitted half-light radius of their host galaxies. Red solid line: bulge-dominated objects (B/T > 0.75). Blue solid line: disk-dominated objects (B/T < 0.25). This is for the primary sample of objects, and the GIM2D analysis. The dotted–dashed lines are Sérsic models: blue indicates n = 1 (disk), green is for n = 2.5, and red is for n = 4 (bulge). The Sérsic profiles have been corrected for missing light at ρ 25 > 1.959, and hence they do not pass through (R/HLR = 1, f = 0.5).
Paper: The Spatial Distribution of Type Ia Supernovae within Host Galaxies
Authors: Christopher Pritchet, Karun Thanjavur, Connor Bottrell, Yan Gao
Figure caption: (a) GIM2D analysis for objects with 0.2 < B/T < 0.7, with L inc/L acc calculated using bulge light (red), disk light (blue), and total light (black). The black dashed line uses only objects with HLR >1.″5. (b) L inc/L acc calculated over the range 0.1 < L inc/L acc<0.9, i.e., ignoring the innermost and outermost SNe. (c) Bulge SN rate scaled by 0.2–1.6 × , in steps of 0.2.
Paper: The Spatial Distribution of Type Ia Supernovae within Host Galaxies
Authors: Christopher Pritchet, Karun Thanjavur, Connor Bottrell, Yan Gao
Figure caption: Comparison of L inc/L acc from GIM2D and imfit fits of the host galaxy light distribution. The first three panels are from two component (bulge plus disk) models, with L inc/L acc calculated from (left to right) fitted bulge light only, fitted disk light only, and fitted total (i.e., bulge plus disk) light. The right panel is calculated using a single-component model (i.e., pure Sérsic or pS model). The plotted points are from the primary sample of objects (Section 3.4): black–r host < 20, red–r host < 19, blue—r host < 18.
Paper: The Spatial Distribution of Type Ia Supernovae within Host Galaxies
Authors: Christopher Pritchet, Karun Thanjavur, Connor Bottrell, Yan Gao
Figure caption: Galaxy isophotal size in arcsec vs. host r-band magnitude. The size is the circularized radius of the μ  r  = 25 mag/arcsec−2 isophote as given in SDSS DR7. The small gray points are a sample of 93,000 galaxies brighter than r = 21 mag in Stripe 82 with 0° < α < 10°. Squares are host galaxies, color coded according to type: black = SNIa, blue = zSNIa, and red = pSNIa. The shaded area represents our host cut at r < 20 mag.
Paper: The Spatial Distribution of Type Ia Supernovae within Host Galaxies
Authors: Christopher Pritchet, Karun Thanjavur, Connor Bottrell, Yan Gao
Figure caption:  L inc/L acc distribution for bulge-dominated galaxies (B/T > 0.7) in the primary sample (r < 20) (a) GIM2D bulge fits. (b)  HLR > 1″. Red solid line: imfit fits. Red dashed line: GIM2D fits. (c) Single-component (pure Sérsic model), n > 3, HLR > 1″. Red solid line: imfit fits. Red dashed line: GIM2D fits.
Paper: The Spatial Distribution of Type Ia Supernovae within Host Galaxies
Authors: Christopher Pritchet, Karun Thanjavur, Connor Bottrell, Yan Gao
Figure caption: Intermediate B/T host galaxies (0.2 < B/T < 0.7) analyzed by GIM2D. Red: hosts with mean age >5 Gyr. Blue: hosts with mean age <5 Gyr. The age is as determined by FSPS (Sako et al. 2018; column 124 of Table 1).
Paper: The Spatial Distribution of Type Ia Supernovae within Host Galaxies
Authors: Christopher Pritchet, Karun Thanjavur, Connor Bottrell, Yan Gao
Figure caption: Disk-dominated galaxies (B/T < 0.2) analyzed by GIM2D. Red: supernovae with color at maximum light c > 0; Blue: supernovae with c < 0.
