Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userKMT-2019-BLG-1715: planetary microlensing event with three lens masses and two source stars
92
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
We investigate the gravitational microlensing event KMT-2019-BLG-1715, of which light curve shows two short-term anomalies from a caustic-crossing binary-lensing light curve: one with a large deviation and the other with a small deviation. We identify five pairs of solutions, in which the anomalies are explained by adding an extra lens or source component in addition to the base binary-lens model. We resolve the degeneracies by applying a method, in which the measured flux ratio between the first and second source stars is compared with the flux ratio deduced from the ratio of the source radii. Applying this method leaves a single pair of viable solutions, in both of which the major anomaly is generated by a planetary-mass third body of the lens, and the minor anomaly is generated by a faint second source. A Bayesian analysis indicates that the lens comprises three masses: a planet-mass object with $sim 2.6~M_{rm J}$ and binary stars of K and M dwarfs lying in the galactic disk. We point out the possibility that the lens is the blend, and this can be verified by conducting high-resolution followup imaging for the resolution of the lens from the source.
rate research
Read More
We present the analysis of the microlensing event KMT-2018-BLG-1743. The light curve of the event, with a peak magnification $A_{rm peak}sim 800$, exhibits two anomaly features, one around the peak and the other on the falling side of the light curve. An interpretation with a binary lens and a single source (2L1S) cannot describe the anomalies. By conducting additional modeling that includes an extra lens (3L1S) or an extra source (2L2S) relative to a 2L1S interpretation, we find that 2L2S interpretations with a planetary lens system and a binary source best explain the observed light curve with $Deltachi^2sim 188$ and $sim 91$ over the 2L1S and 3L1S solutions, respectively. Assuming that these $Deltachi^2$ values are adequate for distinguishing the models, the event is the fourth 2L2S event and the second 2L2S planetary event. The 2L2S interpretations are subject to a degeneracy, resulting in two solutions with $s>1.0$ (wide solution) and $s<1.0$ (close solution). The masses of the lens components and the distance to the lens are $(M_{rm host}/M_odot, M_{rm planet}/M_{rm J}, D_{rm L}/{rm kpc}) sim (0.19^{+0.27}_{-0.111}, 0.25^{+0.34}_{-0.14}, 6.48^{+0.94}_{-1.03})$ and $sim (0.42^{+0.34}_{-0.25}, 1.61^{+1.30}_{-0.97}, 6.04^{+0.93}_{-1.27})$ according to the wide and close solutions, respectively. The source is a binary composed of an early G dwarf and a mid M dwarf. The values of the relative lens-source proper motion expected from the two degenerate solutions, $mu_{rm wide}sim 2.3 $mas yr$^{-1}$ and $mu_{rm close} sim 4.1 $mas yr$^{-1}$, are substantially different, and thus the degeneracy can be broken by resolving the lens and source from future high-resolution imaging observations.
We present the analysis of a very high-magnification ($Asim 900$) microlensing event KMT-2019-BLG-1953. A single-lens single-source (1L1S) model appears to approximately delineate the observed light curve, but the residuals from the model exhibit small but obvious deviations in the peak region. A binary lens (2L1S) model with a mass ratio $qsim 2times 10^{-3}$ improves the fits by $Deltachi^2=181.8$, indicating that the lens possesses a planetary companion. From additional modeling by introducing an extra planetary lens component (3L1S model) and an extra source companion (2L2S model), it is found that the residuals from the 2L1S model further diminish, but claiming these interpretations is difficult due to the weak signals with $Deltachi^2=16.0$ and $13.5$ for the 3L1S and 2L2L models, respectively. From a Bayesian analysis, we estimate that the host of the planets has a mass of $M_{rm host}=0.31^{+0.37}_{-0.17}~M_odot$ and that the planetary system is located at a distance of $D_{rm L}=7.04^{+1.10}_{-1.33}~{rm kpc}$ toward the Galactic center. The mass of the securely detected planet is $M_{rm p}=0.64^{+0.76}_{-0.35}~M_{rm J}$. The signal of the potential second planet could have been confirmed if the peak of the light curve had been more densely observed by followup observations, and thus the event illustrates the need for intensive followup observations for very high-magnification events even in the current generation of high-cadence surveys.
