论文标题
搜索带有K2的球形群集M4中的过境行星：候选和发生限制
A Search for Transiting Planets in the Globular Cluster M4 with K2: Candidates and Occurrence Limits
论文作者
论文摘要
我们在球状簇（GC）M4的NASA K2观测中进行搜索，以搜索过境行星。 This search is sensitive to larger orbital periods ($P\lesssim 35$ days, compared to the previous best of $P\lesssim 16$ days) and, at the shortest periods, smaller planet radii (R$_p\gtrsim0.3$ R$_J$, compared to the previous best of R$_p\gtrsim0.8$ R$_J$) than any previous search for GC planets.提出了七个行星候选人。对我们数据中系统噪声的分析表明，这些候选人中的大多数（如果不是全部）可能是错误的警报。假设我们的意义最高的是行星，我们计算行星的发生率是行星，并且假设未检测到行星率上限。我们计算3 $σ$的出现率上限为6.1 \％\％的0.71-2 r $ _J $行星，具有1-36天的时间，为0.36-0.71 R $ _J $行星，具有1-10天的时间。 Kepler，TESS和RV研究的发生率与我们数据中的单个热木星的检测既不是一致的。与先前对GC的研究相比，我们无法比Gilliland等人更严格的约束。 2000对于它们敏感的半径周期范围，但比Weldrake等人都更加限制。 2008和Nascimbeni等。 2012年对他们敏感的大型拉迪乌斯政权。
We perform a search for transiting planets in the NASA K2 observations of the globular cluster (GC) M4. This search is sensitive to larger orbital periods ($P\lesssim 35$ days, compared to the previous best of $P\lesssim 16$ days) and, at the shortest periods, smaller planet radii (R$_p\gtrsim0.3$ R$_J$, compared to the previous best of R$_p\gtrsim0.8$ R$_J$) than any previous search for GC planets. Seven planet candidates are presented. An analysis of the systematic noise in our data shows that most, if not all, of these candidates are likely false alarms. We calculate planet occurrence rates assuming our highest significance candidate is a planet and occurrence rate upper limits assuming no detections. We calculate 3$σ$ occurrence rate upper limits of 6.1\% for 0.71-2 R$_J$ planets with 1-36 day periods and 16\% for 0.36-0.71 R$_J$ planets with 1-10 day periods. The occurrence rates from Kepler, TESS, and RV studies of field stars are consistent with both a non-detection of a planet and detection of a single hot Jupiter in our data. Comparing to previous studies of GCs, we are unable to place a more stringent constraint than Gilliland et al. 2000 for the radius-period range they were sensitive to, but do place tighter constraints than both Weldrake et al. 2008 and Nascimbeni et al. 2012 for the large-radius regimes to which they were sensitive.