Paper: Beyond Point Masses. II. Non-Keplerian Shape Effects Are Detectable in Several TNO Binaries
Authors: Benjamin C. N. Proudfoot, Darin A. Ragozzine, Meagan L. Thatcher, Will Grundy, Dallin J. Spencer, Tahina M. Alailima, Sawyer Allen, Penelope C. Bowden, Susanne Byrd, Conner D. Camacho, Gibson H. Campbell, Edison P. Carlisle, Jacob A. Christensen, Noah K. Christensen, Kaelyn Clement, Benjamin J. Derieg, Mara K. Dille, Cristian Dorrett, Abigail L. Ellefson, Taylor S. Fleming, N. J. Freeman, Ethan J. Gibson, William G. Giforos, Jacob A. Guerrette, Olivia Haddock, S. Ashton Hammond, Zachary A. Hampson, Joshua D. Hancock, Madeline S. Harmer, Joseph R. Henderson, Chandler R. Jensen, David Jensen, Ryleigh E. Jensen, Joshua S. Jones, Cameron C. Kubal, Jacob N. Lunt, Stephanie Martins, McKenna Matheson, Dahlia Maxwell, Timothy D. Morrell, McKenna M. Myckowiak, Maia A. Nelsen, Spencer T. Neu, Giovanna G. Nuccitelli, Kayson M. Reardon, Austin S. Reid, Kenneth G. Richards, Megan R. W. Robertson, Tanner D. Rydalch, Conner B. Scoresby, Ryan L. Scott, Zacory D. Shakespear, Elliot A. Silveira, Grace C. Steed, Christiana Z. Suggs, Garrett D. Suggs, Derek M. Tobias, Matthew L. Toole, McKayla L. Townsend, Kade L. Vickers, Collin R. Wagner, Madeline S. Wright, Emma M. A. Zappala
Figure caption: Improvements in fit quality by adopting a non-Keplerian model. The best-fit J 2 presented here is found by assuming a triaxial shape and dividing our measured J 2 R 2 by the resulting body’s volumetric radius squared. The ratio ﹩\tfrac{{{ \mathcal L }}_{{\rm{K}}}}{{{ \mathcal L }}_{\mathrm{NK}}}﹩ compares the Keplerian models presented in Section 3 to the best exploratory fit presented. If the likelihood ratio is ≪1, the null hypothesis (no detectable non-Keplerian effects) could be rejected, and non-Keplerian effects are indeed detected. In general, throughout this paper, we adopt a threshold of ﹩\tfrac{{{ \mathcal L }}_{{\rm{K}}}}{{{ \mathcal L }}_{\mathrm{NK}}}\lt 0.1﹩ to indicate systems that have orbit fit improvements indicative of non-Keplerian motion. We have labeled all of our systems with improvements below our threshold, as well as several systems with marginal improvements. Asterisks in labels indicate either a prograde (*) or retrograde (**) orbital solution for mirror ambiguous TNBs. Color corresponds to the radius of the TNB’s primary. We find that many TNBs are far better explained by a non-Keplerian model, with many systems showing moderate improvements. We also find a wide range of acceptable J 2 values, ranging from oblate spheroids to unresolved binaries. Future work and observations should focus on confirming the significance of our detections and extending the observational baselines of systems with moderate improvements in fit quality. We urge caution in using the values of J 2 in this plot, as there may be significant uncertainties that our exploratory fits are unable to fully constrain/measure.
