1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2:
3: \documentclass[useAMS,usenatbib]{mn2e}
4: \usepackage{amssymb}
5: \usepackage{graphics}
6: \usepackage{multicol}
7: % \usepackage{Times}
8:
9: \topmargin -0.5in
10:
11: \def\TBD{\textbf{ToBeDone}}
12: \def\eqref#1{equation~(\ref{#1})}
13: \def\eqrefs#1#2{equations~(\ref{#1})-(\ref{#2})}
14: \def\apref#1{Appendix~\ref{#1}}
15: \def\scref#1{Section~\ref{#1}}
16: \def\binom#1#2{{#1 \choose #2}}
17: %\def\dfrac#1#2{{{#1} \over {#2}}}
18: %\def\dfrac#1#2{\frac{#1}{#2}}
19: \def\arg{\mathop{\mathrm{arg}}\nolimits}
20: \def\eoq{\mathop{\mathrm{eoq}}\nolimits}
21: \def\eop{\mathop{\mathrm{eop}}\nolimits}
22: \def\ntih{\mathop{\mathrm{ntih}}\nolimits}
23: \def\ntiq{\mathop{\mathrm{ntiq}}\nolimits}
24: \def\ntig{\mathop{\mathrm{ntig}}\nolimits}
25:
26: %TBD: eliminate "amsmath":
27: % - \binom
28:
29: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
30:
31: \title[Properties of analytic transit light curve models]{Properties of analytic transit light curve models}
32: \author[A. P\'al]{%
33: Andr\'as P\'al$^{1,2}$\thanks{E-mail: apal@cfa.harvard.edu
34: }\\
35: $^{1}$Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics,
36: 60 Garden street,
37: Cambridge, MA, 02138, USA \\
38: $^{2}$Department of Astronomy, Lor\'and E\"otv\"os University,
39: P\'azm\'any P. st. 1/A,
40: Budapest H-1117, Hungary}
41: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
42:
43: \begin{document}
44:
45: \date{Accepted \dots. Received \dots; in original form \dots}
46:
47: \pagerange{\pageref{firstpage}--\pageref{lastpage}} \pubyear{2008}
48:
49: \maketitle
50:
51: \label{firstpage}
52:
53: \begin{abstract}
54: In this paper a set of analytic formulae are presented with which
55: the partial derivatives of the flux obscuration function
56: can be evaluated -- for planetary transits and eclipsing binaries --
57: under the assumption of quadratic limb darkening.
58: The knowledge of these partial derivatives is crucial for many
59: of the data modeling algorithms and estimates of
60: the light curve variations directly from the changes in the orbital elements.
61: These derivatives can also be utilized to speed up some of the fitting
62: methods. A gain of $\sim 8$ in computing time
63: can be achieved in the implementation
64: of the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm, relative to using numerical
65: derivatives.
66: \end{abstract}
67:
68: \begin{keywords}
69: Stars: Binaries: Eclipsing -- Stars: Planetary Systems -- Methods: Analytical
70: \end{keywords}
71:
72: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
73:
74: \section{Introduction}
75: \label{sec:introduction}
76:
77: In recent years, the discovery and further characterization
78: of transiting extrasolar planets (TEPs) has provided unique
79: information about the nature of planetary systems. The analysis of a planet
80: which periodically eclipses its host star yields the physical
81: radius, the inclination and the mass of the system in addition to the parameters
82: which are gathered from the radial velocity measurements.
83: Since the discovery of the first such
84: system \citep[see][]{charbonneau2000,brown2001}, more than 40
85: other TEPs were discovered around other stars. Currently operating
86: ground-based surveys are producing numerous new discoveries.
87: The doubling period of the number of known TEPs is below one
88: year. Moreover, existing \citep[CoRoT, see][]{barge2008,alonso2008} and
89: planned space-borne instruments
90: \citep[e.g. Kepler Mission, see][]{borucki2007}
91: are expected to yield hundreds of new discoveries of such systems,
92: even with planetary radii comparable to that of Earth.
93: Also, subsequent observations
94: of a given transiting system can provide some information on
95: the variations in the timing of successive transits
96: and the light curve shape.
97: These detections can be used to constrain other planetary
98: companions \citep{agol2005,steffen2007,holman2005} or co-orbital companions
99: \citep[Trojans, see][]{ford2007}.
100:
101: In order to optimize the precision and speed of TEP observations, a
102: careful analysis of the light curves is required. The basis of such light
103: curve analysis is to find an adequate model of planetary obscuration,
104: which causes a small decrease in the stellar flux.
105: Since both the stellar and the planetary body can be
106: well modelled by a spheroidal shape, the decrease in the stellar flux
107: can be estimated from the full or partial overlap of two circles. The star
108: itself has a non-negligible limb darkening which depends on both
109: the stellar properties and the photometric band
110: and quantified by a small set of coefficients
111: \citep[see e.g.][for such tables of limb darkening constants]{claret2004}.
112: At present, the most widely used models for this problem have been
113: given by \citet{mandel2002}
114: and \citet{gimenez2006}. \citet{mandel2002} calculate closed form expressions
115: for the flux decrease assuming non-linear or quadratic limb darkening
116: (quantified by 4 or 2 coefficients, respectively)
117: while \citet{gimenez2006} gives an infinite
118: series where the limb darkening can be taken into account up
119: to arbitrary order.
120: In most cases the quadratic case is adequate
121: because the photometric precision of typical data is not
122: good enough for the higher
123: order limb darkening models to make a difference.
124:
125: Most data modeling algorithms, including the well known
126: nonlinear Levenberg-Marquardt fitting method \citep[see][]{press1992}
127: utilize the partial derivatives of the model function with respect
128: to the model parameters.
129: The uncertainties in the model parameters can be well characterized by
130: the Fisher information matrix \citep[see e.g.][]{finn1992},
131: also requiring knowledge of the same partial derivatives.
132: Therefore, in the case of planetary transits, the parametric
133: derivatives of the flux decrease function can be extremely valuable.
134: Moreover, partial derivatives can be used
135: to construct a set of uncorrelated parameters of the light curve
136: which is preferred by most of the parameter fitting algorithms
137: (e.g. Levenberg-Marquardt, downhill simplex, Markov Chain Monte Carlo).
138: Also, the analysis of the partial derivatives with respect to the
139: limb darkening coefficients themselves yields a combination of
140: these with which consistent sanity checks can be done verifying
141: the stellar atmospheric properties in an independent way.
142: Finally, these derivatives can be used to directly calculate
143: how the variations in the orbital parameters
144: affect transit timing and the shape of the light curve.
145:
146: In this paper, we present the partial derivatives of the
147: flux decrease function assuming a quadratic limb darkening law. In the
148: next section, the formalism and the derivatives are presented.
149: In Section 3, we apply these derivatives to construct a set of well behaved
150: parameterizations of transiting light curves which yield an always finite
151: and moderate correlation between the adjusted quantities in all important
152: cases and limits. The correlations
153: between the limb darkening coefficients are also discussed.
154: The results are summarized in the last section.
155:
156: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
157:
158: \begin{table}
159: \caption{Exclusion cases of different occultation geometries.
