---
abstract: 'We report the discovery of eight new giant planets, and updated orbits for four known planets, orbiting dwarf and subgiant stars using the CORALIE, HARPS, and MIKE instruments as part of the Calan-Hertfordshire Extrasolar Planet Search. The planets have masses in the range 1.1-5.4’s, orbital periods from 40-2900 days, and eccentricities from 0.0-0.6. They include a double-planet system orbiting the most massive star in our sample (HD147873), two eccentric giant planets (HD128356$b$ and HD154672$b$), and a rare 14 Herculis analogue (HD224538$b$). We highlight some population correlations from the sample of radial velocity detected planets orbiting nearby stars, including the mass function exponential distribution, confirmation of the growing body of evidence that low-mass planets tend to be found orbiting more metal-poor stars than giant planets, and a possible period-metallicity correlation for planets with masses $>$0.1 , based on a metallicity difference of 0.16 dex between the population of planets with orbital periods less than 100 days and those with orbital periods greater than 100 days.'
author:
- |
    J.S. Jenkins$^{1}$[^1], H.R.A. Jones$^2$, M. Tuomi$^2$, M. Díaz$^1$, J.P. Cordero$^1$, A. Aguayo$^1$, B. Pantoja$^1$, P. Arriagada$^3$, R. Mahu$^4$, R. Brahm$^5$, P. Rojo$^1$, M.G. Soto$^1$, O. Ivanyuk$^6$, N. Becerra Yoma$^4$, A.C. Day-Jones$^1$, M.T. Ruiz$^1$, Y.V. Pavlenko$^{2,6}$, J.R. Barnes$^7$, F. Murgas$^8$, D.J. Pinfield$^2$, M.I. Jones$^9$, M. López-Morales$^{10}$, S. Shectman$^{11}$, R.P. Butler$^3$, D. Minniti$^{12}$\
    $^1$Departamento de Astronomia, Universidad de Chile, Camino el Observatorio 1515, Las Condes, Santiago, Chile, Casilla 36-D\
    $^2$Center for Astrophysics, University of Hertfordshire, College Lane Campus, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, UK, AL10 9AB\
    $^3$Carnegie Institution of Washington, Dept. of Terrestrial Magnetism, 5241 Broad Branch Rd. NW, 20015, Washington D.C., USA\
    $^4$Dept. of Electrical Engineering, Universidad de Chile, Av. Tupper 2007, PO Box 412-3, Santiago, Chile\
    $^5$Instituto de Astrofísica, Facultad de Física, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Av. Vicuña Mackenna 4860, Santiago, Chile\
    $^6$Main Astronomical Observatory, Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Golosiiv Woods, Kyiv-127, 03680 Ukraine\
    $^7$Department of Physical Sciences, The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA, UK\
    $^8$Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias, Via Lactea, E38205, La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain\
    $^9$Center of Astro-Engineering UC, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Av. Vicuña Mackenna 4860, Santiago, Chile\
    $^{10}$Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138\
    $^{11}$Carnegie Institution of Washington, The Observatories, 813 Santa Barbara Street, Pasadena, CA 91101-1292, USA\
    $^{12}$Departamento de Ciencias Fisicas, Universidad Andres Bello, Republica 220, Santiago, Chile
bibliography:
- 'refs.bib'
date: Submitted January 2011
title: 'New Planetary Systems from the Calan-Hertfordshire Extrasolar Planet Search'
---

\[firstpage\]

stars: planetary systems; planets and satellites: formation; stars: activity; stars: low-mass; stars: solar-type

Introduction
============

After the discovery and confirmation of the hot Jupiter Dimidium (aka. Helvetios $b$ or 51 Pegasi $b$) in 1995, our view of giant planets was changed forever. Giant planets orbiting dwarf stars like the Sun have been found to inhabit many regions of the parameter space. The first of these were found orbiting their stars with periods much shorter than those of Jupiter in our solar system (e.g. [@mayor95]; [@marcy96]). More recently as the number of giant planets has grown, a new population of *eccentric gas giants* has been shown to exist (e.g. [@jones06]; [@tamuz08]; [@arriagada10]), making up a large fraction of the known systems, at least around main sequence stars since the same high fraction does not appear to be present around giant stars ([@jones14]). These planets seem to span the full range of masses from the sub-Jupiter range all the way up to the mass boundary between giant planets and brown dwarfs.

It has been thoroughly demonstrated that there is a clear bias to metal-rich stars hosting giant planets across the currently sampled range of orbital separations ([@fischer05]; [@sousa11]), a bias that seems to hold for stars beyond the main sequence (e.g. [@reffert15]; [@soto15]; [@jones16]). In comparison, recent work appears to show that stars that host lower-mass planets have a metallicity distribution that is indistinguishable from those that host no known planets at all ([@udry07]; [@jenkins13a]; [@sousa11]; [@buchhave15]). Furthermore, @jenkins13a suggests there exists a boundary that delimits a planet desert for the lowest mass planets in the metal-rich regime. Such results show there is a fundamental relationship between the proto-planetary disc metallicity and the mass of planets that form in these discs, indicating further study of the planetary mass function and its relationship with metallicity is warranted.

Since metallicity plays a key role in the formation of the observed planetary systems, explained well by nature’s merging of core accretion and planet migration (e.g. [@ida04]; [@mordasini12]), and now we are reaching a population size where less obvious correlations can reveal themselves, studying the current population of known planets can provide a window into the fundamentals of planet formation and evolution for the stars nearest to the Sun.

In 2007 we started a radial velocity planet search program on the HARPS instrument at La Silla Chile, with the goal of finding more gas giant planets orbiting super metal-rich stars to increase the statistics, whilst also following up any discoveries to search for transit events. The first results from this work and the target sample were discussed in @jenkins09 and since then our program has expanded to make use of the CORALIE spectrograph [@jenkins11a; @jenkins11b; @jenkins13b]. This current paper announces the first planets from this survey detected using CORALIE and goes on to study the planet mass-metallicity plane to search for correlations between these two parameters.

In this work we describe the latest efforts from our Calan-Hertfordshire Extrasolar Planet Search, which builds on previous work by this group. We include the new giant planets we have detected in this program with the large sample of gas giants detected by radial velocity measurements that already exist in the literature, in order to continue the search for emerging correlations that allow us a more stringent insight into the nature of these objects. In $\S~\ref{observations}$ we describe the measurements used in this work. In $\S~\ref{star}$ we discuss the sample selection, introduce the new giant planet detections from this survey, and discuss some characteristics of their host stars. In $\S~\ref{results}$ we perform tests of the mass function and its relationship to stellar metallicity, along with searching for correlations between these parameters and planetary orbital period and we briefly discuss the impact of these results. Finally, in $\S~\ref{conclusions}$ we summerise the main points of the present work.

Observations and Reduction {#observations}
==========================

The radial velocity datasets for these stars were observed using the precision radial velocity spectrographs CORALIE, HARPS, and MIKE. Both the CORALIE and HARPS spectrographs are physically located at the ESO La Silla Observatory in Chile, where CORALIE is mounted on the Swiss Euler telescope and HARPS is fed by light from the ESO 3.6m telescope. The MIKE spectrograph is located at the Las Campanas Observatory and is mounted on the Magellan Clay 6.5m telescope.

In this work, 570 radial velocities are reported, with a fairly even split between CORALIE and HARPS observations, in comparison to the smaller fraction of MIKE data. The baseline of observations for the CORALIE data run from 2009 November 25$^{\rm{th}}$ until 2015 October 23$^{\rm{rd}}$ (BJD 2455160.53623 - 2457318.85147), whereas the HARPS data runs from 2007 May 28$^{\rm{th}}$ until 2013 September 28$^{\rm{th}}$ (BJD 2454248.60231 - 2456563.90982) showing that the HARPS data covers a longer baseline but the CORALIE data has better sampling coverage in general for these targets. The MIKE velocities run from 2003 August 13$^{\rm{th}}$ until 2009 July 7$^{\rm{th}}$ (BJD 2452864.57934 - 2455019.6938), covering a baseline of six years that overlaps with the HARPS baseline but not the CORALIE data.

CORALIE
-------

The analysis of CORALIE data involves the normal echelle reduction steps, such as debiasing the images using CCD bias frames, order location and tracing using polynomial fitting methods and aperture order filtering, pixel-to-pixel sensitivity correction (flatfielding) by building a normalised master flatfield image and dividing out the master flatfield from the other images, scattered-light removal by measuring the contribution to the total light profile in the inter-order regions, order extraction using a profile fitting method ([@marsh89]), and finally building a precise 2D wavelength solution that is good to $\sim$2.5 overall precision ([@jordan14]; [@brahm16]). The final steps in the analysis include cross-correlating the individual spectra with a binary mask (either G2, K0, K5, or M2 depending on the spectral type of the star, see [@baranne96] and [@pepe02]) and fitting the cross-correlation function (CCF) with a gaussian to measure the radial velocity, along with the width of the CCF to generate realistic uncertainties. The instrumental drift is then measured and removed from the overall velocity by performing a second cross-correlation between the simultaneously measured Thorium-Argon (ThAr) lamp (simultaneously referring to observations where the second optical fibre illuminates the spectrograph with ThAr light) and a previously measured double ThAr observation where both fibres have been fed by light from the ThAr calibration lamp. These double ThAr measurements are generally taken every 1.5-2 hours throughout the night to continually reset the wavelength solution zero-point. These steps were discussed in @jordan14, however the overall performance in term of stability is shown in Appendix \[appendix\_stable\].

An important additional step in the calculation of the radial velocities from CORALIE is the characterisation of the offset between the data collected prior to the November 2014 upgrade of the instrument. As part of this upgrade, the CORALIE circular fibres were replaced with octagonal fibres to increase illumination stability, the double-scrambler was reintroduced into the system, and a focal mirror that focuses light on the guiding camera was replaced. Such instrumental upgrades are expected to introduce systematic offsets in the radial velocity measurements compared to pre-upgrade observations.

In an attempt to account for the offset between the CORALIE reference velocities observed before and after the upgrade, we first determined this offset in our two radial velocity reference targets, HD72673 and HD157347. We denote the mean estimate for the offset $x_{0}$ based on these reference targets as $\mu_{0}$ and its standard error as $\sigma_{0}$. We then used these numbers to construct a prior probability for the offset $x_{1}$ in the first data set of our sample such that $\pi(x_{1}) = \mathcal{N}(\mu_{0}, \sigma_{0}^{2})$. This prior was used to calculate a posterior for the offset and we denote the mean and standard deviation of this obtained posterior with $\mu_{1}$ and $\sigma_{1}$, respectively. After that, we adopted the refined estimate of the offset of $\mu_{i} \pm \sigma_{i}$ to construct the prior for the offset $x_{i+1}$ in the next data set, such that $\pi(x_{i+1}) = \mathcal{N}(\mu_{i}, \sigma_{i}^{2})$. This process, called ’Bayesian updating’ because the prior is updated into a posterior density that is in turn used as as the next prior, was repeated until all the data sets were analysed. This process helps to account for all the information regarding the offsets from all the data sets without having to analyse them simultaneously. As a result, we summarise the information regarding the offset as a probability distribution that is almost Gaussian in the sense that the third and fourth moments are very close to zero. This density has a mean of 19.2 ms$^{-1}$ an a standard deviation of 4.8 ms$^{-1}$ , which indicates that an offset in the reference velocity of roughly 20 ms$^{-1}$ is significantly present in the CORALIE data sets after the upgrade for the stars included in this work.