Paper: Beyond Point Masses. II. Non-Keplerian Shape Effects Are Detectable in Several TNO Binaries
Authors: Benjamin C. N. Proudfoot, Darin A. Ragozzine, Meagan L. Thatcher, Will Grundy, Dallin J. Spencer, Tahina M. Alailima, Sawyer Allen, Penelope C. Bowden, Susanne Byrd, Conner D. Camacho, Gibson H. Campbell, Edison P. Carlisle, Jacob A. Christensen, Noah K. Christensen, Kaelyn Clement, Benjamin J. Derieg, Mara K. Dille, Cristian Dorrett, Abigail L. Ellefson, Taylor S. Fleming, N. J. Freeman, Ethan J. Gibson, William G. Giforos, Jacob A. Guerrette, Olivia Haddock, S. Ashton Hammond, Zachary A. Hampson, Joshua D. Hancock, Madeline S. Harmer, Joseph R. Henderson, Chandler R. Jensen, David Jensen, Ryleigh E. Jensen, Joshua S. Jones, Cameron C. Kubal, Jacob N. Lunt, Stephanie Martins, McKenna Matheson, Dahlia Maxwell, Timothy D. Morrell, McKenna M. Myckowiak, Maia A. Nelsen, Spencer T. Neu, Giovanna G. Nuccitelli, Kayson M. Reardon, Austin S. Reid, Kenneth G. Richards, Megan R. W. Robertson, Tanner D. Rydalch, Conner B. Scoresby, Ryan L. Scott, Zacory D. Shakespear, Elliot A. Silveira, Grace C. Steed, Christiana Z. Suggs, Garrett D. Suggs, Derek M. Tobias, Matthew L. Toole, McKayla L. Townsend, Kade L. Vickers, Collin R. Wagner, Madeline S. Wright, Emma M. A. Zappala
Figure caption: Corner plot for the Borasisi-Pabu non-Keplerian orbit fit in the style of Figure 1. Horizontal and vertical lines correspond to the best-fit solution in the Grundy database. The best fit in the MultiMoon non-Keplerian fit corresponded to a χ 2 of ∼11.5 (compared to 21 for the Keplerian fit). Instead of individually plotting the primary and secondary masses, which are completely degenerate, the system mass (M sys) is plotted to better show parameter correlations. Additionally, to allow for comparison with the literature, we show J 2 and C 22 rather than J 2 R 2 and C 22 R 2, where we take the shape to be a triaxial ellipsoid with R as the volumetric radius. Of particular interest is the marginal distribution for J 2, which clearly shows a high value of J 2 is preferred, with J 2 = 0 (equivalent to Keplerian motion) being excluded with a significance >3σ.
Paper: Beyond Point Masses. II. Non-Keplerian Shape Effects Are Detectable in Several TNO Binaries
Authors: Benjamin C. N. Proudfoot, Darin A. Ragozzine, Meagan L. Thatcher, Will Grundy, Dallin J. Spencer, Tahina M. Alailima, Sawyer Allen, Penelope C. Bowden, Susanne Byrd, Conner D. Camacho, Gibson H. Campbell, Edison P. Carlisle, Jacob A. Christensen, Noah K. Christensen, Kaelyn Clement, Benjamin J. Derieg, Mara K. Dille, Cristian Dorrett, Abigail L. Ellefson, Taylor S. Fleming, N. J. Freeman, Ethan J. Gibson, William G. Giforos, Jacob A. Guerrette, Olivia Haddock, S. Ashton Hammond, Zachary A. Hampson, Joshua D. Hancock, Madeline S. Harmer, Joseph R. Henderson, Chandler R. Jensen, David Jensen, Ryleigh E. Jensen, Joshua S. Jones, Cameron C. Kubal, Jacob N. Lunt, Stephanie Martins, McKenna Matheson, Dahlia Maxwell, Timothy D. Morrell, McKenna M. Myckowiak, Maia A. Nelsen, Spencer T. Neu, Giovanna G. Nuccitelli, Kayson M. Reardon, Austin S. Reid, Kenneth G. Richards, Megan R. W. Robertson, Tanner D. Rydalch, Conner B. Scoresby, Ryan L. Scott, Zacory D. Shakespear, Elliot A. Silveira, Grace C. Steed, Christiana Z. Suggs, Garrett D. Suggs, Derek M. Tobias, Matthew L. Toole, McKayla L. Townsend, Kade L. Vickers, Collin R. Wagner, Madeline S. Wright, Emma M. A. Zappala
Figure caption: Corner plot for the Borasisi-Pabu Keplerian orbit fit. Along the tops of the columns are the marginal posterior distribution for each parameter; in the case of a Gaussian distribution, this can be used to determine the best-fit and uncertainty. The contour plots show the joint posterior distribution between every pair of parameters. For example, the system-mass semimajor axis degeneracy can be seen at the top left, which is a result of measurement of only the orbital period and Newton’s Version of Kepler’s Third Law. Contours show the 1σ, 2σ, and 3σ levels of each joint posterior distribution. The horizontal and vertical lines show the orbit solution publicly available in the Grundy database. Of particular interest is the strong agreement between the Grundy solution (horizontal and vertical lines) and the solution derived by MultiMoon. The best fit in the MultiMoon fit corresponded to a χ 2 of ∼21. rms residuals are 2 mas in both longitude and latitude. All angles are relative to the J2000 ecliptic plane on JD 2451900.0 (2000 December 21 12:00 UT).
