adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Photometric Determination of Unresolved Main-sequence Binaries in the Pleiades: Binary Fraction and Mass-ratio Distribution
Authors: Rongrong Liu, Zhengyi Shao, Lu Li
Figure caption: Mass-ratio distribution and best-fit model for the Pleiades. The gray histogram and error bars show the mass-ratio distribution. The black line represents the best-fit model. The model is divided into three segments. Each segment follows a power law. The dark gray area represents the number of exceeding high-mass-ratio binaries.
Paper: Photometric Determination of Unresolved Main-sequence Binaries in the Pleiades: Binary Fraction and Mass-ratio Distribution
Authors: Rongrong Liu, Zhengyi Shao, Lu Li
Figure caption: Comparison of mass-ratio distribution from this work with other works. The light gray histograms represent the total mass-ratio distribution across all mass ranges, whereas the dark gray ones represent the distributions within specific mass ranges for comparison. The solid line in panel (a) corresponds to the mass-ratio distribution from G. Torres et al. (2021). The solid line in panel (b) reflects the distribution from H. Niu et al. (2020), which follows a power-law distribution with γ = 0.22. The solid and dashed lines in panel (c) denote the mass-ratio distributions reported in A. A. Malofeeva et al. (2022, 2023), respectively.
Paper: Photometric Determination of Unresolved Main-sequence Binaries in the Pleiades: Binary Fraction and Mass-ratio Distribution
Authors: Rongrong Liu, Zhengyi Shao, Lu Li
Figure caption: Distributions of binary probability (Pb) for Pleiades kinematic members on CMDs of Gaia, 2MASS, and the combined data. The star symbols mark the stars with neighbors in 5″. The gray crosses show the stars excluded after multiband fitting. The colored points represent the final 1154 members, with color indicating Pb. All photometric magnitudes have been adjusted to absolute magnitudes using the DM in Table 1. The dotted lines mark ﹩{{ \mathcal M }}_{{\rm{s}}}=0.5,1﹩ and ﹩2\,{{ \mathcal M }}_{\odot }﹩ from bottom to top. The black solid and dashed lines represent the empirical isochrones for q = 0 and 1, respectively. The dotted–dashed lines represent isochrons for triple stars with equal masses.
Paper: Photometric Determination of Unresolved Main-sequence Binaries in the Pleiades: Binary Fraction and Mass-ratio Distribution
Authors: Rongrong Liu, Zhengyi Shao, Lu Li
Figure caption: Binary fraction (fb) as a function of primary mass for different mass ratios in the Pleiades. Panel (a) shows the total binary fraction for ﹩q\gt {q}_{{\rm{lim}}}﹩. Panels (b)–(d) represent the binary fractions for q = 0−0.3, 0.3−0.8, 0.8−1, respectively. Dashed lines indicate incomplete binary fractions. The shaded regions represent fb errors.
Paper: Photometric Determination of Unresolved Main-sequence Binaries in the Pleiades: Binary Fraction and Mass-ratio Distribution
Authors: Rongrong Liu, Zhengyi Shao, Lu Li
Figure caption: Mass-ratio distributions in different mass ranges. Panels (a)–(f) show distributions in different mass ranges: ﹩{{ \mathcal M }}_{1}=0.11\mbox{--}0.18,\,0.18\mbox{--}0.3﹩, 0.3−0.5, 0.5−0.9, ﹩0.9\mbox{--}1.6,\,1.6\mbox{--}4.9\,{{ \mathcal M }}_{\odot }﹩. Within each panel, the dotted lines indicate the peak and valley of the total mass-ratio distribution.
Paper: Photometric Determination of Unresolved Main-sequence Binaries in the Pleiades: Binary Fraction and Mass-ratio Distribution
Authors: Rongrong Liu, Zhengyi Shao, Lu Li
Figure caption: Comparison of mass ratio from this work with double-line binaries (G. Torres et al. 2021). All these stars have Pb ≈ 1. The black line indicates y = x, and the gray line shows an offset of −0.10.
