English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Astrometric and radial-velocity planet detections track very similar motions,and one generally expects that the statistical properties of the detectionswould also be similar after they are scaled to the signal-to-noise ratio of theunderlying observations. I show that this expectation is realized for periodssmall compared to the duration of the experiment P/T << 1, but not when P/T >~1. At longer periods, the fact that models of astrometric observations musttake account of an extra nuisance parameter causes the mass error to begindeteriorating at P/T ~ 0.8, as compared to P/T ~ 1.0 for RV. Moreover, thedeterioration is much less graceful. This qualitative difference carries overto the more complicated case in which the planet is being monitored in thepresence of a distant companion that generates an approximately uniformacceleration. The period errors begin deteriorating somewhat earlier in allcases, but the situation is qualitatively similar to that of the mass errors.These results imply that to preserve astrometric discovery space at the longestaccessible orbits (which nominally have the lowest-mass sensitivity) requiressupplementary observations to identify or rule out distant companions thatcould contribute quasi-uniform acceleration.

On the Difference in Statistical Behavior Between Astrometric and Radial-Velocity Planet Detections