HARPS
-----

For HARPS, the steps are similar to those mentioned above, but the data is automatically processed by the HARPS-DRS version 3.5 which is based in general on the procedure explained in @baranne96. The nightly drift of the ThAr lines are found to be below 0.5  and including the other sources of uncertainty such as centering and guiding ($<$30 ), a stability of less than 1  is found for this spectrograph over the long term (see [@locurto10]).

MIKE
----

For the radial velocities measured using the MIKE spectrograph, the reduction steps are similar but the analysis procedure is different. MIKE uses a cell filled with molecular iodine (I2) that is placed directly in the beam of light from the target star before entering the spectrograph, and this is used to record the instrument point spread function (PSF) and provide a highly accurate wavelength fiducial. The full analysis procedure is explained in @butler, but in short, the velocities are measured by comparing each star+I2 spectrum to that of a template measurement of the same star. This template is observed without the I2 cell in place, such that one can deconvolve the instrument’s PSF from the template observation, usually accomplished by observing a rapidly rotating B-star with the I2 cell in place before and after the template observation and extrapolating the PSF from these observations to that of the template. The deconvolved template can then be used to forward model each observation by convolving it with a very high resolution and high S/N I2 spectrum and a modeled PSF. The final stability of MIKE is found to be between that of CORALIE and HARPS, around the 5 level of velocity precision.

The Stars and their Doppler Signals {#star}
===================================

\[tab:values\]

  ------------------------------ ------------------ ------------------ ------------------- ----------------- --------------------- -----------------
  Spectral Type$_{Hipp}$         G8IV               G5IV/V             G5IV/V              G5V               K3V                   G6V
  $B-V_{Hipp}$                   0.761$\pm$0.002    0.747$\pm$0.014    0.660$\pm$0.021     0.686$\pm$0.015   1.017$\pm$0.015$^*$   0.773$\pm$0.004
  $V$                            8.40               8.05               9.11                8.83              8.29                  9.20
  $\pi$ (mas)                    12.67$\pm$0.62     11.71$\pm$0.58     12.82$\pm$0.61      13.74$\pm$0.83    38.41$\pm$0.77        15.23$\pm$1.18
  distance (pc)                  78.93$\pm$3.86     85.40$\pm$4.23     78.00$\pm$3.71      72.78$\pm$4.40    26.03$\pm$0.52        65.66$\pm$5.09
  log$R'$$_{\rm{HK}}$            -5.23              -5.24              -4.95               -5.03             -5.07                 -5.12
  Hipparcos $N$$_{\rm{obs}}$     92                 98                 107                 92                72                    96
  Hipparcos $\sigma$             0.014              0.009              0.017               0.016             0.013                 0.016
  $\Delta$$M_{V}$                1.478              1.914              0.108               0.405             0.553                 0.349
  $T$$_{\rm{eff}}$ (K)           5577$\pm$100       5650$\pm$100       5950$\pm$100        5688$\pm$100      4875$\pm$100          5505$\pm$100
  $L_{\rm{\star}}$/$L_{\odot}$   2.41$\pm$0.18      3.84$\pm$0.19      1.17$\pm$0.06       1.40$\pm$0.09     0.36$\pm$0.01         0.81$\pm$0.06
  $M_{\rm{\star}}$/$M_{\odot}$   1.03$\pm$0.05      1.28$\pm$0.05      1.12$\pm$0.05       1.02$\pm$0.05     0.65$\pm$0.05         0.95$\pm$0.05
  $R_{\rm{\star}}$/$R_{\odot}$   1.67$\pm$0.07      2.05$\pm$0.05      1.02$\pm$0.05       1.22$\pm$0.06     0.85$\pm$0.02         0.99$\pm$0.08
  $[$Fe/H$]$                     0.39$\pm$0.10      0.40$\pm$0.10      0.29$\pm$0.10       0.25$\pm$0.10     0.17$\pm$0.10         0.22$\pm$0.10
                                 4.03$\pm$0.05      3.92$\pm$0.03      4.47$\pm$0.05       4.27$\pm$0.05     4.52$\pm$0.06         4.42$\pm$0.08
  U,V,W (km/s)                   22.2,-56.5,-29     -14.2,-24.0,4.5    -37.5,-16.3,-17.3   72.2,-2.0,-15.8   30.8,-28.7,8.8        -24.4,-49.5,3.7
  (km/s)                         2.1$\pm$0.2        3.1$\pm$0.3        2.9$\pm$0.2         2.7$\pm$0.2       1.3$\pm$0.1           1.5$\pm$0.1
  Age (Gyrs)                     9$\pm$3            5$\pm$3            2$\pm$3             8$\pm$3           10$\pm$5              5$\pm$5
                                                                                                                                   
  Spectral Type$_{Hip}$          G1V                G6V                G3IV                G8V               F9IV/V                
  $B-V_{Hip}$                    0.575$\pm$0.012    0.711$\pm$0.025    0.713$\pm$0.013     1.018$\pm$0.095   0.581$\pm$0.006       
  $V$                            7.96               9.18               8.21                9.36              8.06                  
  $\pi$ (mas)                    9.53$\pm$0.99      12.00$\pm$1.52     15.44$\pm$0.84      15.39$\pm$1.72    12.86$\pm$0.73        
  distance (pc)                  104.93$\pm$10.90   83.33$\pm$10.56    64.77$\pm$3.52      64.98$\pm$7.26    77.76$\pm$4.41        
  log$R'$$_{\rm{HK}}$            -5.27              -4.99              -5.12               -5.18             -4.99                 
  Hipparcos $N$$_{\rm{obs}}$     88                 84                 120                 67                163                   
  Hipparcos $\sigma$             0.011              0.014              0.014               0.019             0.017                 
  $\Delta$$M_{V}$                1.337              0.508              0.943               1.373             0.627                 
  $T$$_{\rm{eff}}$ (K)           5972$\pm$100       5726$\pm$100       5655$\pm$100        5426$\pm$100      6097$\pm$100          
  $L_{\rm{\star}}$/$L_{\odot}$   5.99$\pm$0.62      1.28$\pm$0.16      1.91$\pm$0.10       0.70$\pm$0.08     2.95$\pm$0.17         
  $M_{\rm{\star}}$/$M_{\odot}$   1.38$\pm$0.05      1.10$\pm$0.05      1.08$\pm$0.05       1.02$\pm$0.05     1.34$\pm$0.05         
  $R_{\rm{\star}}$/$R_{\odot}$   2.29$\pm$0.10      1.15$\pm$0.13      1.44$\pm$0.05       0.95$\pm$0.11     1.54$\pm$0.06         
  $[$Fe/H$]$                     -0.03$\pm$0.10     0.16$\pm$0.10      0.11$\pm$0.10       0.09$\pm$0.10     0.27$\pm$0.10         
                                 3.86$\pm$0.05      4.36$\pm$0.10      4.15$\pm$0.05       4.49$\pm$0.11     4.19$\pm$0.04         
  U,V,W (km/s)                   18.7,-18.2,3.2     -39.6,-46.2,10.2   -20.0,-18.7,-29.1   13.3,9.8,-20.5    -29.1,-15.0,+7.2      
  (km/s)                         5.9$\pm$0.5        1.8$\pm$0.1        2.2$\pm$0.2         1.5$\pm$0.1       3.9$\pm$0.3           
  Age (Gyrs)                     4$\pm$3            3$\pm$3            8$\pm$3             11$\pm$4          2$\pm$3               
  ------------------------------ ------------------ ------------------ ------------------- ----------------- --------------------- -----------------

\* - colour calculated from magnitudes drawn from the Tycho-2 catalogue ([@hog00]).\
We assign a standard $\pm$100K uncertainty to the measurements and $\pm$0.10 dex to the metallicities.\
$\pi$ values come from @vanleeuwen07 and all other Hipparcos parameters are taken from @perryman97.\
Evolutionary bulk properties and spectrally measured indices were either computed in this work or taken from @jenkins08, @jenkins11a, and @murgas13.\
$[$Fe/H$]$ abundances, spectroscopic  values, and rotational velocities were calculated using the procedures in @pavlenko12 and taken from @ivanyuk16.

The selection of the Calan-Hertfordshire Extrasolar Planet Search (CHEPS) target sample is discussed in @jenkins09 but we outline the main selection criteria here. The stars are generally selected to be late-F to early-K stars, with a $B-V$ range between 0.5-0.9, and with a small number of redder stars included to allow the study of activity correlations and timescales between activity indicators and the measured Doppler velocities. The positions of the CHEPS sample on a colour-magnitude diagram are shown in Fig. \[hr\_plot\] (squares) compared to a general selection of nearby stars from the Hipparcos catalogue (circles), along with the targets discussed in this work (stars). The magnitude limits we set are between 7.5-9.5 in the $V$ optical band and after preliminary screening with the FEROS spectrograph ([@jenkins08]), we predominantly selected chromospherically quiet stars, and those that are metal-rich (primary sample having log$R'_{\rm{HK}}$ indices $\le$ -4.9 dex and \[Fe/H\] $\ge$ +0.1 dex, with some stars outside of these selection limits to use as comparisons). The positions of the stars reported here on an HR-diagram are shown in the inset plot in Fig. \[hr\_plot\]. The Y2 isomass tracks are also shown ([@demarque04]) for masses of 1.0-1.3 , increasing in mass towards higher luminosities, and with a fixed metallicity of +0.2 dex. The characteristics of the targets we discuss in this work are shown in Table \[tab:values\].

Since the planets reported here are gas giants, the radial velocity signals of these stars are fairly large, and hence one might expect that we can detect frequencies for all of them using standard periodogram analyses to hunt for power peaks in the Fourier power spectrum, or minimum mean square error (MMSE) spectrum (e.g. [@dawson10]; [@jenkins14a]). However, the search for the best solutions can be complicated, particularly for combined data sets from independent spectrographs because the sets have different baselines, data samplings, and uncertainties that all have to be accounted for in a search for periodic signals. The signals we discuss in this work are a mixture of well, and moderately well sampled data, such that some signals are more problematic to detect than others. Moreover, the inclusion of a linear trend that could be present in the data of a given target due to a long period companion, will cause considerable correlations to the probability densities of the model parameters.

In Appendix \[appendix0\] we show the MMSE power spectra for our sample of stars and it is clear that a number of deep troughs are present in the data, yet some sets show no significant power troughs over the frequency space searched. We thus applied the delayed-rejection adaptive-Metropolis algorithm (DRAM; [@haario06]) together with tempered Markov chains when searching for solutions to our Keplerian models (see [@tuomi14a; @tuomi14b]) and the simpler adaptive-Metropolis algorithm ([@haario01]) when obtaining estimates for the model parameters. This method has previously been applied in @tuomi13a, @jenkins13a, @jenkins13c, and @jenkins14b, for example. The vertical dashed lines in the MMSE periodograms mark the positions of these detected signals.

The DRAM algorithm works by using a sequence of proposal densities that are each narrower than the last. Here “narrower” is to be understood as a multivariate Gaussian proposal density, on which the adaptive-Metropolis algorithm is based, that has a smaller variance for at least one of the parameters in the parameter vector. In short, if a value proposed by drawing it from an initial proposal density is rejected, we continue by modifying the proposal density with respect to the period parameter(s) by multiplying it with a factor of 0.1 such that another value is proposed from a narrower area surrounding the current state of the chain. This enables us to visit the areas of high probability in the period space repeatedly and reliably and to see which periods correspond to the highest values of the posterior probability density.