Paper: Photometric Determination of Unresolved Main-sequence Binaries in the Pleiades: Binary Fraction and Mass-ratio Distribution
Authors: Rongrong Liu, Zhengyi Shao, Lu Li
Figure caption: Distribution of binary probability (Pb) of main-sequence members.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Example of a simulated light curve and the different preprocessing stages. The stages are shown sequentially from the upper left to the lower right. The upper-left panel shows the raw light curve, randomly cropped to the 720 day segment. The upper-middle panel shows the light curve after the addition of Kepler noise, and the upper-right panel shows the resulting light curve after averaging with a 6 hr window. The lower-left panel shows the light-curve differences (Diff-Lc), and the lower-middle panel shows the resulting normalized Diff-ACF. The lower-right panel shows the normalized differences light curve. The input for the model is a two-channel time series corresponding to the last two panels.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Results of our model (upper left) vs. implementations of ACF (upper right) and GPS (lower) on our test data set. In the left panel, the color represents the model's confidence levels. The sharp drop of samples, seen at 10 days, is a result of the prior distribution of periods (see Table 1). This distribution was also implemented in S. Aigrain et al. (2015) and motivated by the bimodality found by A. McQuillan et al. (2013; 2014).
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Observational error distributions of the LightPred model vs. the ACF model. The left panel shows all of the samples (108,785 samples), and the right panel shows a subsample of 36,154 points with no planet-hosting stars, eclipsing binaries (EBs), and where ACF was able to predict all of the segments, i.e., the ACF effectively could not predict a rotation period for the majority of the data.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Distributions of predictions: difference between pairs of different quarters of the same sample for Kepler samples. The orange curve represents the fit to a normal distribution.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Simulation error vs. observational error (averaged over 1 day bin). The left panel shows all of the samples, and the right panel shows only samples with predicted periods smaller than 25 days. The red line represents a line with a slope of 2.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: High-level diagram of the lightPred model.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Period confidence value vs. absolute period error of the model.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Training pipeline. In the self-supervised step, the LightPred model is trained without the prediction head.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: EBs orbital period vs. the ratio between the orbital period and stellar period. Horizontal lines corresponds to Porb/Prot = 0.5, 1, 2. The upper panel shows the stellar period predicted by LightPred, and the lower panel shows the stellar period predicted by the ACF method. The colors represent stellar classes defined by J. C. Lurie et al. (2017)—sp—starspots modulation; ev—Ellipsoidal variations; np—no periodic out-of-eclipse variability; ce—Targets where starspot modulations appear to have been mistaken for ellipsoidal variation; ot—another periodic out-of-eclipse variability; pux—possible pulsator; pu—likely pulsator.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Comparison of the period determinations between LightPred model, A. McQuillan et al. (2014; left panel), T. Reinhold et al. (2023), and A. R. G. Santos et al. (2021). Colors represent model confidence scores. The red and orange lines represent slopes of 1 and 0.5, respectively. The inconsistencies, seen on short periods and half-period regimes, are discussed in Section 5.2.5.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: EBs orbital period vs. the ratio between orbital period and rotational period. Horizontal lines corresponds to Porb/Prot = 0.5, 1, 2. In the upper-left panel, colors correspond to the model's confidence. In the upper-right panel, colors correspond to the total error. The lower-left panel shows the three classes defined in Section 5.2.4. The lower-right panel shows the histograms of confidence for the classes on the left panel.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Comparison of our predictions and A. McQuillan et al. (2014) predictions as seen in Figure 9. Colors represent the w-parameter as given in A. McQuillan et al. (2014). The left panel shows the results for PMcQ14 > 3, and the right panel shows the results after the full selection process, as described in Section 5.3.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Correlation between the w-parameter from A. McQuillan et al. (2014) and the total error.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Distributions of the entire sample (red) vs. possible contaminants (gray): there are four types of CP/CD contaminant (see the text for details). The upper panels show the period distributions, and the lower panels show the total error distributions.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Distributions of the entire sample (red) vs. possible contaminants (gray), with the No Rotation flag 6 in A. R. G. Santos et al. (2021). The upper panel shows the period distributions, and the lower panel shows the total error distributions.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Two-dimensional correlation between stellar parameters and the total error. On each panel, the PCA parameters and Pearson correlation are shown in the legend.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Correlation between stellar parameters and the total error on each panel. The Pearson correlation is shown in the legend.
