Image Details

Choose export citation format:

TESS Eclipsing Binary Stars. I. Short-cadence Observations of 4584 Eclipsing Binaries in Sectors 1–26

  • Authors: Andrej Prša, Angela Kochoska, Kyle E. Conroy, Nora Eisner, Daniel R. Hey, Luc IJspeert, Ethan Kruse, Scott W. Fleming, Cole Johnston, Martti H. Kristiansen, Daryll LaCourse, Danielle Mortensen, Joshua Pepper, Keivan G. Stassun, Guillermo Torres, Michael Abdul-Masih, Joheen Chakraborty, Robert Gagliano, Zhao Guo, Kelly Hambleton, Kyeongsoo Hong, Thomas Jacobs, David Jones, Veselin Kostov, Jae Woo Lee, Mark Omohundro, Jerome A. Orosz, Emma J. Page, Brian P. Powell, Saul Rappaport, Phill Reed, Jeremy Schnittman, Hans Martin Schwengeler, Avi Shporer, Ivan A. Terentev, Andrew Vanderburg, William F. Welsh, Douglas A. Caldwell, John P. Doty, Jon M. Jenkins, David W. Latham, George R. Ricker, Sara Seager, Joshua E. Schlieder, Bernie Shiao, Roland Vanderspek, and Joshua N. Winn

2022 The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series 258 16.

  • Provider: AAS Journals

Caption: Figure 3.

Demonstration of a successful (top panels) and unsuccessful (bottom panels) fit with the two models. The top panels show a system with asymmetric variability outside of eclipse, which cannot be modeled by the two-Gaussian model. However, this does not prevent the model from fitting the eclipses correctly. Polyfit, due to its higher degree of freedom, manages to capture both the eclipses and variability outside of eclipse. The bottom panels show the deficiencies of the two models that cause it to not correctly fit the shallow secondary eclipse: the two-Gaussian model considers it part of the asymmetric variability outside of eclipse that it is unable to model, while polyfit fits the variability as an eclipse instead.

Other Images in This Article

Show More

Copyright and Terms & Conditions

Additional terms of reuse