Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-nvqbz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-05T12:07:17.106Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Co-ordinated Follow-Up of Transiting Planet Candidates with Robotic Telescope Facilities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2008

R. A. Street  and
T. A. Lister
R. A. Street
Affiliation:
Las Cumbres Observatory Global Telescope Network, 6740 Cortona Drive, Suite 102, Goleta, CA 93117, USA email: [email protected], [email protected] Dept. of Physics, Broida Hall, University of California at Santa Barbara, CA 93106-9530, USA
T. A. Lister
Affiliation:
Las Cumbres Observatory Global Telescope Network, 6740 Cortona Drive, Suite 102, Goleta, CA 93117, USA email: [email protected], [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

There are now several large photometric surveys scanning millions of stellar light-curves for signs of planetary transits. All produce large candidate lists with a high false alarm rate, so that further observations are required to confirm new detections. One such survey, SuperWASP, produced ~150 candidates during the 2007–2008 season. Here we describe our campaign to follow-up 86 of these candidates using the robotic facilities of Las Cumbres Observatory Global Telescope Network and the Tenagra-II robotic telescope in Arizona. The aim of these observations was to eliminate false positives as far as possible ahead of spectroscopic follow-up and to provide additional photometry to help characterise the surviving targets.

Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 4 , Symposium S253: Transiting Planets , May 2008 , pp. 412 - 415
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2009

References

Abazajian, K. et al. 2005, AJ, 129, 1755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christian, D. et al. 2008, MNRAS, submitted, arXiv:0806.1482Google Scholar
Collier Cameron, A. et al. 2007, MNRAS, 380, 1230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, S. & Steele, I.A. 2004, in Quinn, P.J. & Bridger, A. (eds.), Optimizing Scientific Return for Astronomy through Information Technologies, Proc. SPIE, 5493, 331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hebb, C. et al. 2008, in prep.Google Scholar
Hellier, C. et al. 2008, ApJL, submitted, arXiv:0805.2600Google Scholar
Joshi, Y. et al. 2008, MNRAS, submitted, arXiv:0806.1478Google Scholar
Pollacco, D. et al. 2006, PASP, 118, 1407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pont, F. 2007, in Afonso, C., Weldrake, D., & Henning, Th. (eds.), Transiting Extrasolar Planets Workshop, ASP-CS, 366, 3Google Scholar
Skrutskie, M.F et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 1163CrossRefGoogle Scholar