Paper: Infrared Compositional Measurements in Comet C/2017 K2 (Pan-STARRS) at Heliocentric Distances Beyond 2.3 au
Authors: Chemeda Ejeta, Erika Gibb, Michael A. DiSanti, Hideyo Kawakita, Boncho P. Bonev, Neil Dello Russo, Nathan X. Roth, Younas Khan, Adam J. McKay, Michael R. Combi, Lori Feaga, Mohammad Saki, Ronald J. Vervack Jr, Yinsi Shou
Figure caption: The abundances of volatiles in comet K2 [panels (a) and (b)], 3abundances in K2 and OCCs measured at comparable heliocentric distances [panel (c)], and comparison of abundances of volatiles in K2 in comparison with OCCs measured to date in the infrared wavelength [panels (d), (e) and (f)]. The vertical dotted lines indicate measurements within 2 au, where most measurements are performed.
Paper: Effects of Planetary Mass Uncertainties on the Interpretation of the Reflectance Spectra of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Mario Damiano, Zachary Burr, Renyu Hu, Jennifer Burt, Tiffany Kataria
Figure caption: Mass–radius relations used for the 2D prior (L. Zeng et al. 2016). The shaded region shows the full search space of the retrieval when using this prior function. The radius is chosen from a uniform distribution between 0.58 and 2.2 R⊕, then the mass is chosen from a uniform distribution between the corresponding mass for a 100% water ice planet and a 100% iron planet with this radius. For example, for a radius of 1.25 R⊕, the mass can vary from 0.65 to 5.2 M⊕.
Paper: Infrared Compositional Measurements in Comet C/2017 K2 (Pan-STARRS) at Heliocentric Distances Beyond 2.3 au
Authors: Chemeda Ejeta, Erika Gibb, Michael A. DiSanti, Hideyo Kawakita, Boncho P. Bonev, Neil Dello Russo, Nathan X. Roth, Younas Khan, Adam J. McKay, Michael R. Combi, Lori Feaga, Mohammad Saki, Ronald J. Vervack Jr, Yinsi Shou
Figure caption: Production rates of CO (blue), C2H6 (red), CH4 (green), H2O (magenta), CH3OH (black), C2H2 (olive), and HCN (orange) in K2 as a function of the heliocentric distance.
Paper: Effects of Planetary Mass Uncertainties on the Interpretation of the Reflectance Spectra of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Mario Damiano, Zachary Burr, Renyu Hu, Jennifer Burt, Tiffany Kataria
Figure caption: Simulated spectra and data models for the Modern and Archean Earth–like scenarios. The data points are obtained by binning the synthesized model and by applying Gaussian noise and error bars as defined in the Appendix. Top panel: modern Earthlike. Bottom panel: Archean Earth–like.
Paper: Effects of Planetary Mass Uncertainties on the Interpretation of the Reflectance Spectra of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Mario Damiano, Zachary Burr, Renyu Hu, Jennifer Burt, Tiffany Kataria
Figure caption: Posterior distribution functions for planetary mass, radius, and surface pressure for the cloud-free modern Earthlike scenario. The surface pressure is a proxy for the atmospheric gases collectively as the sum of their partial pressure is equal to the surface pressure.
Paper: Effects of Planetary Mass Uncertainties on the Interpretation of the Reflectance Spectra of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Mario Damiano, Zachary Burr, Renyu Hu, Jennifer Burt, Tiffany Kataria
Figure caption: Posterior distribution functions for planetary mass, radius, and surface pressure for the modern Earthlike scenario. The surface pressure is a proxy for the atmospheric gases collectively as the sum of their partial pressure is equal to the surface pressure.
Paper: Effects of Planetary Mass Uncertainties on the Interpretation of the Reflectance Spectra of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Mario Damiano, Zachary Burr, Renyu Hu, Jennifer Burt, Tiffany Kataria
Figure caption: Posterior distribution functions for planetary mass, radius, surface pressure, and particle size for the modern Earthlike scenario. The surface pressure is a proxy for the atmospheric gases collectively as the sum of their partial pressure is equal to the surface pressure.