Paper: Beyond Point Masses. II. Non-Keplerian Shape Effects Are Detectable in Several TNO Binaries
Authors: Benjamin C. N. Proudfoot, Darin A. Ragozzine, Meagan L. Thatcher, Will Grundy, Dallin J. Spencer, Tahina M. Alailima, Sawyer Allen, Penelope C. Bowden, Susanne Byrd, Conner D. Camacho, Gibson H. Campbell, Edison P. Carlisle, Jacob A. Christensen, Noah K. Christensen, Kaelyn Clement, Benjamin J. Derieg, Mara K. Dille, Cristian Dorrett, Abigail L. Ellefson, Taylor S. Fleming, N. J. Freeman, Ethan J. Gibson, William G. Giforos, Jacob A. Guerrette, Olivia Haddock, S. Ashton Hammond, Zachary A. Hampson, Joshua D. Hancock, Madeline S. Harmer, Joseph R. Henderson, Chandler R. Jensen, David Jensen, Ryleigh E. Jensen, Joshua S. Jones, Cameron C. Kubal, Jacob N. Lunt, Stephanie Martins, McKenna Matheson, Dahlia Maxwell, Timothy D. Morrell, McKenna M. Myckowiak, Maia A. Nelsen, Spencer T. Neu, Giovanna G. Nuccitelli, Kayson M. Reardon, Austin S. Reid, Kenneth G. Richards, Megan R. W. Robertson, Tanner D. Rydalch, Conner B. Scoresby, Ryan L. Scott, Zacory D. Shakespear, Elliot A. Silveira, Grace C. Steed, Christiana Z. Suggs, Garrett D. Suggs, Derek M. Tobias, Matthew L. Toole, McKayla L. Townsend, Kade L. Vickers, Collin R. Wagner, Madeline S. Wright, Emma M. A. Zappala
Figure caption: Constraints on the mass ratio and separation of a putative unresolved binary in the Borasisi system. The thick black line shows the mass ratio and separation given by the median value of the inferred J 2 implied by Equation (4). Colored contours indicate the 1σ, 2σ, and 3σ ranges from the J 2 posterior. Gray dashed lines show several separations for reference. Here, we adopt a radius of 63 km for Borasisi, but this could be smaller, especially at mass ratios close to 1. The separation equivalent to a single Wide Field Camera 3 (WFC3) pixel on HST is calculated based on Borasisi-Pabu’s typical distance from Earth and the instrument’s 0.″04 px−1 pixel scale. The separation of Pabu’s orbit is shown in Table 2. The black points show other close binaries known in our solar system. Data for Lempo-Hiisi is from D. Ragozzine et al. (2023, in preparation), 2014 WC510 is from Leiva et al. (2020) and assumes equal densities and albedos, and 2011 JY31 is from Weaver et al. (2022) and assumes equal masses. The J 2 found in our analysis is consistent with an unresolved binary interpretation, as the separation of the binary would be less than a single HST pixel across a wide range of mass ratios.