KMT-2016-BLG-2605, with planet-host mass ratio $q=0.012pm 0.001$, has the shortest Einstein timescale, $t_e = 3.41pm 0.13,$days, of any planetary microlensing event to date. This prompts us to examine the full sample of 7 short ($t_e<7,$day) planetary events with good $q$ measurements. We find that six have clustered Einstein radii $theta_e = 115pm 20,muas$ and lens-source relative proper motions $mu_relsimeq 9.5pm 2.5,masyr$. For the seventh, these two quantities could not be measured. These distributions are consistent with a Galactic-bulge population of very low-mass (VLM) hosts near the hydrogen-burning limit. This conjecture could be verified by imaging at first adaptive-optics light on next-generation (30m) telescopes. Based on a preliminary assessment of the sample, planetary companions (i.e., below the deuterium-burning limit) are divided into genuine planets, formed in their disks by core accretion, and very low-mass brown dwarfs, which form like stars. We discuss techniques for expanding the sample, which include taking account of the peculiar anomaly dominated morphology of the KMT-2016-BLG-2605 light curve.
We report the analysis of OGLE-2019-BLG-0960, which contains the smallest mass-ratio microlensing planet found to date (q = 1.2--1.6 x 10^{-5} at 1-sigma). Although there is substantial uncertainty in the satellite parallax measured by Spitzer, the measurement of the annual parallax effect combined with the finite source effect allows us to determine the mass of the host star (M_L = 0.3--0.6 M_Sun), the mass of its planet (m_p = 1.4--3.1 M_Earth), the projected separation between the host and planet (a_perp = 1.2--2.3 au), and the distance to the lens system (D_L = 0.6--1.2 kpc). The lens is plausibly the blend, which could be checked with adaptive optics observations. As the smallest planet clearly below the break in the mass-ratio function (Suzuki et al. 2016; Jung et al. 2019), it demonstrates that current experiments are powerful enough to robustly measure the slope of the mass-ratio function below that break. We find that the cross-section for detecting small planets is maximized for planets with separations just outside of the boundary for resonant caustics and that sensitivity to such planets can be maximized by intensively monitoring events whenever they are magnified by a factor A > 5. Finally, an empirical investigation demonstrates that most planets showing a degeneracy between (s > 1) and (s < 1) solutions are not in the regime (|log s| >> 0) for which the close/wide degeneracy was derived. This investigation suggests a link between the close/wide and inner/outer degeneracies and also that the symmetry in the lens equation goes much deeper than symmetries uncovered for the limiting cases.
We show that the perturbation at the peak of the light curve of microlensing event KMT-2019-BLG-0371 is explained by a model with a mass ratio between the host star and planet of $q sim 0.08$. Due to the short event duration ($t_{rm E} sim 6.5 $ days), the secondary object in this system could potentially be a massive giant planet. A Bayesian analysis shows that the system most likely consists of a host star with a mass $M_{rm h} = 0.09^{+0.14}_{-0.05}M_{odot}$ and a massive giant planet with a mass $M_{rm p} = 7.70^{+11.34}_{-3.90}M_{rm Jup}$. However, the interpretation of the secondary as a planet (i.e., as having $M_{rm p} < 13 M_{rm Jup}$) rests entirely on the Bayesian analysis. Motivated by this event, we conduct an investigation to determine which constraints meaningfully affect Bayesian analyses for microlensing events. We find that the masses inferred from such a Bayesian analysis are determined almost entirely by the measured value of $theta_{rm E}$ and are relatively insensitive to other factors such as the direction of the event $(ell, b)$, the lens-source relative proper motion $mu_{rm rel}$, or the specific Galactic model prior.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
