Warm Jupiters are less lonely than hot Jupiters: close neighbours
Chelsea X. Huang (Toronto), Yanqin Wu (Toronto), Amaury H.M.J. Triaud, (Cambridge)

TL;DR
This study reveals that warm Jupiters often have small planetary companions, unlike hot Jupiters, suggesting different formation mechanisms, with warm Jupiters likely forming in-situ and hot Jupiters possibly arising from a different process.
Contribution
It provides the first statistical comparison of companion prevalence between hot and warm Jupiters using Kepler data, supporting in-situ formation for warm Jupiters.
Findings
Warm Jupiters frequently have small close companions.
Hot Jupiters generally lack detectable planetary companions.
Warm Jupiters with companions show low eccentricities and inclinations.
Abstract
Exploiting the Kepler transit data, we uncover a dramatic distinction in the prevalence of sub-Jovian companions, between systems that contain hot Jupiters (periods inward of 10 days) and those that host warm Jupiters (periods between 10 and 200 days). Hot Jupiters, with the singular exception of WASP-47b, do not have any detectable inner or outer planetary companions (with periods inward of 50 days and sizes down to ). Restricting ourselves to inner companions, our limits reach down to . In stark contrast, half of the warm Jupiters are closely flanked by small companions. Statistically, the companion fractions for hot and warm Jupiters are mutually exclusive, particularly in regard to inner companions. The high companion fraction of warm Jupiters also yields clues to their formation. The warm Jupiters that have close-by siblings should have low…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