160: To figure out the respective case for a certain value of $p$ and $z$,
161: check the relations step by step: if the current relation is true, that
162: case can be assigned to the given values of $p$ and $z$,
163: otherwise go to the next step. The final case $\mathbf{G}$
164: is when there is no obscuration. Cases with subscripts can only occur
165: if the radius of the planet is not smaller than $1/2$.}
166: \label{table:cases}
167: \begin{center}\begin{tabular}{rllr}
168: \hline
169: \hline
170: Step & Relation & Case & M\&A case \\
171: \hline
172: 1 & $z=0$ ~\&~ $p<1$ & $\mathbf{A}$ & 10 \\
173: 2 & $z\le p-1$ & $\mathbf{A_G}$ & 11 \\
174: 3 & $z<p$ ~\&~ $z<1-p$ & $\mathbf{B}$ & 9 \\
175: 4 & $z<p$ ~\&~ $z=1-p$ & $\mathbf{B_T}$ & -- \\
176: 5 & $z<p$ & $\mathbf{B_G}$ & 8 \\
177: 6 & $z=p$ ~\&~ $z<1-p$ & $\mathbf{C}$ & 5 \\
178: 7 & $z=p=1/2$ & $\mathbf{C_T}$ & 6 \\
179: 8 & $z=p$ & $\mathbf{C_G}$ & 7 \\
180: 9 & $z<1-p$ & $\mathbf{D}$ & 3 \\
181: 10 & $z=1-p$ & $\mathbf{E}$ & 4 \\
182: 11 & $z<1+p$ & $\mathbf{F}$ & 2 \\
183: 12 & -- & $\mathbf{G}$ & 1 \\
184: \hline
185: \end{tabular}\end{center}
186: \end{table}
187:
188: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
189:
190:
191: \section{Parametric derivatives of the flux decrease}
192: \label{sec:paramderiv}
193:
194: In this section the partial derivatives of the flux decrease are presented.
195: The surface brightness of a star as a function of the normalized
196: distance $0\le r\le 1$ assuming quadratic limb darkening is given
197: by the equation
198: \begin{equation}
199: I(r)=1-\sum\limits_{m=1,2}\gamma_m\left(1-\sqrt{1-r^2}\right)^m,
200: \end{equation}
201: where the constants $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ quantify the limb darkening.
202: Recalling \citet{mandel2002}, the relative apparent flux of an eclipsed star
203: with a quadratic limb darkening can be written as $f=1-\Delta f$
204: (assuming a unity flux out of the transit), where flux decrease $\Delta f$
205: can be calculated using the equation
206: \begin{eqnarray}
207: \Delta f & = &
208: W_0F_0+W_2F_2+ \label{eq:fluxdecrease} \\
209: & & W_1[F_1+F_K\mathrm{K}(k)+F_E\mathrm{E}(k)+F_{\Pi}\Pi(n,k)]. \nonumber
210: \end{eqnarray}
211: In this equation the quantities $W_i$ ($i=0,1,2$) are only functions of
212: the limb darkening coefficients, namely
213: \begin{eqnarray}
214: W_0 & = & \frac{6-6\gamma_1-12\gamma_2}{W}, \\
215: W_1 & = & \frac{6\gamma_1+12\gamma_2}{W},\\
216: W_2 & = & \frac{6\gamma_2}{W},
217: \end{eqnarray}
218: where $W=6-2\gamma_1-\gamma_2$. In \eqref{eq:fluxdecrease} the
219: terms $F_0$, $F_1$, $F_K$, $F_E$, $F_\Pi$ and $F_2$ are only
220: functions of the occultation geometry, namely the relative
221: planetary radius $p\equiv R_p/R_\star$ and the normalized projected distance
222: $z$ between the center of the star and the center of the planet.
223: In \eqref{eq:fluxdecrease} the functions $\mathrm{K}(\cdot)$,
224: $\mathrm{E}(\cdot)$ and $\Pi(\cdot,\cdot)$ denote the complete
225: elliptic integrals of the first, second and third kind, respectively.
226: The variation in the occultation geometry yields 12 distinct cases
227: of obscuration, which are summarized in Table~\ref{table:cases}. This
228: table is an \emph{exclusion} table and should be interpreted as follows.
229: For a given value of $(p,z)$, the first relation (in step 1) is
230: checked. If it is true, the appropriate case can be assigned to the
231: geometry, otherwise the next relation should be checked and so on.
232: The different cases are denoted by bold capitals for planetary radii
233: smaller than $1/2$ and capitals with a subscript which can only
234: occur if the radius of the planet is greater than or equal to $1/2$
235: In practice it would barely occur for planetary companions for earlier
236: types of stars but it might happen in the cases when a Jovian
237: planet transits a later main sequence star (M dwarf).
238: For the actually most common planet-like applications ($p<1/2$),
239: the 7 major cases ($\mathbf{A}$,\dots,$\mathbf{G}$)
240: are in the order of growing distance between the geometrical centers of
241: the planet and the star. In \eqref{eq:fluxdecrease} the expressions
242: for the terms $F_i$ ($i=0,1,K,E,\Pi,2$), $k$ and $n$ can be
243: found in tables \ref{table:fdaux} and \ref{table:fdcoeffs} in \apref{app:a};
244: after the appropriate geometrical case has been obtained.
245: We should note here that \eqref{eq:fluxdecrease} is completely equivalent
246: with the equation found in \citet{mandel2002}, in the first line of
247: the second paragraph in their Section 4 at page L173. However, this
248: expansion of \eqref{eq:fluxdecrease} clearly separates the terms which
249: depend only on the limb darkening coefficients ($W_m$)
250: and the terms which depend only on the occultation geometry ($F_i$).
251:
252: \subsection{Partial derivatives with respect to the limb darkening coefficients}
253:
254: Since in \eqref{eq:fluxdecrease} the only quantities which depend
255: on the limb darkening coefficients are $W_0$, $W_1$ and $W_2$, the
256: partial derivatives of $\Delta f$ with respect to
257: $\gamma_m$ ($m=1,2$) can easily be obtained, namely
258: \begin{eqnarray}
259: \frac{\partial\Delta f}{\partial \gamma_m} & = &
260: \frac{\partial W_0}{\partial\gamma_m}F_0+
261: \frac{\partial W_2}{\partial\gamma_m}F_2+ \\
262: & & \frac{\partial W_1}{\partial\gamma_m}
263: [F_1+F_K\mathrm{K}(k)+F_E\mathrm{E}(k)+F_{\Pi}\Pi(n,k)], \nonumber
264: \end{eqnarray}
265: where the appropriate derivatives $\partial W_i/\partial \gamma_m$
266: are the following:
267: \begin{eqnarray}
268: \frac{\partial W_0}{\partial\gamma_1} & = & \frac{2W_0-6}{W} \\
269: \frac{\partial W_0}{\partial\gamma_2} & = & \frac{W_0-12}{W} \\
270: \frac{\partial W_1}{\partial\gamma_1} & = & \frac{2W_1+6}{W} \\
271: \frac{\partial W_1}{\partial\gamma_2} & = & \frac{W_1+12}{W} \\
272: \frac{\partial W_2}{\partial\gamma_1} & = & \frac{2W_2}{W} \\
273: \frac{\partial W_2}{\partial\gamma_2} & = & \frac{W_2+6}{W}.
274: \end{eqnarray}
275:
276: \subsection{Partial derivatives with respect to the geometric parameters}
277:
278: In \eqref{eq:fluxdecrease}, the terms $F_i$ explicitly depend on the
279: relative planetary radius $p$ and the normalized distance $z$.
280: There is also an implicit dependence via the complete elliptic
281: integrals since their parameters $k$ and $n$ are also functions
282: of $p$ and $z$. The derivation of these partial derivatives are
283: quite straightforward for the non-degenerate cases, i.e. for
284: the cases $\mathbf{B}$, $\mathbf{B_G}$, $\mathbf{D}$ and $\mathbf{F}$
285: since all of the appearing functions in these domains are analytic.
