REVIEW
KMT-2019-BLG-0371 and the Limits of Bayesian Analysis
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
KMT-2019-BLG-0371 and the Limits of Bayesian Analysis
read the original abstract
We show that the perturbation at the peak of the light curve of microlensing event KMT-2019-BLG-0371 is explained by a model with a mass ratio between the host star and planet of $q \sim 0.08$. Due to the short event duration ($t_{\rm E} \sim 6.5\ $ days), the secondary object in this system could potentially be a massive giant planet. A Bayesian analysis shows that the system most likely consists of a host star with a mass $M_{\rm h} = 0.09^{+0.14}_{-0.05}M_{\odot}$ and a massive giant planet with a mass $M_{\rm p} = 7.70^{+11.34}_{-3.90}M_{\rm Jup}$. However, the interpretation of the secondary as a planet (i.e., as having $M_{\rm p} < 13 M_{\rm Jup}$) rests entirely on the Bayesian analysis. Motivated by this event, we conduct an investigation to determine which constraints meaningfully affect Bayesian analyses for microlensing events. We find that the masses inferred from such a Bayesian analysis are determined almost entirely by the measured value of $\theta_{\rm E}$ and are relatively insensitive to other factors such as the direction of the event $(\ell, b)$, the lens-source relative proper motion $\mu_{\rm rel}$, or the specific Galactic model prior.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.