Benjamin Montet

Here are some figures from my recent first-author papers that may be useful in presentations. Some are the same versions as can be found in the papers themselves; some are tweaked slightly to be optimized for large displays. Feel free to use any of these, but please cite the relevant papers if you do. Other figures available upon request. The figures on this page are image files (some are transparent). You can access these directly by right-clicking and saving the image, or opening it in a new tab. Clicking directly on the image will open a pdf version.

Long Term Photometric Variability in Kepler Full Frame Images: Magnetic Cycles of Sun-Like Stars
(Montet, Tovar, and Foreman-Mackey 2017)

(top left) "Postcard'' FFI image of the region around a sample star, KIC 8462852, from the Kepler data. The image is 300 pixels square (20 arcmin on a side). (top right) The same, with automated apertures drawn over reference stars. (middle) A representative sample of 12 stars with Sun-like stellar parameters and non-Sun-like magnetic activity. These stars have quasi-periodic brightness variations ranging from 0.5% to 2% over 4 years. For comparison, the Sun's brightness varies by 0.1% over an 11 year cycle. (bottom left) Distribution of targets with observed variable behavior across the Kepler field of view. (bottor right) Stars with observed long-term variability either correlated (facula-dominated, red) or anticorrelated (spot-dominated, blue) with short-term starspot variability observed in Kepler long cadence data. For example, 13% of all Sun-like stars with rotation periods of 13 days have detectable spot-dominated variability. The fraction of stars with facula-dominated variability increases in time, with the two equal at a rotation period of 24 days. Beyond 26 days, we do not detect any stars with spot-dominated variability.

KIC 8462852 Faded Throughout the Kepler Mission (Montet and Simon 2016, ApJL)

(top) Full-frame image data for the region near KIC 8462852. The target star aperture is shown in red, while seven bright comparison stars are highlighted in blue. (bottom) Light curve for KIC 8462852. The points with error bars are relative flux measurements recorded approximately monthly through the full-frame images of the entire Kepler field. The four different colors and shapes correspond to the four spacecraft orientations (also shown in subplots). Due to the uncertainties of the underlying flat field, a linear offset between flux recorded at different spacecraft orientations may be required. The gray curve in the background corresponds to one possible realization of the true long cadence light curve of KIC 8462852, conditioned on the FFI data. The now-famous dips originally published in Boyajian et al. 2016 correspond to the narrow dips seen here.

GJ 3305 Orbit and Model Comparison (Montet, Bowler, Shkolnik et al. 2015, ApJL)

(top) Astrometry for the GJ 3305 AB system. Red dashed lines show the maximum likelihood model, blue dashed lines draws from the posterior distribution of allowed orbits, and black points are the data. These figures show the predicted orbit throughout the next few years as well, through the next periastron passage. (middle) Same as the above's top two panels, but with a different scaling of the orbit. (bottom) Comparison with BHAC15 stellar models, showing that while star A is well-represented by stellar models, star B is fainter than predicted in the near-infrared.


Characterizing and Validating K2 Planets and Stars (Montet, Morton, Foreman-Mackey et al. 2015)

(top left) Photometry for (black) all K2 Campaign 1 stars, (fuschia) all Campaign 1 planet host candidates, (blue) all known K2 planet host stars, and (yellow) the Sun. (top right) Phase-folded Kepler photometry for all K2 Campaign 1 planet candidates. Names in blue are validated planets, names in black are planet candidates, and names in red are false positives. (bottom) Proper motion for EPIC 201912552, a star hosting a mini-Neptune that receives Earthlike insolation. Sixty years of motion show there is no background object behind this star.


LHS 6343 C: Refined Mass and Radius (Montet, Johnson, Muirhead et al. 2015)

(top left) Joint constraints on the temperature of LHS 6343 A and B from the combined near-IR spectrum. Shaded region and dashed line show the temperature of A expected from the observed light curve and empirical main-sequence relation, converting mass to temperature through the Dartmouth models. (top right) Phase-folded Kepler photometry for LHS 6343 ABC. (bottom left) Phase-folded Keck/HIRES radial velocities for LHS 6343 A relative to LHS 6343 B. (bottom right) Brown dwarf mass-radius diagram, including isodensity contours and isochrones from the Baraffe models.


TRENDS IV: The Occurrence Rate of Giant Planets around Mid-M Dwarfs (Montet, Crepp, Johnson et al. 2014)

(top left) Mass and metallicity distributions of M dwarfs in our sample, with systems exhibiting long-term RV acceleration marked. (top right) Occurence rate of giant planets orbiting M dwarfs. 6.5 +/- 3.0 percent of M dwarfs host a 1-13 Jupiter mass planet with a < 20 AU. (bottom left) Measured occurence rate as a function of assumed power law in planet mass and orbital semimajor axis. (bottom right) Measured power law in mass and orbital semimajor axis, assuming the planets orbiting M dwarfs detected from microlensing surveys are drawn from the same population as the planets orbiting M dwarfs detected in RV surveys.