286: For the other cases, the partial derivatives can be calculated
287: as the appropriate limits, namely
288: \begin{eqnarray}
289: \partial F_i^{\mathbf{A}} & \equiv & \lim\limits_{z \to 0} \partial F_i^{\mathbf{B}}, \\
290: \partial F_i^{\mathbf{B_T}} & \equiv & \lim\limits_{z \to (1-p)-0} \partial F_i^{\mathbf{B}}, \\
291: \partial F_i^{\mathbf{C}} & \equiv & \lim\limits_{z \to p-0} \partial F_i^{\mathbf{B}} = \lim\limits_{z \to p+0} \partial F_i^{\mathbf{D}}, \\
292: \partial F_i^{\mathbf{C_T}} & \equiv & \lim\limits_{p \to 1/2} \partial F_i^{\mathbf{C}}, \\
293: \partial F_i^{\mathbf{C_G}} & \equiv & \lim\limits_{z \to p+0} \partial F_i^{\mathbf{F}}, \\
294: \partial F_i^{\mathbf{E}} & \equiv & \lim\limits_{z \to (1-p)-0} \partial F_i^{\mathbf{B}}.
295: \end{eqnarray}
296: For $\mathbf{A_G}$ and $\mathbf{G}$, all of the derivatives
297: are obviously 0, except for the case ($p=1$, $z=0$) when the
298: partial derivatives do not exist.
299:
300: Utilizing the parametric derivatives of the elliptic integrals
301: (see \apref{app:b}), the final form of the partial derivatives of $\Delta f$
302: with respect to $z$ and $p$ is
303: \begin{eqnarray}
304: \frac{\partial\Delta f}{\partial g} & = &
305: W_0F_{0,g}+W_1F_{1,g}+W_2F_{2,g}+ \label{eq:pdgfluxdecrease} \\
306: & & W_1\mathrm{K}(k)
307: \left[F_{K,g}-\frac{(F_K+F_E)k_g}{k}+\frac{F_\Pi n_g}{2n(n-1)}\right]+ \nonumber \\
308: & & W_1\mathrm{E}(k)
309: \left[F_{E,g}+\frac{F_K k_g}{k(1-k^2)}+\frac{F_E k_g}{k}+\right. \nonumber \\
310: & & +\left.\frac{F_\Pi k k_g}{(k^2-n)(1-k^2)}+\frac{F_\Pi n_g}{2(k^2-n)(n-1)}\right], \nonumber
311: \end{eqnarray}
312: where $g$ denotes either $p$ or $z$, the appropriate geometric parameter.
313: The expressions for $F_{0,g}$, $F_{1,g}$, $F_{K,g}$, $F_{E,g}$,
314: $F_{2,g}$, $k_g$ and $n_g$ can be figured out for all cases
315: using the tables in \apref{app:c}, namely Table~\ref{table:fpartaux}
316: and Table~\ref{table:fpartcoeffs}.
317:
318: We note here that the computation of these derivatives are even more
319: simple and faster than the computation of \eqref{eq:fluxdecrease} since
320: \eqref{eq:pdgfluxdecrease} lacks the complete elliptic integral of the
321: third kind for which evaluation requires most of the computing time.
322:
323: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
324:
325: \section{Applications}
326: \label{sec:applications}
327:
328: In this section we present three simple applications which utilize
329: the partial derivatives of the flux decrease function.
330: All of these applications assume a transiting planetary system on a circular
331: orbit with a given semimajor axis (relative to the radius of the star)
332: $a/R_\star$, an impact parameter, $b\equiv (a/R_\star)\cos i$,
333: the planetary companion has a fixed mean motion of $n=2\pi/P$ and the
334: transit occurs at the instance $E$. The relative radius
335: of the planet is denoted by $p\equiv R_p/R_\star$.
336: Therefore, the distance between the center of the stellar and
337: planetary disk has a time dependence,
338: \begin{equation}
339: z^2(t)=\left(\frac{a}{R_\star}\right)^2\sin^2[n(t-E)]+b^2\cos^2[n(t-E)]. \label{eq:classtrparam}
340: \end{equation}
341: From now on we assume that the semimajor axis is relatively large, i.e.
342: the distance can be approximated by
343: \begin{equation}
344: z^2(t)\cong\left(n\frac{a}{R_\star}\right)^2 (t-E)^2 + b^2.\label{eq:zlinapprox}
345: \end{equation}
346: In the following parts of this section, we first calculate the correlations
347: between the limb darkening coefficients, assuming
348: the orbital parameters and the relative planetary radius to be known.
349: In the second part of this section, we construct a set of adjusted
350: parameters which always yields finite (i.e. definitely smaller than unity)
351: correlations between them in the cases of non-grazing eclipses.
352: This is relevant for studies of transiting planets
353: since \eqref{eq:zlinapprox} yields a unity
354: correlation between $a/R_\star$ and $b$ in the limit of $p\to 0$ with
355: or without limb darkening for all impact parameters. In the last
356: part of this section we present an analytical calculation how the
357: uncertainties in the light curve parameters depend on the photometric
358: passbands, assuming a Jupiter-sized planet orbiting a solar-type star.
359: In all of these cases we use the Fisher matrix method
360: \citep{finn1992} to obtain the uncertainties and correlations
361: of the fitted parameters. This method gives the covariance matrix as
362: \begin{equation}
363: \left<\delta a_m \delta a_n\right>=\left(\Gamma^{-1}\right)_{mn},
364: \end{equation}
365: where
366: \begin{equation}
367: \Gamma_{mn}=\sum_i \frac{\partial_m f(\mathbf{a},t_i)\partial_n f(\mathbf{a},t_i)}{\sigma_i^2}, \label{eq:fisherdef}
368: \end{equation}
369: $f(\mathbf{a},t_i)$ is the observed flux at the instance $t_i$,
370: $\mathbf{a}=(a_1,a_2)=(\gamma_1,\gamma_2)$ or
371: $\mathbf{a}=(a_1,a_2,a_3,a_4)=(p,a/R_\star,b,E)$ is the vector of the adjusted parameters
372: (depending on the actual application)
373: and $\partial_m\equiv\partial/\partial a_m$. Since we are interested only
374: in the correlations between the parameters and we can expect uniform
375: uncertainties in the measurements
376: and uniform data sampling, therefore $\Gamma$ can
377: be multiplied by any arbitrary constant and the sum in \eqref{eq:fisherdef} can
378: be replaced by the integral
379: \begin{equation}
380: \Gamma_{mn}\propto\int\limits_{t_1}^{t_2} \partial_m f(\mathbf{a},t)\partial_n f(\mathbf{a},t)\mathrm{d}t.\label{eq:fisherintegral}
381: \end{equation}
382: Here $t_1 < E-(na/R_\star)^{-1}(1+p)$ and
383: $E+(na/R_\star)^{-1}(1+p) < t_2$, assuring
384: that the ingress and egress are completely observed, independently
385: from the impact parameter.
386:
387: \subsection{Correlations between the limb darkening coefficients}
388: \label{subsec:corrlimbdark}
389:
390: \begin{figure}
391: \resizebox{8cm}{!}{\includegraphics{tld-corr.eps}}
392: \caption{The dependence of the correlation between the
393: limb darkening coefficients, $C(\gamma_1,\gamma_2)$ as a function
394: of the impact parameter. Thin lines are for $p=0.01$, moderately
395: thick lines are for $p=0.1$ and thick lines are for $p=0.2$. The
396: continuous, long dashed, short dashed, dotted and dotted-dashed lines
397: represents the cases when limb darkening coefficients
398: are $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=0$, $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=0.1$, $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=0.2$,
399: $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=0.3$ and $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=0.4$, respectively.}
400: \label{fig:ldcorr}
401: \end{figure}
402:
403: Now, we determine the correlations between the limb darkening coefficients
404: when the adjusted parameters are $\mathbf{a}=(\gamma_1,\gamma_2)$.