We applied a statistical model that contains reference velocities of each instrument, a linear trend, Keplerian signals, and excess white noise. By simplifying the statistical model in @tuomi14b by removing the intrinsic correlations that we do not expect to play a significant role due to the low number of measurements and the (relatively) high amplitude variations in the data, the model can be written as

$$\label{eq:rv_model}
m_{i,l} = \gamma_{l} + \dot{\gamma}t_{i} + f_{k}(t_{i}) + \epsilon_{i,l}$$

where $m_{i,l}$ is the $i$th measurement made by the $l$th telescope/instrument, $\gamma_{l}$ is the systemic velocity offset for each instrument, $\dot{\gamma}$ represents the linear trend, $f_{k}$ is the superposition of $k$ Keplerian signals at time $t_{i}$, and $\epsilon_{i,l}$ is a Gaussian random variable with zero mean and a variance of $\sigma_{l}^{2} + \sigma_{i}^{2}$, where $\sigma_{l}$ is a free parameter in our analyses that represents the stellar jitter noise and $\sigma_{i}$ is the measurement uncertainty. We use prior probability densities as described in @tuomi12 but apply an informative prior density for the orbital eccentricities such that $\pi(e) \propto \mathcal{N}(0, 0.3^{2})$ that penalises, but does not exclude, eccentricities close to unity ([@anglada-escude13]; [@tuomi13b]). Therefore, given the previous tests performed using this model, in particular using high-precision HARPS data, we expect this model to represent a sufficiently accurate description of the velocities analysed in the current work. The good agreement between the parameters published for the stars we discuss that overlap with previous work, is testament to the model’s applicability.

Posterior densities for the periods, semi-amplitudes, and eccentricities for all signals are shown in Appendices \[appendix1\], \[appendix2\], and \[appendix3\], and below we discuss each of the systems independently. Note that all the signal fits are shown phase folded to highlight the phase coverage we have observed. We did not show the posteriors for the residuals to any of the systems (more than a single planet model fit) unless we detected a unique solution that relates to a second Doppler signal.

HD9174
------

HD9174 is classed as a G8 subgiant star in the Hipparcos catalogue ([@perryman97]) since it has a distance from the main sequence ($\Delta M_V$) of 1.5 and a $B-V$ colour of 0.76. The star is also extremely metal-rich, with an \[Fe/H\] of nearly +0.4 dex, indicating a high probability of hosting a giant planet. A signal with a semi-amplitude of 21 has been detected with a period of nearly 1200 days. The star is very chromospherically quiet and exhibits low rotational velocity, indicating it is an ideal subgiant to search for orbiting exoplanets using the radial velocity method, and hence we do not believe the signal is induced by activity features, and therefore conclude that HD9174 hosts an orbiting planet.

In order to understand the significance of the detected signals we present here, we calculated log-Bayesian evidence ratios for each of the signals presented here based on the MCMC samples drawn from a mixture of prior and posterior densities, as discussed in @newton94 (see Eqs. 15 $\&$ 16). This is a version of importance sampling that uses a mixed distribution to obtain a sampling distribution that has “heavier” tails than the posterior (see [@nelson16] for further discussion of this method). We note that all of these signals are so strong that they would pass essentially any meaningful significance test, from likelihood-ratio tests to tests applying any other information criteria.

The log-Bayesian evidence ratio for the signal in the data of HD9174 was found to be 42.1 for the 1-planet model. The signal is also readily apparent in the MMSE periodogram. No secondary signal was detected. Considering we set the threshold boundary for a statistically significant signal to be at the level of $10^4$, or 9.21 in log-Bayesian units, it is clear that this signal is very significant. Our best fit to the data yields a non-circular eccentricity, only at the level of around 0.12, and with a stellar mass commensurate with that of the Sun, the orbiting planet has a minimum mass of 1.11 . The phase folded velocities and model fit are shown in Fig. \[phased1\]

HD48265
-------

HD48265 is classed in the Hipparcos catalogue as a G5IV/V star, however we find a $\Delta M_V$ of 1.9, therefore this star is a subgiant. Again, it is extremely metal-rich, towards the top end of the metallicity scale, since it’s \[Fe/H\] is found to be +0.4 dex. A planetary companion to this star was previously published in @minniti09 and an update to the planet’s orbital parameters was published in @jenkins09. Here we report our latest orbital solution for this system, including more HARPS velocities and with the addition of CORALIE and MIKE data.

We found a signal with a period of 780 days and with a semi-amplitude of 28 (Fig. \[phased2\]) in the radial velocities of HD48265. The log-Bayesian evidence for this signal is 103.1, well above the significance threshold. Although there is a trough in the MMSE close to this period when compared to the surrounding parameter space, it is significantly lower than the noise floor at shorter periods, in particular around a period of 20 days (deepest trough), therefore the MMSE periodogram can not be used to confirm the existence of this signal. We studied this 20 day trough to look for evidence of a signal here but nothing was clear. In fact, this trough was found to be dependent on the noise properties of the data, since when the jitter parameter was considered in the periodogram analysis the evidence pointed towards a period of $\sim$40 days, close to twice the period, indicating it is an artifact of the interference pattern from the window function beating with the real signal in the data.

The evolved nature of the star ensures that it is an inactive and slowly rotating star and hence it is unlikely that stellar activity is the source of these signals. The minimum mass of the planet is found to be 1.47  and a non-zero eccentricity was found for the signal. We note that a significant linear trend was also found that possibly indicates more companions that await discovery in this system, particularly at longer orbital periods. The method also indicated that a shorter period signal may be present, with a period close to 60 days, yet the current data does not allow us to confirm this as a genuine second planet since the signal disappears when we introduce the linear activity correlation parameters in the analysis. Also, this signal could be an alias of the detected planetary signal.

The planetary parameters we find here are generally in good agreement with those published in @minniti09 and @jenkins09, however the period we quote is significantly larger than that found by Jenkins et al. by $\sim$80 days. The differences in the periods are attributed to the lower number of high precision HARPS data in that work, which was causing the fitting algorithm to weight heavily towards those data points, even though they were much fewer compared to the MIKE data. This had the effect of significantly increasing the precision of the fit compared to Minniti et al., but in the presence of a linear trend, it also skewed the orbital period to lower values. All other parameters are in excellent agreement within the uncertainties.

HD68402
-------

The star HD68402 is classed as G5IV/V, though since we find a $\Delta M_V$ of around 0.1 magnitudes, we believe the star to be a dwarf. The metallicity of HD68402 is found to be +0.29 dex. A signal with a semi-amplitude of over 50 was found at a period ($\sim$1100 days) similar to that in the HD9174 data. The MMSE shows two long period troughs for this data, with the detected signal found to be the second trough behind a slightly stronger trough close to 3000 days. The signal was found to have an eccentricity of 0.03, but to within the limits it can be considered as circular.

Given the mass of HD68402 is 1.12 , we compute a minimum mass of just over 3  for the planet. The phase folded velocities for the planetary signal are shown in Fig. \[phased3\]. Since the log-Bayesian evidence is 49.4, strongly confirming the existence of a signal, and it was also found in the MMSE analysis, and by a manual fitting approach, the solution is significantly well constrained, even though there is a small gap in the phase folded curve.

HD72892
-------

This G5V star is located at a distance of 73 pc from the Sun and has a metallicity of +0.25 dex. The star is also very inactive (log$R'_{\rm{HK}}$ = -5.02) and a slow rotator (= 2.5 ) representing an excellent target to search for planets. We have detected a signal with a period of nearly 40 days and semi-amplitude of 320 . The signal has a log Bayesian evidence value of 903.0, confirming the signal at very high significance. Given the S/N ratio between the signal amplitude and the HARPS and CORALIE uncertainties, we fully expected a large evidence ratio to confirm the nature of the signal. The signal is also clearly apparent in the MMSE periodogram as the strongest trough, adding to its reality.

We find a mass for the star of 1.02 , leading to a planetary minimum mass of 5.5 . This super-Jupiter also has appreciable eccentricity, at the level of 0.4, and the final Keplerian model to the phase folded velocities are shown in Fig. \[phased4\]. We note that the solution gives rise to a transit probability for this star of 1.6%, a relatively high likelihood of transit for such a planet-star separation.

HD128356
--------

HD128356 is the coolest star we have included in the CHEPS sample and is classed as a main sequence star by Hipparcos (K3V). We find the star to have a \[Fe/H\] of almost +0.2 dex, and with a $\Delta M_V$ of 0.55, it may be a subgiant star, or at least in the process of evolving onto the subgiant branch.

Using our Bayesian approach we detected a signal with a semi-amplitude of 37 and period approaching 300 days that had a log-Bayesian evidence ratio of 144.5. The star is found to be a very slow rotator, having a of only 1.3$\pm$0.2 , and with a low chromospheric activity of log$R'_{\rm{HK}}$ of -4.8. We note that this activity level is significantly lower than the one reported in @jenkins11a, due to an updated $B-V$ colour used here. The colour used in Jenkins et al. was drawn from the Hipparcos catalogue ($B-V =$ 0.685), yet the Tycho-2 catalogue magnitudes ([@hog00]) give a colour $>1$, agreeing with what is expected for a mid-K star. Even if the star was moderately active, we would still expect the jitter to be low since mid-K type stars are not as $Doppler-noisy$ as earlier type stars for a given activity level (e.g. [@isaacson10]). This, combined with the very slow rotation of the star, indicates that it is likely a signal with a peak-to-peak amplitude of nearly 80 is not caused by modulated activity effects, especially with a period close to 300 days and eccentricity of 0.8.

The signal detected in our MCMC analysis is also clearly apparent in the MMSE, being the deepest trough, despite the high eccentricity. However, an additional trough at a much longer period is also approaching a similar level of significance. There is also no apparent correlations with the activity indicators, as discussed in the next section, nor are there any detected periods in the activity measurements. Given the multi-method signal detection and lack of activity correlations, we can confidently conclude that the signal we detected has a Doppler origin, and since the mass of HD128356 was found to be around 0.65 , the measured minimum mass for the planet is 0.9 .

HD143361
--------

The star HD143361 was previously shown to have a planet with a period of 1057 days ([@minniti09]; [@jenkins09]) and we have been conducting further reconnaissance to search for additional companions and to better constrain the orbital characteristics of the previously detected planet. The host star is a chromospherically quiet (log$R'_{\rm{HK}}$ = -5.12 dex) and metal-rich (\[Fe/H\] = +0.22 dex) G6V star, located at a distance of 66 pc.

Our Bayesian search found a signal with a period of 1046 days with a Bayesian evidence of 491.9, relating to a planet orbiting the star with a minimum mass of 3.5  (Fig. \[phased6\]). From the MMSE periodogram the signal is clearly detected, being one of the most significant periodogram detection’s in our sample. The final parameters are in good agreement with those published in Minniti et al. and Jenkins et al. The orbital period found here is lower by 40 days ($\sim$4%) compared to that published in Minniti et al. but only lower by 11 days ($\sim$1%) to that published in Jenkins et al., and both are in agreement within the quoted uncertainties, which are a factor of 28.1 and 6.3 lower here than in those previous two works, respectively. Although in agreement within the quoted uncertainties, our semi-amplitude is higher than those published in the previous two works, by 9.1 and 7.1 , respectively. No strong evidence for a second companion was found in this system with the current data set.

HD147873
--------

The star HD147873 is the earliest type star in this sample of planet-hosts and is reported as a G1V star in the Hipparcos catalogue. Given its distance of 105 pc, the star is a little brighter than 8 magnitudes in $V$. The star also appears to have a solar metallicity (\[Fe/H\] = -0.03 dex), is extremely inactive (log$R'_{\rm{HK}}$ = -5.27 dex), and rotates at the level of nearly 6 . We find a Y2 evolutionary track mass for HD147873 of 1.38 .