Paper: Beyond Point Masses. II. Non-Keplerian Shape Effects Are Detectable in Several TNO Binaries
Authors: Benjamin C. N. Proudfoot, Darin A. Ragozzine, Meagan L. Thatcher, Will Grundy, Dallin J. Spencer, Tahina M. Alailima, Sawyer Allen, Penelope C. Bowden, Susanne Byrd, Conner D. Camacho, Gibson H. Campbell, Edison P. Carlisle, Jacob A. Christensen, Noah K. Christensen, Kaelyn Clement, Benjamin J. Derieg, Mara K. Dille, Cristian Dorrett, Abigail L. Ellefson, Taylor S. Fleming, N. J. Freeman, Ethan J. Gibson, William G. Giforos, Jacob A. Guerrette, Olivia Haddock, S. Ashton Hammond, Zachary A. Hampson, Joshua D. Hancock, Madeline S. Harmer, Joseph R. Henderson, Chandler R. Jensen, David Jensen, Ryleigh E. Jensen, Joshua S. Jones, Cameron C. Kubal, Jacob N. Lunt, Stephanie Martins, McKenna Matheson, Dahlia Maxwell, Timothy D. Morrell, McKenna M. Myckowiak, Maia A. Nelsen, Spencer T. Neu, Giovanna G. Nuccitelli, Kayson M. Reardon, Austin S. Reid, Kenneth G. Richards, Megan R. W. Robertson, Tanner D. Rydalch, Conner B. Scoresby, Ryan L. Scott, Zacory D. Shakespear, Elliot A. Silveira, Grace C. Steed, Christiana Z. Suggs, Garrett D. Suggs, Derek M. Tobias, Matthew L. Toole, McKayla L. Townsend, Kade L. Vickers, Collin R. Wagner, Madeline S. Wright, Emma M. A. Zappala
Figure caption: Residual plot for the Borasisi-Pabu Keplerian orbit fit. Plotted are the normalized residuals (residual divided by measurement uncertainty) in longitude (x) and latitude (y) with color corresponding to observation date. The three large circles correspond to 1σ, 2σ, and 3 σ error contours. The best fit in the MultiMoon fit corresponded to a χ 2 of ∼21. rms residuals are 2 mas in both longitude and latitude. The radius of a typical 1σ error contour is ∼2 mas, although values ranged between 0.9 and 5 mas.
Paper: Beyond Point Masses. II. Non-Keplerian Shape Effects Are Detectable in Several TNO Binaries
Authors: Benjamin C. N. Proudfoot, Darin A. Ragozzine, Meagan L. Thatcher, Will Grundy, Dallin J. Spencer, Tahina M. Alailima, Sawyer Allen, Penelope C. Bowden, Susanne Byrd, Conner D. Camacho, Gibson H. Campbell, Edison P. Carlisle, Jacob A. Christensen, Noah K. Christensen, Kaelyn Clement, Benjamin J. Derieg, Mara K. Dille, Cristian Dorrett, Abigail L. Ellefson, Taylor S. Fleming, N. J. Freeman, Ethan J. Gibson, William G. Giforos, Jacob A. Guerrette, Olivia Haddock, S. Ashton Hammond, Zachary A. Hampson, Joshua D. Hancock, Madeline S. Harmer, Joseph R. Henderson, Chandler R. Jensen, David Jensen, Ryleigh E. Jensen, Joshua S. Jones, Cameron C. Kubal, Jacob N. Lunt, Stephanie Martins, McKenna Matheson, Dahlia Maxwell, Timothy D. Morrell, McKenna M. Myckowiak, Maia A. Nelsen, Spencer T. Neu, Giovanna G. Nuccitelli, Kayson M. Reardon, Austin S. Reid, Kenneth G. Richards, Megan R. W. Robertson, Tanner D. Rydalch, Conner B. Scoresby, Ryan L. Scott, Zacory D. Shakespear, Elliot A. Silveira, Grace C. Steed, Christiana Z. Suggs, Garrett D. Suggs, Derek M. Tobias, Matthew L. Toole, McKayla L. Townsend, Kade L. Vickers, Collin R. Wagner, Madeline S. Wright, Emma M. A. Zappala
Figure caption: Kernel density estimates (KDEs) for the distributions of z-scores of Grundy best fits (when compared to the MultiMoon posteriors) for each fitted parameter. The dashed black line shows a normal distribution with a width of 1 as a comparison. It is clear that for all fitted parameters, the Grundy best fits are well within our posterior distributions, with the majority being <1σ away from our posteriors. MultiMoon's Keplerian fitting algorithm produces essentially identical results to those previously published in the literature.
Paper: Beyond Point Masses. II. Non-Keplerian Shape Effects Are Detectable in Several TNO Binaries
Authors: Benjamin C. N. Proudfoot, Darin A. Ragozzine, Meagan L. Thatcher, Will Grundy, Dallin J. Spencer, Tahina M. Alailima, Sawyer Allen, Penelope C. Bowden, Susanne Byrd, Conner D. Camacho, Gibson H. Campbell, Edison P. Carlisle, Jacob A. Christensen, Noah K. Christensen, Kaelyn Clement, Benjamin J. Derieg, Mara K. Dille, Cristian Dorrett, Abigail L. Ellefson, Taylor S. Fleming, N. J. Freeman, Ethan J. Gibson, William G. Giforos, Jacob A. Guerrette, Olivia Haddock, S. Ashton Hammond, Zachary A. Hampson, Joshua D. Hancock, Madeline S. Harmer, Joseph R. Henderson, Chandler R. Jensen, David Jensen, Ryleigh E. Jensen, Joshua S. Jones, Cameron C. Kubal, Jacob N. Lunt, Stephanie Martins, McKenna Matheson, Dahlia Maxwell, Timothy D. Morrell, McKenna M. Myckowiak, Maia A. Nelsen, Spencer T. Neu, Giovanna G. Nuccitelli, Kayson M. Reardon, Austin S. Reid, Kenneth G. Richards, Megan R. W. Robertson, Tanner D. Rydalch, Conner B. Scoresby, Ryan L. Scott, Zacory D. Shakespear, Elliot A. Silveira, Grace C. Steed, Christiana Z. Suggs, Garrett D. Suggs, Derek M. Tobias, Matthew L. Toole, McKayla L. Townsend, Kade L. Vickers, Collin R. Wagner, Madeline S. Wright, Emma M. A. Zappala
Figure caption: KDEs in the style of Figure 3. Here, we compare the non-Keplerian best fits found in our exploratory fits to the Keplerian posteriors presented in Section 3. We find that significant deviations are present in the argument of periapsis (ω) and longitude of ascending node (Ω) when assuming a non-Keplerian model. This is expected, since this model allows for precession of these two angles. The distributions are still centered at zero presumably because we are comparing the non-Keplerian angles at an epoch typically near the middle of the observations and because many systems show insignificant non-Keplerian effects. Notably, however, the system mass, semimajor axis, eccentricity, and inclination are still consistent with Keplerian fits, implying that systematic errors due to non-Keplerian effects are small in most previous analyses.