405: It is easy to show that this
406: correlation would only depend on the impact parameter, the planetary
407: radius and the two limb darkening parameters themselves while it does
408: not depend on the mean motion, geometrical ratio of $a/R_\star$
409: and the transit center time $E$. We have obtained these correlations
410: for very small ($p=0.01$), average ($p=0.1$) and large ($p=0.2$)
411: planetary radii assuming limb darkening coefficients between $0.0$ and $0.4$,
412: while the impact parameter was varied between $0$ and $1$. We found that
413: the correlation is always negative, relatively large, i.e.
414: $|C(\gamma_1,\gamma_2)|\gtrsim 0.93$ and it strongly depends on
415: the impact parameter. For these certain values, the correlation
416: is plotted as a function of $b$ on Fig.~\ref{fig:ldcorr}.
417: It can easily be seen that the smallest correlation is around
418: $b\approx0.7-0.8$, almost independent of the limb darkening
419: and the radius of the planet.
420:
421: Let us now calculate the optimal linear combination of the limb darkening
422: coefficients which can be adjusted to yield no correlation. Define
423: the parameters $u_1$ and $u_2$ as
424: \begin{equation}
425: \binom{u_1}{u_2}=\binom{\cos\varphi~~~~~\sin\varphi}{-\sin\varphi~~\cos\varphi}\binom{\gamma_1}{\gamma_2}.
426: \end{equation}
427: For simplicity, let us denote the above orthogonal matrix by $\mathbf{O}=O_{mn}$.
428: It can be shown that the covariance matrix of $(u_1,u_2)$ and
429: that of $(\gamma_1,\gamma_2)$ are related to each other as
430: \begin{equation}
431: \left<\delta u_k \delta u_\ell\right>=O_{km}\left<\delta \gamma_m \delta \gamma_n\right>\tilde{O}_{n\ell}.
432: \end{equation}
433: To make the matrix $\left<\delta u_k\delta u_\ell\right>$ diagonal, the rotation
434: parameter $\varphi$ should be in coincidence with the
435: orientation of the eigenvectors of $\left<\delta \gamma_m \delta \gamma_n\right>$,
436: namely
437: \begin{equation}
438: \varphi = \frac12
439: \arctan \frac{\left<\delta \gamma_1 \delta \gamma_2\right>+\left<\delta \gamma_2 \delta \gamma_1\right>}
440: {\left<\delta \gamma_1 \delta \gamma_1\right>-\left<\delta \gamma_2 \delta \gamma_2\right>}.
441: \end{equation}
442:
443: \begin{figure}
444: \resizebox{8cm}{!}{\includegraphics{tld-optp.eps}}
445: \caption{The optimal rotation parameter (in degrees) to avoid correlations
446: between the limb darkening parameters as a function of the impact parameter
447: (see text for definition and further details).
448: Thin lines are for $p=0.01$, moderately
449: thick lines are for $p=0.1$ and thick lines are for $p=0.2$. The
450: continuous, long dashed, short dashed, dotted and dotted-dashed lines
451: represents the cases when limb
452: darkening coefficients are $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=0$, $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=0.1$,
453: $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=0.2$, $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=0.3$
454: and $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=0.4$, respectively.}
455: \label{fig:ldoptp}
456: \end{figure}
457:
458: We have obtained the optimal values of the rotation parameter $\varphi$
459: for very small ($p=0.01$), average ($p=0.1$) and large ($p=0.2$)
460: planetary radii assuming limb darkening coefficients between $0.0$ and $0.4$,
461: while the impact parameter was varied between $0$ and $1$. We found that
462: like above, this parameter mostly depends on the impact parameter.
463: The results are plotted on Fig.~\ref{fig:ldoptp}. The usefulness
464: of such a plot is somewhat limited if we have no \emph{a priori} knowledge
465: from the limb darkening coefficients themselves since the correlation
466: between them and therefore the optimal rotation
467: parameter depends on the actual values of $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$.
468: However, in practice if we have a hint for the planetary radius
469: and the impact parameter, this angle can be estimated within
470: a few degrees since the correlation depends more strongly on $b$ and $p$
471: than $\gamma_1$ or $\gamma_2$. If we do not know any
472: reasonable value for $p$ or $b$ before the fit,
473: an angle of $\varphi\approx35^\circ-40^\circ$ is a
474: plausible selection in general.
475:
476: \subsection{Correlations between the light curve parameters}
477: \label{subsec:corrlc}
478:
479: In this subsection we investigate the correlations between the light
480: curve parameters utilizing the previously obtained partial derivatives and
481: Fisher information matrix method. The classical formalism of
482: adjusting parameters of a transiting system uses the same
483: parameters as in \eqref{eq:classtrparam}, namely the ratio $a/R_\star$,
484: the impact parameter $b$ and the instance of the center of the transit $E$
485: as well as the radius of the planet, $p=R_p/R_\star$. Since
486: the flux decrease depends directly on the radius $p$ and indirectly
487: on $a/R_\star$, $b$ and $E$ (assuming a fixed limb darkening),
488: the partial derivatives of the light curve $f(t)=1-\Delta f(t)$
489: can be obtained by using \eqref{eq:pdgfluxdecrease} and the chain rule.
490: These derivatives can then be plugged into \eqref{eq:fisherintegral}
491: while the adjusted set of parameters will
492: be $\mathbf{a}=(p,b,a/R_\star,E)$. We have obtained the correlations
493: between these variables and we have found that the correlation
494: between $b$ and $a/R_\star$ tends to unity as the radius of the
495: planet is decreased. This correlation is plotted as a function
496: of the impact parameter for planetary radii $p=0.01$, $p=0.1$ and
497: $p=0.2$ and for various limb darkening parameters on
498: Fig.~\ref{fig:corrarb}. It can clearly be seen that $C(b,a/R_\star)$
499: is almost independent from the actual limb darkening. From
500: further analysis of the correlation, it turns out that
501: for small impact parameters ($b\lesssim 0.5$), $C(b,a/R_\star)$
502: can be well approximated by $1-p^2/2$. Therefore, for very small
503: planets, this correlation can be undesirable and most of the
504: fitting methods would distort the results.
505:
506: \begin{figure}
507: \resizebox{8cm}{!}{\includegraphics{tlc-c-pa-corr.eps}}
508: \caption{Correlation between the adjusted values of $a/R_\star$ and
509: the impact parameter $b$ for various values of planetary radii
510: and limb darkening coefficients:
511: Thin lines are for $p=0.01$, moderately
512: thick lines are for $p=0.1$ and thick lines are for $p=0.2$. The cases
513: for different limb darkening constants are almost indistinguishable.}
514: \label{fig:corrarb}
515: \end{figure}
516:
517: At this point we have
518: checked the correlations between an alternative parametrization
519: proposed by \citet{bakos2007}. In that work the light curve
520: was parametrized by the equation
521: \begin{equation}
522: z^2(t)=\left(\frac{\zeta}{R_\star}\right)^2(1-b^2)(t-E)^2+b^2, \label{eq:uncorrtrparam}
523: \end{equation}
524: where $\zeta/R_\star=n(a/R_\star)/\sqrt{1-b^2}$. This parameter
525: is related to the duration of the transit, namely
526: $(\zeta/R_\star)^{-1}=T_{\rm duration}/2$, where $T_{\rm duration}$
527: is the time between the instances when the center of the
528: planet crosses the limb of the star.
