Handbook of Exoplanets 2018
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-30648-3_155-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Occurrence Rates from Direct Imaging Surveys

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 99 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Radial velocity surveys indicate that giant planets inside 7 au only occur around 10% of FGK stars and they predominantly orbit their host stars at intermediate distances (3 − 5 au); their occurrence rate declines at both smaller and larger orbital distances (Cumming et al 2008;Howard et al 2012;Wittenmyer et al 2016;Fernandes et al 2019;Fulton et al 2019;Wittenmyer et al 2020; complemented by direct imaging surveys, e.g. Bowler & Nielsen 2018; Baron et al 2019). It is unclear why giant planets preferably occur at intermediate distances.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Radial velocity surveys indicate that giant planets inside 7 au only occur around 10% of FGK stars and they predominantly orbit their host stars at intermediate distances (3 − 5 au); their occurrence rate declines at both smaller and larger orbital distances (Cumming et al 2008;Howard et al 2012;Wittenmyer et al 2016;Fernandes et al 2019;Fulton et al 2019;Wittenmyer et al 2020; complemented by direct imaging surveys, e.g. Bowler & Nielsen 2018; Baron et al 2019). It is unclear why giant planets preferably occur at intermediate distances.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With its first direct detections already some ten to fifteen years ago (Chauvin et al 2004;Marois et al 2008), the technique of direct imaging has started to reveal a scarce but interesting population of planets or very-low-mass substellar objects at large separations from their host stars (Bowler 2016;Bowler & Nielsen 2018;Wagner et al 2019). The formation mechanism of individual detections is often not obvious but gravitational instability as well as core accretion (with the inclusion of N-body interactions during the formation phase and in the first few million years afterwards) are likely candidates to explain the origin of at least some of these systems (e.g., Marleau et al 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These high-viscosity models introduce some challenges in the modeling of the observed mass function of exoplanets especially around stars with multiple gas giant if these planets are formed over a range of time prior to or during disk clearing stage (see discussions in §2). They are also difficult to reconcile with the simulations (Zhang et al 2018;Lodato et al 2019) of the ALMA maps of PSDs with gaps (Andrews et al 2018;Long et al 2018) and the sparsity of massive gas giants with wide orbits (Meshkat et al 2017;Vigan et al 2017;Bowler & Nielsen 2018). Based on these considerations, we suggest typical Jupiter mass giants were born in disks with relatively low viscosity.…”
Section: Tidal Barrier For Jupiter-size Giants: Accretion Rates and F...mentioning
confidence: 58%