The Bayesian search for signals in the Doppler data for this star detected two strong periodic signals with semi-amplitudes of 170 and 50 for HD147873$b$ and $c$ respectively. The periods of the signals were found to be at 117 days for the stronger signal and 492 days for the weaker of the two signals. The log-Bayesian evidences we found for these signals were 1131.5 and 145.2. The MMSE periodogram also detected both these signals rather easily; the second becoming detectable in the residuals of the data once the first signal was removed, as shown in Appendix \[appendix0\]. We find planetary minimum masses of 5.1 and 2.3  for the short and longer period planets, respectively. Both Keplerian fits to the data are shown in the upper and middle plots in Fig. \[phased7\]. The inner planet is also only one of two in this sample that has a transit probability of over 2%, a value that encourages the search for transits from intermediate period planets.

Given we have discovered two giant planets with a semimajor axis difference of only 0.84 AU between them, we decided to test if the system architecture was dynamically stable. We ran Gragg-Burlich-Stoer integrations in the Systemic Console ([@meschiari09]) over a period of 10 Myrs to study the evolution of the orbits of both planets. We find the eccentricity of the orbits librate with a period of around 12000 years but the system itself remains dynamically stable across this timespan. Systems with multiple giant planets are interesting laboratories for dynamical studies and this system may warrant further detailed dynamical study, especially if more massive companions are discovered with the addition of more data.

HD152079
--------

HD152079 is classed as a G6 main sequence star in the Hipparcos catalogue and our previous work found it to be inactive (=-4.99 dex) and metal-rich (+0.16 dex in \[Fe/H\]), which may explain the 0.5 magnitude $\Delta M_V$. We found the mass of the star to be 1.1 . This is also one of the stars in this sample with a previously announced planet candidate detected in orbit ([@arriagada10]).

A signal with a period of 2900 days and semi-amplitude of 31 was detected in the Doppler data of HD152079. The log-Bayesian evidence ratio was found to be 99.1, highly significant, and the signal was found to have an eccentricity over 0.5. It is likely for this data set that the moderate eccentricity of the signal is hampering its detection in the MMSE periodogram. In addition, there is the presence of a linear trend in the data that indicates there is a long period secondary companion to this star, and since linear trends are not considered in the MMSE model, the interference here could also be confusing the algorithm. Yet there is a fairly strong trough showing at a period of $\sim$1400 days, which is close to half the Bayesian detected signal, and could be related to the Doppler signal, or an additional companion that is at a 2:1 resonance site, which could also explain the eccentric shape of the one planet signal ([@marcy01]; [@anglada-escude10]). In any case, we found the minimum mass of HD152079$b$ to be 2.2  and the Keplerian model fit is shown in Fig. \[phased8\]. These values are in good agreement with those presented in Arriagada et al., except the precision quoted here is much higher. For instance, the period of 2097$\pm$930 days quoted in their work has been constrained to 2899$\pm$52 days here, a factor of 18 increase in precision and pushing the planet’s orbit upwards by nearly 900 days. This precision increase is also mirrored directly in the semi-amplitude precision, lowering it from 58$\pm$18 to 31.3$\pm$1.1 .

HD154672
--------

This star has a Hipparcos classification of G3IV, confirmed by our measurement of 0.94 magnitudes from the main sequence. Part of the elevation from the main sequence can also be explained by the metallicity enrichment of 0.11 dex. The star is also a slow rotator, having a of 2.2 and was found to be very chromospherically inactive (= -5.12 dex). The position on the HR-diagram gives rise to a mass of 1.08 .

A signal with a period of 164 days and semi-amplitude of 176 was found in the Doppler timeseries of HD154672, with a log-Bayesian evidence ratio of 1709.2, the most significant signal in this data set. The signal is also clearly apparent in the MMSE periodogram, the period trough being significantly stronger than any other periods across the parameter space. The eccentricity of the signal was found to be 0.6, giving rise to a planet with a minimum mass of nearly 5 . The values we find are in good agreement with the values previously published for this planet in @lopez-morales08, with the period agreeing to within one hour and the minimum mass being slightly lower here by only 0.23 , but well within the 1$\sigma$ uncertainties. Given the inclusion of higher quality data in this analysis, we find the jitter for this star to be  2 , a factor two lower than that quoted in Lopez-Morales et al., demonstrating that a significant fraction of their jitter was instrumental noise. The model fit is shown in Fig. \[phased9\].

Our search for additional planets in the combined data sets did not yield any positive results, therefore no firm evidence exists for any additional companions in this system. If the eccentricity from this planet is genuine and not due to the super-position of mixed signals from other giant planets in resonant orbits (see [@anglada-escude10]; [@wittenmyer12]), then the transit probability for this object is found to be the highest in the current sample of intermediate and long period planets, at 2.5%.

HD165155
--------

The Hipparcos catalogue classifies HD165155 as a G8 main sequence star, however with a elevation above the main sequence of 1.4, this star can be considered as a subgiant. The star is located at a distance of 65 pc, and from spectroscopy we have found a  activity index of -5.18 dex, a rotational velocity of 1.5 , and a \[Fe/H\] metallicity index of 0.09 dex. Comparison to Y2 evolutionary models yield a mass for the star of 1.02 .

A signal has been detected in the radial velocity data for HD165155 with a period of 435 days and a semi-amplitude of 76 . The log-Bayesian evidence for the signal was found to be 168.9, securely above the significance threshold. The eccentricity was found to be 0.20 and therefore the final minimum mass of the companion is calculated as 2.9   (Fig. \[phased10\]). A two-planet model search produced statistically significant evidence for a second signal in the data, however given the limited number of measurements we could not confirm a unique secondary signal at this time. No statistically significant troughs were detected in the MMSE periodogram for this star, which may be due to the presence of a secondary signal that is interfering with the primary signal. Indeed, the inclusion of a strong linear trend was necessary to constrain this signal, and since linear trends are not included in the MMSE modeling approach, this trend is likely the reason why the MMSE approach failed to detect this signal.

HD224538
--------

The main Hipparcos catalogue lists HD224538 as a F9 dwarf or subgiant located at a distance of 78 pc. With a calculated $\Delta M_V$ of 0.63 and a high overabundance of metals in the star (\[Fe/H\]=+0.27 dex), the possibility remains that this star is either on the main sequence or crossing into the subgiant branch. The star is both a slow rotator (= 3.9 ) and chromospherically inactive (= -4.99 dex). From comparisons to Y2 isomass tracks on a HR-diagram we found a mass of 1.34 for HD224538.

Our Bayesian algorithm found a signal with a period of 1189 days, a semi-amplitude of 107 , and an eccentricity of 0.46, shown in Fig. \[phased12\]. The log-Bayesian evidence ratio for the signal was found to be highly significant at 391.0. The MMSE periodogram also clearly detected this signal. Therefore a planet with a minimum mass of 6.0  is found to be orbiting this star. This is reminiscent of the gas giant planet 14 Her $b$ that has a broadly similar mass, period, and eccentricity ([@butler03]) and such planets appear to be rare. Even though 14 Her is an early K-dwarf star it does have a super solar metallicity (+0.43$\pm$0.08 dex) similar to HD224538, likely necessary to form such high-mass planets. No additional statistically significant signals were found in the current data set.

Line Modulation Tests
---------------------

Although these stars are very inactive and slowly rotating and the Doppler signals we have detected are generally very large compared to the uncertainties (most are significantly larger than 20 ), it is useful to rule out line modulations that could originate from stellar activity as the source of the variations. The activity parameters employed are the calciumiiHK line doublet, the bisector span (BIS), the CCF FWHM, the $H\alpha$ line, and the He I D3 line. These indices were selected since they have previously been shown to be good tracers of stellar magnetic activity, and/or spectral line modulations (e.g. [@queloz01]; [@robertson14]; [@santos10]). In Fig. \[activity\] we show four of the tests we have carried out to rule out these modulations as the source of the detected radial velocity shifts for the star HD128356, originally believed to be the most active star in the sample due to the erroneous $B-V$ colour. We note that we do not show the CCF FWHM test for this star since there is large variations with a few outliers, but no correlation exists.

In the upper plot of Fig. \[activity\] we show how the BIS values vary as a function of the radial velocity datasets. The BIS values for HARPS were taken from the HARPS-DRS and measured following the method explained in @queloz01. The CORALIE BIS values were calculated using a similar procedure. No significant correlation between the radial velocities and the BIS measurements are found and we highlight this by showing the best fit linear trend to the data. The unweighted Pearson rank correlation coefficient has a value of 0.23, signifying a weak correlation, however when the correlation is weighted by the measurement uncertainties on the radial velocity and BIS values, the coefficient drops to 0.11, or no evidence at all for any correlation.

We also searched for a correlation between the chromospheric activity $S$-indices and the velocities as a second useful discriminant that activity is not the source of the observed variations. The measurement of these $S$-indices for HARPS was briefly discussed in @jenkins13a and therefore here we only discuss the CORALIE activity measurement method in Appendix \[appendix\_act\]. In any case the method for both is similar, except for HARPS we use the extracted 1D order-merged spectrum, whereas for CORALIE spectra we perform the calculations using the extracted 2D order-per-order spectrum, similar to the method discussed in @jenkins06.

The second plot in Fig. \[activity\] shows these chromospheric activity $S$-indices as a function of the radial velocity measurements and no apparent correlation is found. The best unweighted linear fit is shown by the solid line and confirms the lack of any correlation between the two parameters. The correlation coefficient also confirms this since an unweighted $r$ coefficient of -0.09, similar to the weighted BIS, is not statistically significant, dropping even lower when considering the weights.

The lower two plots in the figure show the linear correlations against the measured H$\alpha$ and He I D3 activity indicators, respectively. These indices were calculated following the methods discussed in @santos10. For both of these indices, no significant correlation is found when combining the CORALIE and HARPS data. Some moderate correlation between the He I index and the velocities is seen, with an unweighted $r$ correlation coefficient of -0.64 for the HARPS only measurements, decreasing to -0.39 when the CORALIE measurements are added. Judging by the lower panel in the figure, no striking correlation is apparent, given what would be expected for this level of correlation, and once the measurement uncertainties are included to weight the correlation coefficient, the value drops significantly to be in agreement with zero correlation. In fact, we can see that the majority of the data are uncorrelated, from radial velocities between -25 - +55 , with only a few offset data points clustered around -40 driving the correlation. As an aside, if we apply the relationships in @saar and @hatzes02 to calculate the spot coverage expected for a star with the rotational period of HD128356, in order to produce a radial velocity amplitude in agreement with that observed here, then $\sim$5% of disk spot coverage is required, which would likely exhibit as photometric variations that are not observed (see below).

Although the activity indicators for the other stars reported in this work show no evidence for any strong linear correlations, measured by the Pearson Rank correlation coefficient, against the radial velocities, we report the moderately correlated data sets ($|0.5| \ge r \ge |0.75|$). For HD48265 the HARPS BIS values correlate with the radial velocities with a $r$ value of 0.59$\pm$0.25, indicating some moderate correlation between the two parameters. We also note that both the H$\alpha$ and He I indices have values of 0.47 and -0.41, respectively, yet there are large parts of parameter space that are under-sampled by including only the HARPS data alone. When adding in the CORALIE measurements we find these values decrease to 0.22, 0.12, and -0.33 for the three quantities respectively, with uncertainties of $\pm$0.16, indicating that these correlations are not the source of the velocity signal for this star.

