08:13:54 From Elisabeth Newton : In the plot of false positives, it looks like there was a region for red stars where there weren’t any confirmed planets. Do you have any insight into that? 08:16:57 From Natalia Guerrero : @Elisabeth, I see that gap, but I’m not sure why there aren’t any planets there. Because there are a bunch of FPs there, I’m wondering if maybe some of them could be rescued. 08:17:35 From Eric Agol to Elisabeth Newton, All Panelists : Good question - I was wondering the same thing! 08:18:59 From Elisabeth Newton : Thanks @Natalia! 08:46:53 From Andrew McWilliam to All panelists : Fe/Si and Fe/Mg ratios can vary in stars depending on Galactic chemical evolution. For example, high Fe/Mg would have more SNIa material and more common at high metallicity and also dwarf galaxies. 08:47:30 From Andrew McWilliam : Fe/Si and Fe/Mg ratios can vary in stars depending on Galactic chemical evolution. For example, high Fe/Mg would have more SNIa material and more common at high metallicity and also dwarf galaxies. 08:52:17 From Lauren Weiss to All panelists : The bias toward higher uncompressed densities is also driven by the choice to exclude planets with sigma(M)/M > 25% 08:52:26 From Steve Kawaler : Are diffusive processes in stars (gravitational settling of He and, more relevantly, other ‘heavies’) big enough to impact this analysis? 08:53:07 From Athanasia Nikolaou : Very interesting. You mentioned that we have no way to explain very light cores (low CMF value/purple points) in the figure showed. But we do not have a way to explain a heavy core either, e.g. The case of Mercury in our solar system. In the end are we constrained by our equatons of state? 08:54:29 From Elisabeth Adams to All panelists : @Athanasia: Mercury’s high composition has been explained through collisions (the lighter stuff got blasted off). It’s not clear collisions could do the reverse... 08:55:11 From Athanasia Nikolaou : Would it be possible to post the link to the git repository? 08:57:02 From Steve Kawaler : Great, thanks 08:57:41 From Elisabeth Adams to All panelists : Question for Lauren: Fascinating idea that Kepler-88 system could be akin to an USP precursor. Has a long-term dynamical (Gyr) simulation been run for Kepler-88? 08:58:59 From Lokesh Mishra : Out of curiosity: How are the uncompressed densities calculated? What assumption would I introduce in an analysis if I were to use uncompressed densityies as compared to mean densities? 09:00:06 From Jim Fuller - Coordinator : Question for Natalia: The large-radius suspected false positives are likely due to eclipsing binaries. But what produces the suspected false positives at very short orbital periods? 09:01:30 From Jim Fuller - Coordinator : Thanks! 09:03:56 From Lokesh Mishra : Yes, it does. Thank you. 09:05:21 From Athanasia Nikolaou : Thank you for commenting on the Mercury issue! 09:08:45 From Rebekah Dawson - Coordinator : From Diana: https://github.com/mplotnyko/SuperEarth.py 09:10:54 From Athanasia Nikolaou : Hi, it was me with the Mercury question, sorry for the confusion with the different zoom identity! 09:11:05 From Athanasia Nikolaou : and thank you again for the git link 09:13:17 From Diana Valencia to All panelists : thanks for the question 09:14:00 From Jamie Tayar : https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019AJ....157..245H/abstract TOI-197 has a seismic mass and radius (Huber 2019) 09:16:55 From Stuart F. Taylor : Any dependence on metallicity? 09:17:09 From Carey Lisse to All panelists : I have an RNAAS article discussing why thus occurrence rate may be happening 09:17:43 From Carey Lisse to All panelists : Very nice work! How does it compare to Gulders et al. 2015? 09:19:00 From Jake Clark : Great poster! Could the teff-occurrence rate be due to selection bias? RVs are harder for hotter stars/large vsini values 09:19:45 From Jia-Yi Yang杨佳祎 to All panelists : To Carey Lisse. Do you mean Mulders 2015?We compare our work with his work and Howard 2012 in our paper. 09:20:21 From Jia-Yi Yang杨佳祎 to All panelists : Thanks for the question 09:21:57 From Jake Clark : For RV follow up, do you happen to know what the rough Vmag values are? 09:22:14 From Jia-Yi Yang杨佳祎 to All panelists : To Jake Clark: thanks for your question! We use Kepler DR25 data, and consider detection efficiency for cold/hot stars, the result should not be affected by selection bias. 09:22:36 From Jack Lissauer : What is the shortest period of these companions to USPs? 09:23:50 From Pierre Maxted : Where/when can we find the details/identies of these USP planets? 09:24:06 From Elisabeth Adams : Shortest period: 4 hours 09:24:24 From Elisabeth Adams : Identites to be published in a paper Real Soon Now 09:24:31 From Theron Carmichael : For Elisabeth: are the USP inner planets typically more massive than their outer neighbors? 09:25:30 From Elisabeth Adams : @Theron: masses I mostly don’t know. For radii, USPs are about half the radius of their companions but I need to recalculate with all the new systems in 09:26:01 From Jamie Tayar : How does your pipeline deal with spurious peaks in the power spectrum? 09:29:16 From Jake Clark : This is awesome Eric, what Solar Normalisation are you using here? Fe/Mg and Mg/Si values differ quite a lot for different Solar Normalisations :) 09:30:16 From Carey Lisse to All panelists : Very interesting Eric! Do we know if the TRAPPIST-1 primary is deficient in Fe vs Is compared to solar values? 09:31:05 From Lauren Weiss to All panelists : Question for Eric: how do the densities compare to the minimum rocky density Diana presented? 09:31:59 From Diana Valencia to All panelists : differentiation has a smaller effect than removing Fe 09:32:10 From Lauren Weiss to All panelists : Thanks for the clarification, Diana! :) 09:32:31 From Lauren Weiss to All panelists : Thanks to all the speakers! 09:32:44 From Diana Valencia to All panelists : Ditto! 09:32:55 From Avi Shporer : Eric, is there room for additional, non-transiting planets, in the system? 09:33:00 From Jake Clark : Thank you speakers, that session was AMAZING! 09:33:13 From Tabetha Boyajian : 🤩 09:33:14 From Rebekah Dawson - Coordinator to All panelists : If we didn’t get to your question, feel free to ask in the chat window again or to ask on the slack channel 09:33:23 From Rebekah Dawson - Coordinator : If we didn’t get to your question, feel free to ask in the chat window again or to ask on the slack channel 09:33:49 From Eric Agol : The Solar normalization is Fe/Mg = 0.83 & Mg/Si = 1.02 by number. The models were computed based on the methodology of Dorn et al. (2018). 09:34:17 From Diana Valencia to All panelists : In comparison, in our paper we don’t normalize to the sun, we use the absolute values. 09:34:26 From Eric Agol : There is room exterior to the planets for additional non-transiting planets (or planets yet to be detected to transit). There is most likely no room in between the seven planets.