529: Since the above parametrization
530: of $z^2$ is linear in $b^2$, we have chosen $b^2$ instead of $b$ as
531: an independent parameter. We have found that utilizing the parameter
532: set $\mathbf{a}'=(p,b^2,\zeta/R_\star,E)$ yields practically no correlation
533: between $b^2$ and $\zeta/R_\star$ for non-grazing eclipses and
534: increases only up to unity near $b\gtrsim 1-p$.
535: This correlation is plotted on Fig.~\ref{fig:corromb2} for various
536: planetary radii and limb darkening coefficients.
537:
538: We should mention here that the recent work of \citet{carter2008}
539: gives an exhaustive analysis of the uncertainties and correlations
540: for various kind of transiting light curve characterizations. Their
541: work focuses on the analytical calculations for light curves with
542: no limb darkening and compares these results with
543: numerical derivations for the limb darkened cases.
544:
545: \subsection{Uncertainties of the light curve parameters}
546: \label{subsec:uncertfilt}
547:
548: In this subsection we calculate the dependence of uncertainties of the light
549: curve parameters $a/R_\star$, $E$ and $b$
550: (see equation~\ref{eq:classtrparam}) and the fractional planetary radius $p$
551: for various photometric passbands from near-ultraviolet to mid-infrared.
552: It is known that the limb-darkening parameters decrease for longer
553: wavelengths, therefore the transits themselves become shallower and
554: flattened. Using the Fisher information matrix method, as described earlier
555: gives a simple and straightforward way to obtain these uncertainties.
556: Assuming a solar-type star -- i.e. with metallicity of ${\rm [Fe/H]=0.00}$,
557: surface gravity of $\log g_\star=4.44$\,(CGS) and atmospheric temperature
558: of $T_{\rm eff}=5780\,{\rm K}$ -- we estimated these uncertainties
559: for photometric passbands $u'$, $g'$, $r'$, $i'$, $z'$, $J$, $H$ and $K$,
560: when such a star is transited by a hypotetical planet
561: with the orbital parameters of $a/R_\star=10$, $P=3.67\,{\rm days}$
562: and $p=R_{\rm p}/R_\star=0.1$. The appropriate limb darkening coefficients
563: for each filter have been obtained using the tables
564: provided by \citet{claret2004}.
565: The results are plotted on Fig.~\ref{fig:uncertfilt} for various
566: impact parameters ($b=0.2$, $b=0.5$ and $b=0.8$).
567: During these estimations, the transits are assumed to be observed
568: with a cadence of 10~seconds and with a photometric precision
569: of $\Delta m=1.4\,{\rm mmag}$. Note that this photometric precision
570: is attainable by $\sim 1-1.2$\,m class telescopes
571: for relatively bright stars ($z'\approx9.5\,{\rm mag}$) and using such cadence
572: \citep[see e.g.][]{winn2007}.
573:
574: It can clearly be seen from the plots of Fig.~\ref{fig:uncertfilt}
575: that the uncertainties for all of the parameters decrease
576: for longer wavelengths; moreover, this decrement can reach a factor
577: of $\sim 10$ (between the near-ultraviolet and mid-infrared bands)
578: for the planetary radius. We note here that these analytical results
579: agrees well with numerical estimations (Joshua N. Winn, personal
580: communication).
581:
582: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
583:
584: \section{Discussion and summary}
585:
586: In this paper the partial derivatives of the flux decrease function
587: of exoplanetary transits (or stellar binary eclipses)
588: has been calculated assuming a quadratic limb darkening law.
589: These derivatives can then be applied for various analyses from which
590: we have demonstrated the correlation analysis of the
591: limb darkening coefficients and two of the known transit
592: light curve parameterizations. The most time consuming part
593: of the evaluation of the flux decrease (and its derivatives)
594: is the computing of the complete elliptic integrals.
595: Therefore, the calculation of the partial derivatives does not increase
596: significantly the total computing time of both.
597: The presented analytical analysis
598: of light curve parametrization is extremely fast comparing to
599: such an analysis based on Monte-Carlo methods: the integral
600: in \eqref{eq:fisherintegral} should be calculated only once
601: instead of the evaluation of the $\chi^2$ function $\mathcal{O}(10^4)$
602: times\footnote{which is necessary to obtain a
603: reliable \emph{a posteriori} distribution of the parameters}.
604: The knowledge of these derivatives also allows
605: straightforward calculations about how the variations in the
606: orbital elements affect the light curves and the timings
607: of the successive transits.
608:
609: \begin{figure}
610: \resizebox{8cm}{!}{\includegraphics{tlc-u-pa-corr.eps}}
611: \caption{Correlation between the adjusted values of
612: $\zeta/R_\star\equiv n(a/R_\star)/\sqrt{1-b^2}$ and
613: the square of the impact parameter, $b^2$ for various values of planetary radii
614: and limb darkening coefficients. Thin lines are for $p=0.01$, moderately
615: thick lines are for $p=0.1$ and thick lines are for $p=0.2$. The
616: continuous, long dashed, short dashed, dotted and dotted-dashed lines
617: represents the cases when limb
618: darkening coefficients are $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=0$, $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=0.1$,
619: $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=0.2$, $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=0.3$
620: and $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=0.4$, respectively.}
621: \label{fig:corromb2}
622: \end{figure}
623:
624: Here we note that such derivatives are also helpful in the implementation
625: of the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm. Since this method requires the
626: partial derivatives of the function to be adjusted, these must be evaluated
627: either analytically or numerically. The numerical evaluation of the
628: partial derivatives requires the computation of the original function
629: twice in all directions of the parameter space. Therefore for
630: such a problem like transit light curve fitting, the numerical
631: approximation requires approximately 10 times more computation time
632: (note that in practice the gain will be less, $\sim 8$ due to
633: other overheads resulted by the computation of increased number of
634: coefficients and the gain will clearly depend on the used programming
635: environment and its features).
636: Moreover -- because the derivatives of a transiting light curve function
637: lack the Lipschitz property of continuity -- the numerical approach
638: can also be unstable at the points of contacts.
639:
640: The routines for calculating both the transit decrease function
641: and its derivatives are
642: available\footnote{http://szofi.elte.hu/\~{ }apal/utils/astro/ntiq/}
643: in Fortran77 and C languages along
644: with the codes used to calculate the correlations between the
645: limb darkening parameters and the light curve parameters.
646:
647: \begin{figure}
648: \resizebox{8cm}{!}{\includegraphics{uncertfilt.eps}}
649: \caption{Uncertainties of the geometrical ratio $a/R_\star$,
650: the impact parameter $b$, the fractional planetary radius
651: $p\equiv R_{\rm p}/R_\star$
652: and the transit center time $E$ for a hypothetical transiting planet
653: with a radius of $p=0.1$ orbiting its Sun-like host star on an
654: orbit with a semimajor axis of $a/R_\star=10$. The uncertainties
655: are plotted as the function of the photometric passbands, for
656: various impact parameters. See text for further details.}
657: \label{fig:uncertfilt}
658: \end{figure}
659:
660:
661: The recent review of \citet{southworth2008} concludes that
662: the determination of some of the light curve parameters,
663: especially the radius of the planet can be sensitive to the applied
664: limb darkening model and its parameters, yielding a possibility of
665: systematic errors. Therefore, analytic description of transit light curves
666: for other different limb darkening laws would also be a point
667: of interest.