The star HD68402 shows HARPS velocity correlations with the BIS and He I indices with $r$ values of 0.79 and 0.52, respectively. We note that there are only five HARPS data points for this star so no result here can be deemed significant. Furthermore, once the CORALIE values are included we find values of 0.01 and 0.12 for these parameters respectively. When including the CORALIE measurements we find a moderate correlation appears between the velocities and the CCF FWHM measurements ($r =$ 0.52$\pm$0.23). Again there appears no significant correlations in the analysis.

Another star with a limited number of HARPS spectra (eight measurements) that give rise to an apparent moderate correlation between the radial velocities and activity indicators is HD72892. The HARPS CCF FWHM and He I measurements have Pearson rank correlation coefficients of 0.58 and 0.73, respectively, with uncertainties of $\pm$0.38. When the CORALIE measurements are added to the HARPS data we find this correlation becomes insignificant, with values of only -0.47 and 0.10, respectively, and uncertainties of $\pm$0.19. However, the $H\alpha$ indices now exhibit a moderate correlation with the velocities ($r =$ 0.57). The signal for this star has an amplitude of nearly 320 and a period of $\sim$40 days. Although 40 days is a plausible rotational period for this type of very inactive G5 dwarf star, the fact that it is so inactive indicates that such a large signal would be difficult to produce through spot rotation. In fact, if we calculate the spot coverage as above, then 20-25% of disk spot coverage is required, which can be ruled out based on the photometric stability and the low  measurement.

For HD152079 the HARPS $H\alpha$ index correlates with the velocities with a correlation coefficient $r$ of 0.66$\pm$0.24, although none of the the other indicators show any evidence for correlations, and when adding the CORALIE data, the correlation coefficient decreases to a value of only 0.47$\pm$0.17. We note that the variations in the measurements are only changing at the few $\times$10$^{-3}$ level, from 0.203 to 0.208 in our HARPS $H\alpha$ index.

The star HD165155 shows a correlation between the velocities and the HARPS CCF FWHM with a value of -0.66$\pm$0.23, although with a large spread. Addition of the CORALIE CCF FWHM decreases the value to 0.12$\pm$0.17, rendering this result insignificant.

HD224538 shows moderate correlation between the velocities and the $H\alpha$ indices at the level of 0.69$\pm$0.22 in the HARPS data, and at the level of 0.27$\pm$0.15 when the CORALIE values are included. Again the variation is only at the few $\times$10$^{-3}$ level, which is likely to be insignificant.

The periodogram analysis for each of the five activity indicators did not reveal any significant periods that could explain the detected signals in any of the stars considered here (see Appendix \[appendix5\]), however a few features do appear. For the star HD72892 there are emerging peaks in the periodograms of the BIS, FWHM, $S$ and He I indices at periods between 11-13 days, and although this region is distinct from the detected planetary signal, these may be linked to the rotational period of the star, however there is a peak in the window function at 22.5 days that could be giving rise to a peak at the first harmonic in these indices. For HD128356, the moderately active star, both the BIS and FWHM timeseries show peaks that agree with a period around 1250 days that has no counterpart in the window function, meaning this could be a magnetic cycle, but it is far from the detected Doppler signal period. HD147873 does show a unique peak close to the lower period signal in the radial velocities in the He I indices with a period of around 120 days, yet the peak is not significant. The H$\alpha$ indices show an emerging peak with a period of $\sim$70 days as the strongest signal for HD165155 that could point to the rotation period for this star but there is a window function peak emerging at 63.5 days, that is likely unrelated to this peak, but is worthy of note. In any case, neither of these are related to the detected Doppler signal in the radial velocities. Finally, the star HD224538 shows evidence for two peaks in the periodograms of the BIS and H$\alpha$ indices that are in good agreement with signals with periods of 20 days, which again could be a good candidate for the rotational period for this star, however the fifth strongest peak in the window function is found to be at 19 days, meaning there is a non-insignificant probability that this peak is being boosted by the sampling.

Photometric Analysis
--------------------

We decided to photometrically search for a secure rotational period for these stars by employing frequency analyses of the $V$-band All Sky Automated Survey (ASAS; [@pojmanski97]) photometric data. We have previously shown that such analyses can shed light on the rotational periods of planet-host stars and/or short period and long period magnetic cycles (e.g. [@anglada-escude13]; [@jenkins14b]). We tend to focus on the best quality data, ASAS grade A or B using the smallest ASAS apertures that are best for point sources, and typical baselines cover $\sim$9 years at a sampling cadence of $\sim$3 days. Out of all the 11 planet-hosts considered in this work, six show evidence for a significant rotational period or long period magnetic cycle in the photometry, and these are summarised below, with particular focus paid to HD165155.

The six stars showing evidence for a photometric signal in the ASAS timeseries are HD68402, HD147873, HD152079, HD154672, HD165155, and HD224538, and the Lomb-Scargle periodograms for these six stars are shown in Appendix \[appendix4\]. We do not show the periodograms for the remaining six stars since they exhibit no significant frequency peaks. The periodogram for HD68402 shows two strong peaks emerging at periods of 312 days and 2000 days. Neither of these signals reside at periods close to the detected Doppler signal in the radial velocities, however their strength suggests there may be some long term magnetic cycle at play within this star.

The stars HD147873, HD152079, HD154672, and HD224538 all show evidence for long period modulated spot activity, with periods at the extremities of the data timeseries and periodogram sampling $\sim$5000–10000 days. These could be real long term spot cycles or they could be sampling features to due to the limited baselines of the data sets. However, none of these features appear to coincide with the detected radial velocity signal periods, or harmonics there-of. HD154672 has a velocity signal detected at just over 160 days, far from any long period magnetic cycle, whereas the signal in the HD224538 velocities has a period of a few thousand days, which could agree with any potential photometric signal in the ASAS data that is not due to the limited data baseline. However, our analysis never indicated any correlations were evident between the radial velocities and the activity indicators for this star, and its inactive nature, along with the strength of the radial velocity signal ($K =$ 110 ), would make an activity origin unlikely for a star of this type. The evidence from these analyses points to the origin of the detected signals as being due the gravitational influence of orbiting planets.

The star HD152079 has a detected signal in the velocities with a period of a few thousand days, which is approaching the regime where a long period magnetic cycle could be present due to the ASAS photometric periodogram, yet the amplitude of this signal is a little over 30 for this very inactive star. The structure of the long period signals in the power spectrum of these stars are very similar, which argues that the frequencies emerge due to the sampling baseline. A further secondary peak exists in the photometric periodogram for this star at $\sim$830 days. Since this is too short to be associated with the signal in the radial velocities, it is not the origin of that signal but could be a possible sampled magnetic cycle. In any case, the nature of the radial velocity signal is likely Doppler and from an orbiting planetary mass candidate.

We note that for HD147873 and HD224538, additional peaks arise in the periodograms at periods that could be in the range of rotational periods for stars with these types of rotational velocities and stellar radii, or could relate to additional magnetic cycles. For HD147873, there is a strong peak at a period of 29.5 days, very close to the lunar cycle, and since this period was found to arise in other ASAS timeseries, it is likely this is a sampling alias and not the star’s rotational period. For HD224538, the next strongest peak is located at 385 days, with again the 29.5 day period being detected. The 385 day peak is within a small cluster of peaks that surround the Earth’s orbital period, therefore it is likely this is another sampling alias. Hence, it is unlikely that we have made a significant detection of the rotational period for any of these stars, with only tentative detections of long period magnetic cycles.

Finally, we discuss the photometric analysis for the star HD165155 independently, since there is an indication of a peak in the periodogram that is close to the period of the detected signal in the RV measurements. Given that the signal is rather strong, it is unlikely that activity is the source of the signal at this type of period. We also note that the orbital separation is too large to produce star-planet interactions that could cause any photometric signal. From the ASAS periodogram in Appendix \[appendix4\] we can see that again a long period signal emerges, but after this signal, there are two fairly strong peaks with periods of 454 and 344 days. The 454 day signal is the second strongest after the long period peak and it closely matches the period of the signal in the radial velocities at 452 days, indicating the signal could arise from activity or pulsations. As mentioned above, no similar periodicities were found in the activity indicators and since the Hipparcos photometry for this star only consists of 67 measurements, with a scatter in the data of 0.019 magnitudes, no significant periodicity was found in this data either. We also note that by removing the long period trend with periods of 10000 days or more removes the signal at 454 days, signifying it is linked to this long period trend and therefore likely not a true magnetic cycle that could induce such a radial velocity signal as we observe.

There exists a small possibility that the detected radial velocity signal is not of Doppler origin and is due to line asymmetries from stellar activity on this subgiant star, even though the existence of this photometric period is difficult to causally connect to the origin of the radial velocity signal without corroborating periodicities in the spectral activity indicators. Without garnering more data, and since the detected photometric peak in the periodogram could be an alias that is associated with a longer period signal or the window function of the data, we still consider the radial velocity signal as due to an orbiting companion. If, on the other hand, the signal in the velocities is genuinely of astrophysical origin, this data set would serve as a warning when trying to understand the origin of signals in radial velocity timeseries of subgiant stars, even when the signal amplitude is relatively large, and there are no correlations or periodicities in the spectral activity indicators. Thorough searches of existing photometric data should always be performed, where possible, to help to confirm the reality of proposed planetary systems.

  ----------------------------------------- ------------------- ----------------- --------------- ------------------- ---------------- -----------------
          Orbital period $P$ (days)             1179$\pm$34       780.3$\pm$4.6     1103$\pm$33    39.475$\pm$0.004    298.2$\pm$1.6    1046.2$\pm$3.2
        Velocity amplitude $K$ (m/s)           20.8$\pm$2.2       27.7$\pm$1.2     54.7$\pm$5.3      318.4$\pm$4.5      36.9$\pm$1.2     72.1$\pm$1.0
              Eccentricity $e$                 0.12$\pm$0.05      0.08$\pm$0.05    0.03$\pm$0.06    0.423$\pm$0.006    0.57$\pm$0.08    0.193$\pm$0.015
               $\omega$ (rad)                  1.78$\pm$0.66       6.0$\pm$2.4      0.3$\pm$2.3     6.010$\pm$0.014    1.47$\pm$0.08     4.21$\pm$0.06
                 M$_0$ (rad)                    3.5$\pm$1.3        4.9$\pm$1.4      6.0$\pm$2.2     2.714$\pm$0.010     3.1$\pm$0.7      3.21$\pm$0.14
                     ()                        1.11$\pm$0.14      1.47$\pm$0.12    3.07$\pm$0.35     5.45$\pm$0.37     0.89$\pm$0.07     3.48$\pm$0.24
           Semimajor axis $a$ (AU)             2.20$\pm$0.09      1.81$\pm$0.07    2.18$\pm$0.09    0.228$\pm$0.008    0.87$\pm$0.03     1.98$\pm$0.07
         $\gamma_{\rm{HARPS}}$ (m/s)           -7.2$\pm$1.4       -1.5$\pm$1.6     -34.2$\pm$8.2     -37.8$\pm$1.7      -0.1$\pm$1.9     -1.2$\pm$0.8
        $\gamma_{\rm{CORALIE}}$ (m/s)          -1.6$\pm$3.0       -4.3$\pm$2.6     -10.6$\pm$4.6     48.7$\pm$3.2       9.4$\pm$2.7       3.4$\pm$2.2
         $\gamma_{\rm{MIKE}}$ (m/s)                  –            -3.5$\pm$1.4           –                 –                 –           -26.6$\pm$1.2
         $\sigma_{\rm{HARPS}}$ (m/s)            1.8$\pm$0.6        6.0$\pm$0.6      1.7$\pm$0.9       2.2$\pm$0.7       3.9$\pm$0.7       2.3$\pm$0.6
        $\sigma_{\rm{CORALIE}}$ (m/s)           2.2$\pm$1.0        2.7$\pm$1.1      2.0$\pm$1.0       2.0$\pm$1.0       2.1$\pm$1.0       1.8$\pm$0.9
         $\sigma_{\rm{MIKE}}$ (m/s)                  –             2.8$\pm$0.8           –                 –                 –            2.8$\pm$0.8
   $\dot{\gamma}$ \[ms$^{-1}$year$^{-1}$\]           –                  –                –                 –                 –                 –
                   $P_{T}$                         0.3%               0.5%             0.2%              1.6%               0.4%             0.2%
               N$_{\rm{Obs}}$                       29                 57               20                32                 60               80
               $\ln B(k,k-1)$                      42.1               103.1            49.4              903.0             144.5             491.9
                                                                                                                                       