Paper: Effects of Planetary Mass Uncertainties on the Interpretation of the Reflectance Spectra of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Mario Damiano, Zachary Burr, Renyu Hu, Jennifer Burt, Tiffany Kataria
Figure caption: Posterior distribution functions of the Bayesian analysis on the cloud-free modern Earthlike reflected spectrum of all scenarios defined in Section 2.1.5.
Paper: Spectroscopically Resolved Partial Phase Curve of the Rapid Heating and Cooling of the Highly Eccentric Hot Jupiter HAT-P-2b with WFC3
Authors: Bob Jacobs, Jean-Michel Désert, Nikole Lewis, Ryan C. Challener, L. C. Mayorga, Zoë L. de Beurs, Vivien Parmentier, Kevin B. Stevenson, Julien de Wit, Saugata Barat, Jonathan Fortney, Tiffany Kataria, Michael Line
Figure caption: HAT-P-2b's WFC3 G141 light curve starting just before transit and ending just after secondary eclipse. (a) Raw WFC3 G141 light curve separated by scan direction. The flux levels of the two scan directions are different owing to the upstream–downstream effect (P. McCullough & J. MacKenty 2012). Note that the first exposure of the penultimate orbit is missing: we omitted it because of a satellite crossing event. (b) Relative drift in pixels of each exposure on the WFC3 detector in the dispersion direction with respect to the reference exposure (δλ). Large circles mark the average over δλ for each orbit. (c) Telescope-systematics-removed white light-curve data and best-fit planetary flux model (Φ(t) + M(t)) relative to the mean stellar flux. The first orbit has already been removed. The subsequent orbits have the same color-coding as in Figure 1. We also show 200 posterior samples from the light-curve fits. We show the best fit as a thick line, which is pushed to an early eclipse by the priors. Note that the scale of the y-axis is different above and below (Fp + Fs)/Fs = 0.9998. For the white light-curve data we removed the best-fit telescope systematics. These are correlated with the planetary and stellar fit parameters. Different light-curve posterior samples correspond to different telescope systematics and would therefore alter the representation of the data in this figure slightly. We highlight the orbits that we used for the transit and eclipse spectra. In the bottom of this panel we plot the posterior distributions for the timing of periastron from J. de Wit et al. (2017), Z. L. de Beurs et al. (2023), and this work. The median of the periastron posterior of this work is denoted with a vertical dashed line. (d) Stellar light curve Ψ(t) showing stellar pulsations from the 200 posterior samples shown in panel (c). The scaling of this panel is equal to the scaling of the upper part of panel (c). The retrieved pulsation phases resemble the pulsation phases found in Spitzer data 5–9 yr prior to these observations (J. de Wit et al. 2017).
Paper: Spectroscopically Resolved Partial Phase Curve of the Rapid Heating and Cooling of the Highly Eccentric Hot Jupiter HAT-P-2b with WFC3
Authors: Bob Jacobs, Jean-Michel Désert, Nikole Lewis, Ryan C. Challener, L. C. Mayorga, Zoë L. de Beurs, Vivien Parmentier, Kevin B. Stevenson, Julien de Wit, Saugata Barat, Jonathan Fortney, Tiffany Kataria, Michael Line
Figure caption: Visualization of HAT-P-2b's orbit, including the locations of transit, eclipse, and the phases that we observed. The planet, star, and orbit are to scale. We color-code the HST orbits to correspond to the colors in the subsequent figures. The two visits were taken consecutively.
Paper: Effects of Planetary Mass Uncertainties on the Interpretation of the Reflectance Spectra of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Mario Damiano, Zachary Burr, Renyu Hu, Jennifer Burt, Tiffany Kataria
Figure caption: Posterior distribution functions of the Bayesian analysis on the modern Earthlike reflected spectrum of all the scenarios defined in Section 2.1.5.