668:
669: \section*{Acknowledgments}
670:
671: The author would like to thank the hospitality and support of
672: the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics where this
673: work was partially carried out. The author acknowledges the support by
674: the HATNet project, and NASA grant NNG04GN74G.
675: The author also thanks Eric Agol, G\'asp\'ar Bakos,
676: Bence Kocsis and Joshua Winn for helpful comments and discussions.
677:
678: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
679:
680: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
681:
682: %On detecting terrestrial planets with timing of giant planet transits
683: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Agol et al.}{2005}]{agol2005}
684: Agol, E., Steffen, J., Sari, R., \& Clarkson, W.,
685: 2005, MNRAS, 359, 567
686:
687: % Corot-exo-II
688: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Alonso et al.}{2008}]{alonso2008}
689: Alonso, R. et al.,
690: 2008, A\&A, 482, 21
691:
692: % HAT-P-5, first mention of omega/R*
693: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Bakos et al.}{2007}]{bakos2007}
694: Bakos, G. \'A. et al.,
695: 2007, ApJ, 671, L173
696:
697: % Corot-exo-1
698: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Barge et al.}{2008}]{barge2008}
699: Barge, P. et al.,
700: 2008, A\&A, 482, 17
701:
702: % KEPLER mission status:
703: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Borucki et al.}{2007}]{borucki2007}
704: Borucki, W. J.~et al.,
705: 2007, ASP Conf.~Ser., 366, 309
706:
707: % HST, HD209458
708: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Brown et al.}{2001}]{brown2001}
709: Brown, T. M., Charbonneau, D., Gilliland, R. L., Noyes, R. W. \& Burrows, A.,
710: 2001, ApJ, 552, 699
711:
712: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Carter et al.}{2008}]{carter2008}
713: Carter, J. A., Yee, J. C., Eastman, J., Gaudi, B. S. \& Winn, J. N.,
714: 2008, astro-ph:0805.0238
715:
716: % first transiting planet: HD209458:
717: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Charbonneau et al.}{2000}]{charbonneau2000}
718: Charbonneau, D., Brown, T. M., Latham, D. W. \& Major, M.,
719: 2000, ApJ, 529, 45
720:
721: % Limb darkening coefficients:
722: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Claret}{2004}]{claret2004}
723: Claret, A.,
724: 2004, A\&A, 428, 1001
725:
726: %Fisher matrix:
727: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Finn}{1992}]{finn1992}
728: % Finn, L. S.,
729: Finn, L. S.,
730: 1992, Phys.~Rev.~D, 46, 5236
731:
732: % TTV, Trojans:
733: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Ford \& Holman}{2007}]{ford2007}
734: Ford, E. B. \& Holman, M. J.,
735: 2007, ApJ, 664, 51
736:
737: % TLC modeling:
738: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Gim\'enez}{2006}]{gimenez2006}
739: Gim\'enez, A.,
740: 2006, A\&A, 450, 1231
741:
742: %The Use of Transit Timing to Detect Terrestrial-Mass Extrasolar Planets
743: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Holman \& Murray}{2005}]{holman2005}
744: Holman, M. J, \& Murray, N. W.,
745: 2005, Science, 307, 1288
746:
747: % TLC modelling:
748: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Mandel \& Agol}{2002}]{mandel2002}
749: Mandel, K., Agol, E., 2002,
750: ApJ, 580, 171
751:
752: % Num recipes:
753: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Press et al.}{1992}]{press1992}
754: Press, W. H., Teukolsky, S. A., Vetterling, W.T. \& Flannery, B.P., 1992,
755: Numerical Recipes in C: the art of scientific computing,
756: Second Edition, Cambridge University Press
757:
758: % TTV issues:
759: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Steffen \& Agol}{2007}]{steffen2007}
760: Steffen, J. H. \& Agol, E.,
761: 2007, ASP Conf.~Ser, 366, 158
762:
763: % Homogeneous studies of transiting extrasolar planets. I. Light curve analyses
764: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Southworth}{2008}]{southworth2008}
765: Southworth, J.,
766: 2008, MNRAS, 386, 1644
767:
768: % HAT-P-1, TLC project:
769: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Winn et al.}{2007}]{winn2007}
770: Winn, J. N. et al.,
771: 2007, AJ, 134, 1707
772:
773: \end{thebibliography}{}
774:
775: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
776:
777: \appendix
778:
779: \section{Coefficients for the calculation of the flux decrease function}
780: \label{app:a}
781:
782: In this section, the coefficients required to evaluate the
783: flux decrease function -- as it is given by \eqref{eq:fluxdecrease} --
784: are summarized. The evaluation of the quantities $F_0$, $F_1$,
785: $F_K$, $F_E$, $F_{\Pi}$, $F_2$, $n$ and $k$ is done in two steps.
786: First, using Table~\ref{table:fdaux}, a set of
787: auxiliary variables should be evaluated, all of them are a function
788: only of $p$ and $z$, i.e. do not depend on the limb darkening coefficients.
789: Note that for a given geometrical case, not all of these quantities
790: have to be calculated, only those that referred to in the appropriate
791: row of Table~\ref{table:fdcoeffs}. (Moreover, it might happen that
792: for some of these equations the value of $p$ or $z$ are out of the
793: allowed domain if they are used in the cases when there is no need for them.)
794: Second, using Table~\ref{table:fdcoeffs}, the quantities $F_i$, $k$ and
795: $n$ should by calculated by substituting the previously obtained
796: values of the auxiliary variables.
797:
798: \begin{table*}
799: \caption{Auxiliary quantities for the calculation of the flux decrease.