          Orbital period $P$ (days)          116.596$\pm$0.023   491.54$\pm$0.79    2899$\pm$52    163.967$\pm$0.009   434.5$\pm$2.1    1189.1$\pm$5.1
        Velocity amplitude $K$ (m/s)           171.5$\pm$1.2      47.9$\pm$1.7     31.3$\pm$1.1      176.3$\pm$0.7      75.8$\pm$3.0     107.0$\pm$2.4
              Eccentricity $e$                0.207$\pm$0.013     0.23$\pm$0.03    0.52$\pm$0.02    0.600$\pm$0.004    0.20$\pm$0.03    0.464$\pm$0.022
               $\omega$ (rad)                  1.40$\pm$0.05      0.73$\pm$0.20    5.67$\pm$0.06     4.63$\pm$0.01      3.7$\pm$0.2      0.40$\pm$0.03
                 M$_0$ (rad)                   1.65$\pm$0.07      3.09$\pm$0.20     0.8$\pm$0.8      3.60$\pm$0.02      0.9$\pm$0.8       0.3$\pm$0.3
                     ()                        5.14$\pm$0.34      2.30$\pm$0.18    2.18$\pm$0.17     4.73$\pm$0.32     2.89$\pm$0.23     5.97$\pm$0.42
           Semimajor axis $a$ (AU)            0.522$\pm$0.018     1.36$\pm$0.05    3.98$\pm$0.15     0.59$\pm$0.02     1.13$\pm$0.04     2.28$\pm$0.08
         $\gamma_{\rm{HARPS}}$ (m/s)           59.0$\pm$1.2             –          -37.9$\pm$7.0      5.2$\pm$0.7      -59.6$\pm$18.7    -15.3$\pm$1.5
        $\gamma_{\rm{CORALIE}}$ (m/s)           5.4$\pm$2.2             –          -44.8$\pm$8.5     -44.6$\pm$2.0     -87.7$\pm$20.1    27.0$\pm$2.7
         $\gamma_{\rm{MIKE}}$ (m/s)            37.6$\pm$3.1             –          -13.6$\pm$6.8     28.2$\pm$1.2            –           55.9$\pm$4.3
         $\sigma_{\rm{HARPS}}$ (m/s)            2.6$\pm$0.7             –           1.5$\pm$0.6       2.1$\pm$0.5       5.8$\pm$0.6       2.9$\pm$0.6
        $\sigma_{\rm{CORALIE}}$ (m/s)           1.9$\pm$0.9             –           2.0$\pm$1.0       2.2$\pm$1.0       3.7$\pm$1.2       2.0$\pm$1.0
         $\sigma_{\rm{MIKE}}$ (m/s)             2.4$\pm$1.0             –           2.7$\pm$0.8       3.6$\pm$0.7            –            5.2$\pm$0.7
   $\dot{\gamma}$ \[ms$^{-1}$year$^{-1}$\]     2.94$\pm$0.68            –          1.72$\pm$0.47           –           4.00$\pm$1.19           –
                   $P_{T}$                         2.3%               0.7%             0.1%              2.5%               0.4%             0.2%
               N$_{\rm{Obs}}$                       66                  –               50                72                 38               50
               $\ln B(k,k-1)$                     1131.5              145.2            99.1             1709.2             168.9             391.0
  ----------------------------------------- ------------------- ----------------- --------------- ------------------- ---------------- -----------------

The uncertainties on the   and semimajor axis consider the uncertainties on our stellar mass estimate of 10%.\
The $\gamma$ offset is the value after subtracting off the mean of the data set.\
The $\sigma$ terms parameterise the excess noise in our model fits, aka jitter.\
The ln B(k,k-1) are generally the 1-planet models (e.g. B(1,0)) except for HD147873 which is a 2-planet model (B(2,1)).\
$P_{T}$ is each planet’s transit probability.\
N$_{\rm{Obs}}$ are the total number of radial velocities per target star.\

Planet Population Distributions {#results}
===============================

The high metallicity selection bias in our program means we are generally targeting gas giant planets. The working hypothesis being that if such planets are formed through core accretion processes, then large cores can form quickly due to the enrichment of the proto-planetary disk, which gives the planetesimals sufficient time to accrete gaseous material to reach large masses after they cross the critical core mass limit of around 10 ([@mizuno80]).

Mass Function
-------------

The observed mass distribution is a key observational constraint for planet formation models, a constraint which has previously been fit by smooth power law trends with indices around -1 (e.g. [@butler06]; [@lopez12]). In Fig. \[new\_func\] we show the results of applying an exponential function to the data, which we found to be more suited to the current distribution of exoplanets that have been detected over a wide range in stellar mass

$$f(m) = A \times e^{msin(i)} + B$$

where $f(m)$ is the model function that we fit to the data and $A$ and $B$ are the scaling parameter and offset of the model that are left as free parameters to be found following a maximum likelihood procedure with the following Gaussian likelihood function:

$$\mathcal{L}(\Theta) = -0.5 \times \log(2\pi) - \sum_i \log(\sigma_{t,i}) - \frac{\sum_i (y_i-f(m)_i)^2}{\sigma_{t,i}^2}$$

$$\sigma_{t,i} = \sqrt{\sigma_{p,i}^2 + \sigma_{e,i}^2}$$

Here $\mathcal{L}$ is the likelihood function for parameters $\Theta$, $y$ is the observed data (mass function histogram points) for all $i$ histogram points, and $\sigma_p$ and $\sigma_e$ are the Poisson uncertainties and any excess uncertainty for each of the values, respectively. This procedure finds the following values for the modeled parameters 0.89$\pm$0.03, 0.030$^{+0.004}_{-0.003}$, and 0.034$^{+0.009}_{-0.002}$ for $A$, $B$, and $\sigma_e$, respectively. The uncertainties on these parameters were determined using a Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) procedure in Python, employing the emcee numerical package ([@foreman13]). We used 100 walkers and ran chains of 10000 steps in length, with a 1000 step burn-in, which relates to a final chain length of 900,000 steps, with a final mean acceptance rate of 49%. The parameter values we measure are insensitive to small changes in the bin size used in the histogram, which we set to be 0.5, a value that allows enough samples in most of the bins to reflect the smoothly varying distribution.

At the right of Fig. \[new\_func\] we show the parameter extent probed by the chains, where we used uniform priors for the parameters except the excess uncertainty, where we employed a Jeffries prior where the probability is proportional to 1/$\sigma$. The distribution of the parameters are well confined to the region around the maximum likelihood value for each, showing the model we put forward is an acceptable representation of the current exoplanet mass function. We note that the $A$ and $B$ parameters follow Gaussian distributions, whereas the excess noise parameter is more like a skewed Gaussian or Poisson distribution, where the lower 1$\sigma$ credibility limit is found to be close to the maximum likelihood value of 0.03. In any case, it seems that the mass function appears to be fairly well described by an exponential function.

Mass-Metallicity Functions
--------------------------

As Fig. \[met\_mass\] shows, we tested if there was any metallicity dependence in the mass function. In order to test this we split the sample into three metallicity bins, a high metallicity bin (\[Fe/H\]$\ge$+0.2 dex), an intermediate metallicity bin (-0.1$\le$\[Fe/H\]$<$+0.2 dex), and a low metallicity bin (\[Fe/H\]$<$-0.1 dex). These bin sizes allowed a useful number of samples in each bin to statistically probe the distributions.

Metallicity splitting gives us probabilities (D-statistics) from two-tailed KS-tests of 8% (0.165) that the high metallicity bin and the low metallicity bin are drawn from the same parent population, and 6% (0.161) that the intermediate metallicity planet-hosts and the low metallicity planet hosts are also drawn from the same population. By combining the high metallicity bin and the low metallicity bin values and comparing those to the intermediate metallicity bin, the probability is essentially the same, only dropping the D-statistic by 0.01, with a probability of only 6% that the two populations are statistically similar. To perform this test we decided to remove the lowest mass planets from the metal-poor and intermediate-metallicity samples since @jenkins13a shows that there appears to be a correlation between the mass and metallicity in the low-mass regime. Therefore, we only consider planets with minimum masses above 0.0184  as this is the lowest mass planet in the high metallicity sample, neglecting the exceptional case of the planet orbiting Alpha Centauri B ([@dumusque12]) that @hatzes13 and @rajpaul15 claim may be attributed to other phenomena like stellar activity or sampling ghosts.

In order to firm up these statistics we also ran the samples through the Anderson-Darling (AD) test, which generally tends to be more sensitive than the standard KS test since it gives more statistical weight to the tails of the distribution. From these tests we found p-values of 2% and 5% for the comparison between the high metallicity and low-metallicity samples, and between the intermediate and low-metallicity samples, respectively. This is in good agreement with the KS test results, indicating that there is a correlation between mass and metallicity, whereby metal-rich stars produce many more Jupiter-mass planets compared to super-Jupiters, but metal-poorer stars produce a higher fraction of super-Jupiters than Jupiters compared to the metal-rich population. However, the current sample of host star properties were not drawn from a homogeneous source and therefore the heterogeneous nature of the data could be influencing the results.

To try to circumvent this problem, we decided to search for our sample of exoplanet-hosts in the SWEET-Cat catalogue ([@santos13]). The SWEET-Cat is a project that plans to eventually contain all exoplanet host star properties like and metallicity that have been measured using high resolution spectroscopy in a homogeneous fashion. We were able to find 93% of our sample in the SWEET-Cat, but some of these were not measured homogeneously. From this sample we reran the KS tests and found probabilities of 9.1% that the high and low metallicity bins are drawn from the same parent population and 13.8% that the intermediate and low metallicity bins are drawn from the same distribution.

A further step that was taken was to remove even more information but improve the homogeneity of the sample. We selected only those stars with a homogeneous flag of 1 in the SWEET-Cat, which means that the properties of these stars were measured using the same general methodology. This selection resulted in a 20% loss of information but still contained a total sample size of 358 planet-hosts, however the low metallicity bin only contained 64 stars, whereas the high and intermediate bins have sample sizes of 131 and 163 objects, respectively. The KS test probabilities are now significantly lower than the full sample, having values of 38.0% and 52.0% that the high and intermediate mass functions are statistically similar to that of the low metallicity bin. These tests likely show that currently there are no statistically significant correlations between planetary mass and the metallicity of their host stars, as claimed by @mortier12, and the overabundance of Jupiter’s is not due to the enhanced formation of such planets as a function of metallicity. We did not run the SWEET-Cat samples through the AD test since the results were shown to be very similar to the KS tests for the full sample.