Paper: Beyond Point Masses. II. Non-Keplerian Shape Effects Are Detectable in Several TNO Binaries
Authors: Benjamin C. N. Proudfoot, Darin A. Ragozzine, Meagan L. Thatcher, Will Grundy, Dallin J. Spencer, Tahina M. Alailima, Sawyer Allen, Penelope C. Bowden, Susanne Byrd, Conner D. Camacho, Gibson H. Campbell, Edison P. Carlisle, Jacob A. Christensen, Noah K. Christensen, Kaelyn Clement, Benjamin J. Derieg, Mara K. Dille, Cristian Dorrett, Abigail L. Ellefson, Taylor S. Fleming, N. J. Freeman, Ethan J. Gibson, William G. Giforos, Jacob A. Guerrette, Olivia Haddock, S. Ashton Hammond, Zachary A. Hampson, Joshua D. Hancock, Madeline S. Harmer, Joseph R. Henderson, Chandler R. Jensen, David Jensen, Ryleigh E. Jensen, Joshua S. Jones, Cameron C. Kubal, Jacob N. Lunt, Stephanie Martins, McKenna Matheson, Dahlia Maxwell, Timothy D. Morrell, McKenna M. Myckowiak, Maia A. Nelsen, Spencer T. Neu, Giovanna G. Nuccitelli, Kayson M. Reardon, Austin S. Reid, Kenneth G. Richards, Megan R. W. Robertson, Tanner D. Rydalch, Conner B. Scoresby, Ryan L. Scott, Zacory D. Shakespear, Elliot A. Silveira, Grace C. Steed, Christiana Z. Suggs, Garrett D. Suggs, Derek M. Tobias, Matthew L. Toole, McKayla L. Townsend, Kade L. Vickers, Collin R. Wagner, Madeline S. Wright, Emma M. A. Zappala
Figure caption: A plot showing the change in “information gained” by a single HST observation (in gray) and separation of Borasisi and Pabu (in red) in the first quarter of 2023. The information gained by single observations is a statistic that compares the uncertainty in the projected position of a system’s secondary to the uncertainty of a typical observation (Equation (6)). Information gained clearly shows large variations; observing at times of maximum information gained allows for maximum leverage over reducing uncertainties. Additionally, avoiding times of close separation can ensure high-quality data.
Paper: Beyond Point Masses. II. Non-Keplerian Shape Effects Are Detectable in Several TNO Binaries
Authors: Benjamin C. N. Proudfoot, Darin A. Ragozzine, Meagan L. Thatcher, Will Grundy, Dallin J. Spencer, Tahina M. Alailima, Sawyer Allen, Penelope C. Bowden, Susanne Byrd, Conner D. Camacho, Gibson H. Campbell, Edison P. Carlisle, Jacob A. Christensen, Noah K. Christensen, Kaelyn Clement, Benjamin J. Derieg, Mara K. Dille, Cristian Dorrett, Abigail L. Ellefson, Taylor S. Fleming, N. J. Freeman, Ethan J. Gibson, William G. Giforos, Jacob A. Guerrette, Olivia Haddock, S. Ashton Hammond, Zachary A. Hampson, Joshua D. Hancock, Madeline S. Harmer, Joseph R. Henderson, Chandler R. Jensen, David Jensen, Ryleigh E. Jensen, Joshua S. Jones, Cameron C. Kubal, Jacob N. Lunt, Stephanie Martins, McKenna Matheson, Dahlia Maxwell, Timothy D. Morrell, McKenna M. Myckowiak, Maia A. Nelsen, Spencer T. Neu, Giovanna G. Nuccitelli, Kayson M. Reardon, Austin S. Reid, Kenneth G. Richards, Megan R. W. Robertson, Tanner D. Rydalch, Conner B. Scoresby, Ryan L. Scott, Zacory D. Shakespear, Elliot A. Silveira, Grace C. Steed, Christiana Z. Suggs, Garrett D. Suggs, Derek M. Tobias, Matthew L. Toole, McKayla L. Townsend, Kade L. Vickers, Collin R. Wagner, Madeline S. Wright, Emma M. A. Zappala
Figure caption: Residual plot for the Borasisi-Pabu non-Keplerian orbit fit in the style of Figure 2. The best fit in the MultiMoon non-Keplerian fit corresponded to a χ 2 of ∼11.5. rms residuals are 2 mas in both longitude and latitude. Error contours here are the same size as in Figure 2.