800: Note that the quantities $a$, $b$, $k_0$ and $k_1$ are defined
801: similarly as were defined by \citet{mandel2002} and the former two
802: should not be confused with the same notations for the
803: semimajor axis and the impact parameter.}
804: \label{table:fdaux}
805: \begin{tabular}{llll}
806: $a=(p-z)^2$ &
807: $b=(p+z)^2$ \hspace*{5mm}
808: $t^2=p^2+z^2$ &
809: $\hat p=\sqrt{p(1-p)}$ &
810: $p'=\sqrt{1-p^2}$ \\
811: $C_I=\frac{2}{9\pi\sqrt{1-a}}$ &
812: $C_{IK}=1-5z^2+p^2+ab$ &
813: $C_{IE}=(z^2+7p^2-4)(1-a)$ &
814: $C_{I\Pi}=-3\frac{p+z}{p-z}$ \\
815: $C_G=\frac{1}{9\pi\sqrt{pz}}$ &
816: $C_{GK}=3-6(1-p^2)^2-2pz(z^2+7p^2-4+5pz)$ &
817: $C_{GE}=4pz(z^2+7p^2-4)$ &
818: $C_{G\Pi}=-3\frac{p+z}{p-z}$ \\
819: \multicolumn{2}{l}{\ensuremath{T_I=\frac{2}{3\pi}\arccos(1-2p)-\frac{4}{9\pi}(3+2p-8p^2)\hat p}} &
820: $k_0=\arccos\left(\frac{p^2+z^2-1}{2pz}\right)$ &
821: $k_1=\arccos\left(\frac{z^2+1-p^2}{2z}\right)$ \\
822: \multicolumn{2}{l}{\ensuremath{G_0=\frac{p^2k_0+k_1-\sqrt{z^2-\frac{1}{4}(1+z^2-p^2)^2}}{\pi}}} &
823: \multicolumn{2}{l}{\ensuremath{G_2=\frac{k_1+p^2(p^2+2z^2)k_0-\frac{1}{4}(1+5p^2+z^2)\sqrt{(1-a)(b-1)}}{2\pi}}}
824: \end{tabular}
825: \end{table*}
826:
827: \begin{table*}
828: \caption{Coefficients for
829: the flux decrease function.}
830: \label{table:fdcoeffs}
831: \begin{tabular}{rlllllllll}
832: \hline
833: \hline
834: Step & Case &
835: $F_0$ &
836: $F_1$ &
837: $F_K$ &
838: $F_E$ &
839: $F_\Pi$ &
840: $F_2$ &
841: $k$ &
842: $n$ \\
843: \hline
844: 1 & $\mathbf{A}$ &
845: $p^2$ &
846: $\frac{2}{3}(1-(p')^3)$ &
847: $0$ &
848: $0$ &
849: $0$ &
850: $\frac12p^4$ &
851: -- &
852: -- \\
853: 2 & $\mathbf{A_G}$ &
854: $1$ &
855: $\frac23$ &
856: $0$ &
857: $0$ &
858: $0$ &
859: $\frac12$ &
860: -- &
861: -- \\
862: 3 & $\mathbf{B}$ &
863: $p^2$ &
864: $\frac23$ &
865: $C_IC_{IK}$ &
866: $C_IC_{IE}$ &
867: $C_IC_{I\Pi}$ &
868: $\frac12p^2(p^2+2z^2)$ &
869: $\sqrt{\frac{4pz}{1-a}}$ &
870: $-\frac{4pz}{a}$ \\
871: 4 & $\mathbf{B_T}$ &
872: $p^2$ &
873: $T_I$ &
874: $0$ &
875: $0$ &
876: $0$ &
877: $\frac12p^2(p^2+2z^2)$ &
878: -- &
879: -- \\
880: 5 & $\mathbf{B_G}$ &
881: $G_0$ &
882: $\frac23$ &
883: $C_GC_{GK}$ &
884: $C_GC_{GE}$ &
885: $C_GC_{G\Pi}$ &
886: $G_2$ &
887: $\sqrt{\frac{1-a}{4pz}}$ &
888: $\frac{a-1}{a}$ \\
889: 6 & $\mathbf{C}$ &
890: $p^2$ &
891: $\frac13$ &
892: $\frac{2}{9\pi}(1-4p^2)$ &
893: $\frac{8}{9\pi}(2p^2-1)$ &
894: $0$ &
895: $\frac32p^4$ &
896: $2p$ &
897: -- \\
898: 7 & $\mathbf{C_T}$ &
899: $\frac14$ &
900: $\frac{1}{3}-\frac{4}{9\pi}$ &
901: $0$ &
902: $0$ &
903: $0$ &
904: $\frac{3}{32}$ &
905: -- &
906: -- \\
907: 8 & $\mathbf{C_G}$ &
908: $G_0$ &
909: $\frac13$ &
910: $-\frac{1}{9\pi p}(1-4p^2)(3-8p^2)$ &
911: $\frac{1}{9\pi}16p(2p^2-1)$ &
912: $0$ &
913: $G_2$ &
914: $\frac{1}{2p}$ &
915: -- \\
916: 9 & $\mathbf{D}$ &
917: $p^2$ &
918: $0$ &
919: $C_IC_{IK}$ &
920: $C_IC_{IE}$ &
921: $C_IC_{I\Pi}$ &
922: $\frac12p^2(p^2+2z^2)$ &
923: $\sqrt{\frac{4pz}{1-a}}$ &
924: $-\frac{4pz}{a}$ \\
925: 10 & $\mathbf{E}$ &
926: $p^2$ &
927: $T_I$ &
928: $0$ &
929: $0$ &
930: $0$ &
931: $\frac12p^2(p^2+2z^2)$ &
932: -- &
933: -- \\
934: 11 & $\mathbf{F}$ &
935: $G_0$ &
936: $0$ &
937: $C_GC_{GK}$ &
938: $C_GC_{GE}$ &
939: $C_GC_{G\Pi}$ &
940: $G_2$ &
941: $\sqrt{\frac{1-a}{4pz}}$ &
942: $\frac{a-1}{a}$ \\
943: 12 & $\mathbf{G}$ &
944: $0$ &
945: $0$ &
946: $0$ &
947: $0$ &
948: $0$ &
949: $0$ &
950: -- &
951: -- \\
952: \hline
953: \hline
954: \end{tabular}
955: \end{table*}
956:
957: \section{Parametric derivatives of the complete elliptic integrals}
958: \label{app:b}
959:
960: The derivatives of the complete elliptic integrals of the
961: first and second kind are the following:
962: \begin{eqnarray}
963: \frac{\mathrm{d}K(k)}{\mathrm{d}k} & = & \frac{E(k)}{k(1-k^2)}-\frac{K(k)}{k},\\
964: \frac{\mathrm{d}E(k)}{\mathrm{d}k} & = & \frac{E(k)-K(k)}{k}.
965: \end{eqnarray}
966: If the complete elliptic integral of the third kind is
967: defined with the sign convention as
968: \begin{equation}
969: \Pi(n,k)=\int\limits_0^{\pi/2}\frac{\mathrm{d}\varphi}{(1-n\sin^2\varphi)\sqrt{1-k^2\sin^2\varphi}}, \label{ellipticpidef}
970: \end{equation}
971: then its partial derivatives are the following:
972: \begin{eqnarray}
973: \frac{\partial\Pi(n,k)}{\partial n} & = &
974: \frac{1}{2(k^2-n)(n-1)}
975: \left[E(k)+\frac{(k^2-n)K(k)}{n}+\right. \nonumber \\
976: & & \left.+\frac{(n^2-k^2)\Pi(n,k)}{n}\right], \\
977: \frac{\partial\Pi(n,k)}{\partial k} & = &
978: \frac{k}{n-k^2}
979: \left[\frac{E(k)}{k^2-1}+\Pi(n,k)\right].
980: \end{eqnarray}
981: Throughout this paper we are using the sign convenction for $\Pi(n,k)$ as
982: it is defined by \eqref{ellipticpidef}.
983:
984: \section{Coefficients for the the calculation of the partial derivatives
985: of the flux decrease function}
986: \label{app:c}
987:
988: In this section, the coefficients required to evaluate the partial
989: derivatives of the flux decrease function are summarized,
990: which are needed to evaluate \eqref{eq:pdgfluxdecrease}. The evaluation
991: of these coefficients are also done in two steps.
992: First, using Table~\ref{table:fpartaux}, a set of
993: auxiliary variables should be evaluated, all of them are a function
994: only of $p$ and $z$ (i.e. do not depend on the limb darkening coefficients).
995: Note that for a given geometrical case, not all of these quantities
996: have to be calculated, only those that are referred to in the appropriate
997: row of Table~\ref{table:fpartcoeffs}.
998: Second, using Table~\ref{table:fpartcoeffs}, the quantities $F_{i,g}$,
999: $k_g$ and $n_g$ should by calculated (where $g$ is either $p$ or $z$),
1000: by substituting the previously obtained values of the auxiliary variables.