Other Observational Properties
------------------------------

Within the period-mass plane some features can be seen in the metallicities of exoplanet host stars. An examination of the left plot in Fig. \[properties\] reveals that there is a broad mix of metallicities for the gas giant planets and the planets we publish here are located predominantly in the upper right quadrant of the plot, with only two having periods below 100 days.

### Host Star Metallicities

It appears that the lowest mass planets are found mostly on short period orbits, due to the inherent sensitivities of Doppler surveys, and they also appear to orbit metal-poor stars in general, hence the dominance of the black points towards the bottom left of the left hand panel in Fig. \[properties\]. This result was previously highlighted by @jenkins13a, revealing a ’planet desert’ for the most metal-rich stars, and subsequent confirmation has also been discussed in @marshall14. The nature of this desert could be explained by core accretion theory whereby the lower density discs have limited metals to form cores, whereas the high density discs can readily form high-mass cores that quickly grow to more massive objects, crossing the critical core mass limit and becoming gas giants. In fact, the metallic properties of all planets with periods of less than 100 days appears to be different when we compare planets more massive or less massive than 0.1 . In the plot, this is shown by the significantly higher fraction of red data points above a mass of 0.1  compared to below that limit.

More directly we can test the reality that the metallicity distribution for planets with periods of 100 days or less have a different metallicity distribution by again applying an AD test to the sample of known exoplanets. We chose to apply the sample to the homogeneous samples that we previously cross-matched with the SWEET-Cat list. This test reveals a T-statistic of 8.54 when adjusted for all non-unique values, revealing a probability of 2$\times10^{-4}$ that these samples are statistically similar. A Kolmogorov-Smirnov test yields a similar probability value (4$\times10^{-4}$) with a D-statistic of 0.375. The histograms of both populations are shown in the top plot of Fig. \[met\_hist\_sub100\]. Although the two histograms appear to show similar forms, the host stars that contain lower-mass planets currently has a flatter shape than the host stars containing higher-mass planets in this period space. Although the sample sizes are small, 48 objects in the low-mass population for example, it does appear that the lowest-mass planets are drawn from a different metallicity sample when compared with the most massive planets, within the limits of the current data set. In the future with many more discoveries of very low-mass planets orbiting the nearest stars from Doppler surveys, since these represent the most precise metallicities that can be measured, trends such as those discussed here can be tested at a higher level of statistical significance.

Further to this, the high-mass planet sample may indicate there is a non-uniform metallicity distribution as a function of period. To test this we split the high-mass planet sample into two bins with orbital periods less than or equal to 100 days and those beyond 100 days. The binned histogram for both samples is shown in the lower plot of Fig. \[met\_hist\_sub100\], and although the distributions appear less discrepant than the mass cut in the top plot, there is an indication of a functional change in the metal-poor regime. The AD test of the metallicities from these samples returns a T-statistic of 7.62, leading to a probability of 4$\times10^{-4}$ that the samples are similar. This time the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test reveals a slightly smaller probability of the null hypothesis, returning a value of 8$\times10^{-3}$ and a D-statistic of 0.223. Therefore we find that, in general, short period giant planets have higher metallicities than those at longer periods, with a mean value of \[Fe/H\] of 0.16 dex for the sub-100 day planets and a value of 0.06 dex for the giant planets with orbital periods longer than 100 days, as suggested by @sozzetti04 and @pinotti05.

@mordasini12 constructed global population synthesis models of forming planets in a range of disc environments to search for expected correlations between planetary orbital parameters and bulk compositions against disc properties. They found that planets tend to migrate more in low-metallicity discs compared to more metal-rich discs because the cores that form in the low-metallicity environment need to migrate more to undergo enough collisions to grow to the critical mass limit and transition from Type I migration to the slower Type II migration. They suggest no clear correlation between semimajor axis, or orbital period, exists because the planets in low-metallicity discs also form further from the central star than in the high-metallicity discs, and so the increased efficiency of migration in the low-metallicity environment is compensated by the increased distance the planets need to travel inward towards the star.

These modeling efforts tend to be at odds with the findings we have made unless certain conditions apply. If giant planets in metal-poor discs migrate more then we would expect to see the opposite result, unless the planets start their journeys very far out in the disc before arriving at their current locations. In addition, another scenario could be that the low-metallicity discs are dispersed faster than high-metallicity discs through photo-evaporation ([@yasui09]; [@ercolano10]). This effect is thought to be due to the lower optical depth of the disc allowing the UV and X-ray flux to pass deeper into the disc, dispersing the inner regions faster, meaning there is no remaining gas and dust for the planet to interact with, essentially halting its migration earlier when compared to a planet migrating through a metal-rich disc. Finally, in the Mordasini et al. model, they predominantly consider mostly inward migration of cores, however recent work has shown that disc structure is important in defining the dominant torques that drive planet migration and in the inner discs that are heated by the intensity of the young star’s radiation field, corotation torques dominate over the differential Linblad torques, leading to outward migration of the cores ([@kretke12]). Further to this, random walk motion too can be important for migrating low-mass cores ([@nelson04]; [@laughlin04]; [@nelson05]) and dead-zones in the disk can subsequently halt the migration of forming low-mass cores ([@balmforth01]; [@li09]; [@yu10]). All of these processes could lead to the preservation of a period-metallicity relationship that favours short period planets predominantly being found orbiting more metal-rich stars and longer-period planets being found in more metal-poor environments.

Orbital Eccentricities
----------------------

In the right plot in Fig. \[properties\] we show the same period-minimum mass plane, yet this time the colour scaling highlights the eccentricity distribution. We can see that the majority of the short period planets ($P \le$10 days) are generally found to have circular orbits, a fact that can be attributed to the planets tidal interactions with the host star that tends to circularised their orbits. We also see that the majority of the low-mass planets are found on circular orbits too (black points), in comparison to the high-mass planets where a significant fraction of them have moderate-to-high eccentricities (red points). Note that there is also a selection bias towards the detection of higher eccentricities that depends on the quantity of radial velocity data points that describes a given signal ([@otoole09]), whilst high eccentricity also elevates the amplitude of a given Doppler signal, which can sometimes make them easier to detect.

If we again split the planets up into two mass bins, where the low-mass planets have minimum masses of $\le$0.1  and the high mass bin comprises all planets with minimum masses above this limit, the eccentricity means and standard deviations of the two populations are 0.13 and 0.12 for the low-mass planet population and 0.25 and 0.21 for the high-mass planet sample. Taken at face value, the increased standard deviation for the higher mass sample tells us the spread in eccentricities in this mass regime is higher than for the lower mass planets. There is a strong bias here where the low-mass planet sample has a significantly lower mean orbital period, with a much higher fraction of planets orbiting close enough to the star to be quickly circularised through tidal dissipation of the orbits. Furthermore, there is a tendency to fix the eccentricity to zero when performing Keplerian fits to radial velocity data, in order to remove this additional degree of freedom and the degeneracy with other parameters being fit at the same time.

Summary {#conclusions}
=======

We have used the CORALIE, HARPS and MIKE spectrographs to discover eight new giant planets orbiting seven super metal-rich stars, and a star of solar metallicity, along with updated orbits for four previously published planets. We include radial velocity data prior- and post-2014 CORALIE upgrade and our Bayesian updating method returned a systematic offset of 19.2$\pm$4.8 between the two velocity sets for our stars. The new planets cover a wide area of the giant planet parameter space, having a range of masses, periods, and eccentricities, including a double planet system that was found orbiting the most massive star in our list, and a 14 Herculis $b$ analogue that has a minimum mass of $\sim$5.5, an orbital period of nearly 1200 days, and significant eccentricity (e=0.46), adding another member to the sub-population of massive eccentric planets orbiting super metal-rich stars.

We introduced our method for measuring the chromospheric $S$-index that is a measure of the magnetic activity of Sun-like stars using CORALIE spectra. These activities, along with bisector measurements, CCF FWHM’s, H$\alpha$ indices, HeI indices, and Hipparcos and ASAS photometry, were used to rule out the origin of the planetary Doppler signal as being due to line modulations from rotationally influenced star spot migration or other activity phenomena like chromospheric plage or stellar pulsations.

We show that the mass function for planets is well described by an exponential function with a scaling parameter of 0.89$\pm$0.03 and an offset of 0.030$^{+0.004}_{-0.003}$. We confirm the lack of the lowest-mass planets orbiting metal-rich stars and we also find a period-metallicity correlation for giant planets. The population of planets with masses $\ge$0.1  and orbital periods less than 100 days is found to be more metal-rich than the same mass planets with orbital periods greater than 100 days. The difference is significant at the 0.004% level and the mean difference is found to be 0.16 dex between the two populations. This result could be describing the formation locations of planets in the early disks, with metal-rich disks forming planets in the inner regions and metal-poor disks forming planets further out in the disk, or that giant planets migrate more in metal-rich disks, due to a stronger torque interaction between the high surface density disk and the migrating planet.

Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============

We thank the anonymous referee for providing a fair and helpful report. We are also thankful for the useful discussions with Francois Menard and to Andres Jord[á]{}n for providing access to the CORALIE pipeline. JSJ acknowledges funding by Fondecyt through grants 1161218 and 3110004, partial support from CATA-Basal (PB06, Conicyt), the GEMINI-CONICYT FUND and from the Comité Mixto ESO-GOBIERNO DE CHILE, and from the Conicyt PIA Anillo ACT1120. MJ acknowledges financial support from Fondecyt project \#3140607. DM is supported by the BASAL CATA Center for Astrophysics and Associated Technologies through grant PFB-06, by the Ministry for the Economy, Development, and Tourism’s Programa Iniciativa Científica Milenio through grant IC120009, awarded to Millenium Institute of Astrophysics (MAS), and by FONDECYT Regular grant No. 1130196. This research has made use of the SIMBAD database and the VizieR catalogue access tool, operated at CDS, Strasbourg, France.

Stable Star Results {#appendix_stable}
===================

To confirm the stability of the CORALIE pipeline reduction and analysis procedure we have observed a star known to be radial velocity stable at the $\sim$2 level that should provide an ideal test candidate for our method. HD72673 is a bright ($V$=6.38), nearby (12.2 pc), and inactive ( = -4.946 [@isaacson10]) G9 dwarf star that has a metallicity of -0.38$\pm$0.04 dex ([@marsakov88]; [@santos04]; [@valenti05]), and a mass and age of 0.814$\pm$0.032 and 1.48$^{+5.44}_{-1.48}$ Gyrs ([@takeda07]), respectively.

In the upper panel of Fig. \[hd72673\_harps\] we show the radial velocity timeseries for HD72673 observed with HARPS that was taken from the ESO Archive[^2]. The data span a baseline of over 1900 days in total and comprise 363 individual radial velocity measurements where we have removed 5$\sigma$ outliers that corresponded to bad weather observations, and therefore had very low S/N data, like the point at BJD-2453724.79378. After subtracting off the mean of the data, which we use as our standard flat noise model, we find a rms of 1.44 . The lower panel shows the same data except zoomed in on the most densely sampled observing epoch (BJD 2453500 - 2454000). Some structure is found in the radial velocities throughout this epoch and could be the first signatures of low-amplitude Doppler shifts induced by orbiting low-mass planets, or stellar activity signals affecting the velocities. In any case the HARPS velocities agree that HD72673 does not show large radial velocity variations and is a useful star for testing the precision we can achieve with our CORALIE pipeline.