Paper: Effects of Planetary Mass Uncertainties on the Interpretation of the Reflectance Spectra of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Mario Damiano, Zachary Burr, Renyu Hu, Jennifer Burt, Tiffany Kataria
Figure caption: Posterior distribution functions for planetary mass, radius, and surface pressure for the Archean Earth–like scenario. Note that the surface pressure is a proxy for the atmospheric gases collectively as the sum of their partial pressure is equal to the surface pressure.
Paper: Effects of Planetary Mass Uncertainties on the Interpretation of the Reflectance Spectra of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Mario Damiano, Zachary Burr, Renyu Hu, Jennifer Burt, Tiffany Kataria
Figure caption: Posterior distribution functions of the Bayesian analysis on the Archean Earth–like reflected spectrum of all the scenarios defined in Section 2.1.5.
Paper: Effects of Planetary Mass Uncertainties on the Interpretation of the Reflectance Spectra of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Mario Damiano, Zachary Burr, Renyu Hu, Jennifer Burt, Tiffany Kataria
Figure caption: Posterior distribution functions for planetary mass, radius, surface pressure, and particle size for the Archean Earth–like scenario. The surface pressure is a proxy for the atmospheric gases collectively as the sum of their partial pressure is equal to the surface pressure.
Paper: Effects of Planetary Mass Uncertainties on the Interpretation of the Reflectance Spectra of Earth-like Exoplanets
Authors: Mario Damiano, Zachary Burr, Renyu Hu, Jennifer Burt, Tiffany Kataria
Figure caption: SNR vs. λ for the modern and Archean Earth scenarios. The SNR is set to be 20 at 0.75 μm. The jump at 1 μm is due to the fact that in the NIR, the spectral resolution decreases from R = 140 to R = 70. Similarly, the jump at 0.4 μm is due to the drop in spectral resolution in the NUV, i.e., R = 7.
Paper: Spectroscopically Resolved Partial Phase Curve of the Rapid Heating and Cooling of the Highly Eccentric Hot Jupiter HAT-P-2b with WFC3
Authors: Bob Jacobs, Jean-Michel Désert, Nikole Lewis, Ryan C. Challener, L. C. Mayorga, Zoë L. de Beurs, Vivien Parmentier, Kevin B. Stevenson, Julien de Wit, Saugata Barat, Jonathan Fortney, Tiffany Kataria, Michael Line
Figure caption: Excess flux of the common-mode-reduced spectra at 1.28 μm. Left: deviation from a planetary blackbody model for three wavelength bins surrounding the stellar Paβ line. For the dark-red bin this equals δPa. This planetary blackbody model was fit to the common-mode-reduced spectra excluding the wavelength bins shown in this figure for each orbit at WFC3’s native resolution. The black point in eclipse denotes the uncertainty on the in-eclipse flux measurement. In the common-mode method all data are divided by these in-eclipse data. Therefore, this uncertainty also represents the uncertainty on the mean deviation of each bin. We denote the mean deviation in the second visit with a horizontal line. The data for the first visit are faded because Section 2.5 determined that the common-mode method is unreliable for the first visit. We plot the median planetary light curve from Figure 2 in aquamarine green in the background for reference of the timing of the peak in the excess flux. Its scale (right axis) is the same as for the binned data. The bottom panel contains the corresponding stellar pulsation, with the pulsation amplitude averaged over each orbit denoted as diamonds. Also denoted is the posterior distribution of the time of periastron from this work. The posterior median is demarcated with a vertical dashed line. Right: wavelength binning used for the Paβ line analysis in the left panel. The top panel shows an example measured spectrum of a single WFC3 exposure. The dip in flux at 1.26 μm is due to a dip in the G141 transmission function. The bottom panel shows a PHOENIX stellar spectrum for HAT-P-2 (T. O. Husser et al. 2013) smoothed to the WFC3 G141 dispersion resolution. The Paβ line at 1.282 μm is clearly discernible and has a band-averaged depth of ~5%. We collected the five WFC3 pixel-wide columns surrounding the Paβ line into the dark-red bin. The six neighboring pixel-wide columns were binned into the light-blue bin, and the eight columns surrounding that were grouped into the outer, magenta bin. None of the bins contain any wavelengths of the other bins.