1001:
1002: \begin{table*}
1003: \caption{Auxiliary quantities for the calculation of the
1004: partial derivatives of the flux decrease function.}
1005: \label{table:fpartaux}
1006: \begin{tabular}{ll}
1007: $C_{IK,p}=+2p(1+2(p^2-z^2))$ &
1008: $C_{IE,p}=14p(1-a)-2(p-z)(z^2+7p^2-4)$ \\
1009: $C_{IK,z}=-2z(5+2(p^2-z^2))$ &
1010: $C_{IE,z}=2z(1-a)+2(p-z)(z^2+7p^2-4)$ \\
1011: $C_{GK,p}=-2(p^2(12p+21z)+z(z^2-4)+2p(5z^2-6))$ &
1012: $C_{GE,p}=4z(-4+21p^2+z^2)$ \\
1013: $C_{GK,z}=2p(4-7p^2-10pz-3z^2)$ &
1014: $C_{GE,z}=4p(-4+7p^2+3z^2)$ \\
1015: $G_{0,p}=\frac{p}{\pi}\left(2k_0\right)$ &
1016: $G_{2,p}=\frac{p}{\pi}\left(2t^2k_0-4zp\sin k_0\right)$ \\
1017: $G_{0,z}=\frac{p}{\pi}\left(-2\sin k_0\right)$ &
1018: $G_{2,z}=\frac{p}{\pi}\left(2zp k_0-(p^2+z^2+1)\sin k_0\right)$ \\
1019: \end{tabular}
1020: \end{table*}
1021:
1022: \begin{table*}
1023: \caption{Coefficients for partial
1024: derivatives of the flux decrease function.}
1025: \label{table:fpartcoeffs}
1026: \begin{tabular}{rlllllllll}
1027: \hline
1028: \hline
1029: Step & Case &
1030: $\partial$ &
1031: $F_{0,\partial}$ &
1032: $F_{1,\partial}$ &
1033: $F_{K,\partial}$ &
1034: $F_{E,\partial}$ &
1035: $F_{2,\partial}$ &
1036: $k_{\partial}$ &
1037: $n_{\partial}$ \\
1038: \hline
1039: 1 & $\mathbf{A}$ &
1040: $p$ &
1041: $2p$ &
1042: $2pp'$ &
1043: $0$ &
1044: $0$ &
1045: $2p^3$ &
1046: -- &
1047: -- \\
1048: 1 & $\mathbf{A}$ &
1049: $z$ &
1050: $0$ &
1051: $0$ &
1052: $0$ &
1053: $0$ &
1054: $0$ &
1055: -- &
1056: -- \\
1057: 2, 12 & $\mathbf{A_G}$, $\mathbf{G}$ &
1058: $p$ &
1059: $0$ &
1060: $0$ &
1061: $0$ &
1062: $0$ &
1063: $0$ &
1064: -- &
1065: -- \\
1066: 2, 12 & $\mathbf{A_G}$, $\mathbf{G}$ &
1067: $z$ &
1068: $0$ &
1069: $0$ &
1070: $0$ &
1071: $0$ &
1072: $0$ &
1073: -- &
1074: -- \\
1075: 3, 9 & $\mathbf{B}$, $\mathbf{D}$ &
1076: $p$ &
1077: $2p$ &
1078: $0$ &
1079: $C_IC_{IK,p}+C_IC_{IK}\frac{p-z}{1-a}$ &
1080: $C_IC_{IE,p}+C_IC_{IE}\frac{p-z}{1-a}$ &
1081: $2pt^2$ &
1082: $\frac{2z(1+p^2-z^2)}{(1-a)^2k}$ &
1083: $+\frac{4z(p+z)}{(p-z)a}$ \\
1084: 3, 9 & $\mathbf{B}$, $\mathbf{D}$ &
1085: $z$ &
1086: $0$ &
1087: $0$ &
1088: $C_IC_{IK,z}-C_IC_{IK}\frac{p-z}{1-a}$ &
1089: $C_IC_{IE,z}-C_IC_{IE}\frac{p-z}{1-a}$ &
1090: $2p^2z$ &
1091: $\frac{2p(1-p^2+z^2)}{(1-a)^2k}$ &
1092: $-\frac{4p(p+z)}{(p-z)a}$ \\
1093: 4, 10 & $\mathbf{B_T}$, $\mathbf{E}$ &
1094: $p$ &
1095: $2p$ &
1096: $\frac{8p\hat p}{\pi}$ &
1097: $0$ &
1098: $0$ &
1099: $2pt^2$ &
1100: -- &
1101: -- \\
1102: 4, 10 & $\mathbf{B_T}$, $\mathbf{E}$ &
1103: $z$ &
1104: $0$ &
1105: $-\frac{8p\hat p}{3\pi}$ &
1106: $0$ &
1107: $0$ &
1108: $2p^2z$ &
1109: -- &
1110: -- \\
1111: 5, 11 & $\mathbf{B_G}$, $\mathbf{F}$ &
1112: $p$ &
1113: $G_{0,p}$ &
1114: $0$ &
1115: $-\frac{F_K}{2p}-C_GC_{GK,p}$ &
1116: $-\frac{F_E}{2p}+C_GC_{GE,p}$ &
1117: $G_{2,p}$ &
1118: $-\frac{1+p^2-z^2}{8kp^2z}$ &
1119: $+\frac{2}{(p-z)^3}$ \\
1120: 5, 11 & $\mathbf{B_G}$, $\mathbf{F}$ &
1121: $z$ &
1122: $G_{0,z}$ &
1123: $0$ &
1124: $-\frac{F_K}{2z}-C_GC_{GK,z}$ &
1125: $-\frac{F_E}{2z}+C_GC_{GE,z}$ &
1126: $G_{2,z}$ &
1127: $-\frac{1-p^2+z^2}{8kpz^2}$ &
1128: $-\frac{2}{(p-z)^3}$ \\
1129: 6 & $\mathbf{C}$ &
1130: $p$ &
1131: $2p$ &
1132: $0$ &
1133: $\frac{4p}{9\pi}-\frac{1}{3\pi p}$ &
1134: $\frac{28p}{9\pi}+\frac{1}{3\pi p}$ &
1135: $4p^3$ &
1136: $1$ &
1137: -- \\
1138: 6 & $\mathbf{C}$ &
1139: $z$ &
1140: $0$ &
1141: $0$ &
1142: $-\frac{20p}{9\pi}+\frac{1}{3\pi p}$ &
1143: $\frac{4p}{9\pi}-\frac{1}{3\pi p}$ &
1144: $2p^3$ &
1145: $1$ &
1146: -- \\
1147: 7 & $\mathbf{C_T}$ &
1148: $p$ &
1149: $1$ &
1150: $\frac{2}{\pi}$ &
1151: $0$ &
1152: $0$ &
1153: $\frac12$ &
1154: -- &
1155: -- \\
1156: 7 & $\mathbf{C_T}$ &
1157: $z$ &
1158: $0$ &
1159: $-\frac{2}{3\pi}$ &
1160: $0$ &
1161: $0$ &
1162: $\frac14$ &
1163: -- &
1164: -- \\
1165: 8 & $\mathbf{C_G}$ &
1166: $p$ &
1167: $G_{0,p}$ &
1168: $0$ &
1169: $\frac{3+16p^2(2-9p^2)}{18\pi p^2}$ &
1170: $\frac{72p^2-2}{9\pi}$ &
1171: $G_{2,p}$ &
1172: $-\frac{1}{4p^2}$ &
1173: -- \\
1174: 8 & $\mathbf{C_G}$ &
1175: $z$ &
1176: $G_{0,z}$ &
1177: $0$ &
1178: $\frac{3+ 8p^2(1-6p^2)}{18\pi p^2}$ &
1179: $\frac{24p^2-14}{9\pi}$ &
1180: $G_{2,z}$ &
1181: $-\frac{1}{4p^2}$ &
1182: -- \\
1183: \hline
1184: \hline
1185: \end{tabular}
1186: \end{table*}
1187:
1188:
1189: \label{lastpage}
1190:
1191: \end{document}
1192:
1193: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1194: