Welcome to the new version of CaltechAUTHORS. Login is currently restricted to library staff. If you notice any issues, please email coda@library.caltech.edu
Published October 1, 2013 | Submitted + Published
Journal Article Open

A Systematic Retrieval Analysis of Secondary Eclipse Spectra. I. A Comparison of Atmospheric Retrieval Techniques

Abstract

Exoplanet atmosphere spectroscopy enables us to improve our understanding of exoplanets just as remote sensing in our own solar system has increased our understanding of the solar system bodies. The challenge is to quantitatively determine the range of temperatures and molecular abundances allowed by the data, which is often difficult given the low information content of most exoplanet spectra that commonly leads to degeneracies in the interpretation. A variety of spectral retrieval approaches have been applied to exoplanet spectra, but no previous investigations have sought to compare these approaches. We compare three different retrieval methods: optimal estimation, differential evolution Markov chain Monte Carlo, and bootstrap Monte Carlo on a synthetic water-dominated hot Jupiter. We discuss expectations of uncertainties in abundances and temperatures given current and potential future observations. In general, we find that the three approaches agree for high spectral resolution, high signal-to-noise data expected to come from potential future spaceborne missions, but disagree for low-resolution, low signal-to-noise spectra representative of current observations. We also compare the results from a parameterized temperature profile versus a full classical Level-by-Level approach and discriminate in which situations each of these approaches is applicable. Furthermore, we discuss the implications of our models for the inferred C-to-O ratios of exoplanetary atmospheres. Specifically, we show that in the observational limit of a few photometric points, the retrieved C/O is biased toward values near solar and near one simply due to the assumption of uninformative priors.

Additional Information

© 2013 American Astronomical Society. Received 2013 April 19; accepted 2013 August 19; published 2013 September 16. We thank Jaimin Lee and Leigh Fletcher for their willingness to compare radiative transfer codes. We also thank John Johnson and Jonathan Fortney for useful conversations. We thank members of Yuk Yungs group for useful comments. This research was supported in part by an NAI Virtual Planetary Laboratory grant from the University of Washington to the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and California Institute of Technology. Part of the research described here was carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Y.L.Y. was supported in part by NASA grant NNX09AB72G to the California Institute of Technology.

Attached Files

Published - 0004-637X_775_2_137.pdf

Submitted - 1304.5561v2.pdf

Files

1304.5561v2.pdf
Files (21.8 MB)
Name Size Download all
md5:5f733547df43943a1e21378fa2a88dd6
13.1 MB Preview Download
md5:effd1706c1fa11a3bb36d180dda8ffab
8.7 MB Preview Download

Additional details

Created:
August 22, 2023
Modified:
February 2, 2024