CORALIE Observations
--------------------

Over the course of four years we have performed 108 observations of the star HD72673 with CORALIE, combining data from this project and also from the HAT-South ([@bakos12]) CORALIE observations. The sampling and time baseline provide an excellent diagnostic test of the long term stability that is currently attained with the CORALIE using the procedure described in @jordan14.

For the observations of HD72673 we aimed to get a S/N of around 100 across the optical regime of interest, leading to typical integration times of $\sim$5 minutes. Fig. \[hd72673\_rv\] shows the full radial velocity dataset as a function of time and clearly we see only a small linear trend over the full baseline of observations. No large systematic trends are found in our dataset and the gradient of the best fit we show is 0.004 /day, well below the intrinsic scatter of our procedure. The rms scatter for the full data is found to be 10.9 , however after removing a 5-$\sigma$ outlier due to low S/N we arrive at a scatter of 8.7 , or 8.6 after subtraction of the linear trend shown in the figure. Therefore, we consider the precision of the CORALIE observations to be 9 , consistent with the precision reported by @jordan14, but covering a longer time baseline.

MMSE Periodograms
=================

The minimum mean square error periodograms from the radial velocity timeseries data discussed in this work. The vertical dashed lines mark the signals detected by the MCMC search algorithm.

MCMC Posterior Densities
========================

Here we show the posterior densities from our MCMC search for signals in the radial velocities for all targets in this work. We show the densities from the samplings for the periods, semiamplitudes, and eccentricities for all signals.

CORALIE Chromospheric Activity Indices {#appendix_act}
======================================

We measure the CORALIE activities using only four echelle orders, even though the regions we require for the $S_{\rm{MW}}$ passbands are found across five orders. We drop one of the orders (order 4) due to an excess of noise at the blue end, which is due to the position of the echellogram where the V passband is found and therefore including this order enhances the uncertainty in the $S$-index and, in general, artificially increases the activity value making each star appear more active than it really is. We note that this could be taken out by calibration to other chromospheric indexes. We show the CORALIE extraction regions in Fig. \[cor\_passes\].

We compute the activities by integrating the square continuum V (3891-3911Å) and R (3991-4011Å) bandpasses and taking the ratio of these against the integrated flux in the triangular core bandpasses, described in the following series of equations:

$$\label{eq:activity}
f_{j,i} = \Im_{j,i} * B_{j,i} * \delta\lambda$$

$$S_{cont} = \frac{ \sum{(f_{V,i} + f_{R,i})} }{ \sum{(B_{V,i} + B_{R,i}) * \delta\lambda} }$$

$$S_{core} = \frac{ \sum{(f_{K,i} + f_{H,i})} }{ \sum{(B_{K,i} + B_{H,i}) * \delta\lambda} }$$

$$\sigma_{S_{cont}} = \frac{ \sqrt{ \sum{ \left( \sqrt{(\sigma_{f_{V,i}}^2 + \sigma_{f_{R,i}}^2)} \right) }^2 } }{ \sum{(B_{V,i} + B_{R,i}) * \delta\lambda} }$$

$$\sigma_{S_{core}} = \frac{ \sqrt{ \sum{ \left( \sqrt{(\sigma_{f_{K,i}}^2 + \sigma_{f_{H,i}}^2)} \right) }^2 } }{ \sum{(B_{K,i} + B_{H,i}) * \delta\lambda} }$$

The cont and core subscripts represent the continuum and core regions of the spectrum respectively, $\Im$ is the flux measured in each wavelength domain ($i$), $j$ here denotes either the V,R,K, or H bandpass regions, and $\delta\lambda$ is the wavelength step (dispersion), which at the resolution of CORALIE is $\sim$0.023Å.

Activity Indicator Periodograms
===============================

Lomb-Scargle periodograms of the activity indicators measured from the CORALIE and HARPS timeseries spectra.

ASAS Periodograms
=================

Lomb-Scargle periodograms of the ASAS timeseries $V$-band photometric data for the six stars that show peaks that could be related to magnetic activity on the surface of the star.

Radial Velocities
=================

Here we provide all radial velocities that are discussed in this work.

  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- -------- ------
                     CORALIE                            HARPS   
                                                                
   2455160.5362269     7.2     9.0    2455188.6187049   10.77    0.55
   2455161.5372730    -11.8    9.0    2455883.6145165   -10.66   0.86
   2455162.5377306    30.2     9.0    2455885.5904695   -12.54   1.03
   2455467.6819298    -35.8    9.0    2456183.7872355   12.43    0.48
   2455468.7578863    -25.8    9.0    2456184.6697746    9.39    0.79
   2455878.6618959    -8.9     9.0    2456184.8402196    8.10    0.92
   2455879.6756525    -5.9     15.0   2456185.7970768   13.90    0.55
   2456160.7988170     6.0     9.0    2456442.9352036    3.98    0.69
   2456164.7903294    38.0     9.0    2456461.9331703    0.26    0.74
   2456307.5567717    23.0     9.0    2456463.8950719    1.48    0.77
   2456308.5698681    20.0     9.0    2456561.7814364   -13.46   0.50
   2456675.6083797    -22.0    9.0    2456562.5748725   -12.24   0.86
   2456676.6025593    -16.0    9.0    2456563.6078357   -13.76   0.78
   2456881.8675908    -20.2    12.0                             
   2456882.8265879    -17.2    12.0                             
   2456883.7721760    -13.2    12.0                             
  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- -------- ------

  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- -------- ------ -------------- ------- -----
                     CORALIE                            HARPS                          MIKE   
                                                                                              
   2455208.6992489     1.8     9.0    2454365.8248037   -32.25   0.77   2452920.8629   20.6    6.9
   2455209.7264368    10.8     9.0    2454366.8740710   -25.18   0.99   2453431.6073   -30.2   2.5
   2455210.7165285    -29.2    9.0    2454367.8521212   -29.87   0.62   2453455.5573   -35.0   2.6
   2455465.8329696    16.8     9.0    2454580.5231386   22.43    0.64   2453685.8138   15.0    2.9
   2455468.8765488    27.8     9.0    2454581.5537085   23.60    0.56   2453774.6744   25.0    3.3
   2455877.7963300    -4.2     15.0   2454724.8337096   -14.14   0.59   2453775.6763   12.4    5.2
   2455878.7843441    13.8     9.0    2454725.8177884   -13.78   0.53   2453784.6887   25.4    2.6
   2455879.7984724    10.8     9.0    2454726.7789038   -14.84   0.80   2453811.5943   24.3    2.5
   2455969.6052648    -19.2    9.0    2455651.5366350   -15.41   0.56   2453987.9168   -7.7    2.9
   2455970.7499814    -17.2    9.0    2455883.7630397   -7.88    0.70   2454078.7826   -17.9   3.0
   2455971.7266404    -21.2    9.0    2455885.7426863   -1.10    0.92   2454081.7133   -23.4   2.8
   2456034.5026492    13.8     9.0    2455992.5816638   18.09    0.56   2454137.6436   -20.7   2.5
   2456037.5096202    37.8     9.0    2455994.5576882   23.81    0.61   2454138.6670   -28.7   2.6
   2456164.8925279    15.8     9.0    2456183.8678319   52.75    0.59   2454189.5669   -29.5   4.4
   2456378.6064455    -15.2    9.0    2456185.8516258   57.16    0.66   2454483.6148   28.5    3.0
   2456379.5444957    -21.2    9.0    2456442.4578668   -16.22   0.91   2454501.6725   21.5    2.4
   2456380.6001445    -6.2     9.0    2456444.4478133   -14.86   1.07   2454522.6219   25.4    2.7
   2456381.5979512    -15.2    9.0    2456562.8313800   -12.48   0.73                         
   2456733.6079032     2.9     9.0                                                            
   2456736.5950580    19.9     10.0                                                           
   2456753.5245324     3.9     10.0                                                           
   2456754.5405659     7.9     10.0                                                           
  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- -------- ------ -------------- ------- -----

  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- -------- ------
                     CORALIE                            HARPS   
                                                                
   2455268.5536332    11.4     9.0    2456442.5125503   -21.04   1.51
   2455269.5471815     0.4     9.0    2456444.4892384   -17.13   1.66
   2455270.5544347     4.4     9.0    2456562.9026514   12.99    1.46
   2456034.5316938    -45.6    9.0    2456563.8260976   13.44    1.51
   2456037.5405384    -31.6    9.0    2456563.9098232   11.72    2.07
   2456307.7270563    -32.6    9.0                              
   2456308.7455901    -18.6    9.0                              
   2456675.7326419    47.4     16.0                             
   2456675.7405950    64.4     17.0                             
   2456735.5968024    45.0     12.0                             
   2456736.6337750    33.0     14.0                             
   2456752.5562350    38.0     13.0                             
   2456754.5693098    53.0     15.0                             
   2456823.4935737    33.0     15.0                             
   2456825.4656166     8.0     12.0                             
   2457075.6564372    -43.1    14.0                             
   2457318.8514672    -19.1    14.0                             
  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- -------- ------

  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- --------- ------
                     CORALIE                             HARPS   
                                                                 
   2455698.5075694    223.8    9.0    2456442.5223438   -195.55   1.12
   2455699.5368477    337.8    9.0    2456443.5281580   -167.05   1.77
   2455700.5250521    444.8    9.0    2456444.5101783   -134.83   1.36
   2455968.7197064   -111.2    9.0    2456448.4605785   144.30    1.29
   2455969.7048152    -77.2    9.0    2456449.4624615   248.19    0.82
   2455970.6308925    -55.2    9.0    2456450.4614518   357.16    1.21
   2455972.6288495    61.8     9.0    2456462.4520834   -114.51   1.13
   2456034.5646797   -129.2    9.0    2456463.4499736   -137.72   1.69
   2456037.5717726   -156.2    9.0                               
   2456307.7713660   -110.3    9.0                               
   2456308.7833076   -126.3    9.0                               
   2456378.6598031    159.7    9.0                               
   2456379.5959537    128.7    9.0                               
   2456463.4576754    -57.3    9.0                               
   2456464.4530818    -80.3    14.0                              
   2456465.4567122   -111.3    9.0                               
   2456467.4802779   -147.3    16.0                              
   2456675.7562736   -196.3    9.0                               
   2456734.6035167    134.1    11.0                              
   2456752.6156272   -176.9    13.0                              
   2456754.5855485   -154.9    13.0                              
   2456824.4911691   -138.9    15.0                              
   2457184.4724902   -161.0    13.0                              
  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- --------- ------

  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- -------- ------
                     CORALIE                            HARPS   
                                                                
   2455268.9086205    -22.1    9.0    2454248.6023117   16.75    1.66
   2455269.8196218    -34.1    9.0    2454248.6108994   21.79    1.69
   2455349.6784180    -16.1    9.0    2454248.6176931   17.99    0.69
   2455350.6814856    14.9     9.0    2454367.5031968   -31.24   0.66
   2455351.6612024    -4.1     9.0    2454369.5091063   -37.97   2.49
   2455352.6667444    -6.1     9.0    2454577.6158842   35.96    0.48
   2455609.8365887    -27.1    14.0   2454578.5680249   35.50    0.52
   2455611.8334577    -13.1    9.0    2454581.7357981   41.67    0.47
   2455699.7015878     9.9     9.0    2455271.8690903   -23.11   0.36
   2455967.8551252    27.9     9.0    2455649.7321937   -6.46    0.46
   2455968.8240257    39.9     9.0    2455650.7148680   -6.51    0.49
   2455970.8305273    20.9     9.0    2455651.7295683   -7.26    0.50
   2455971.7742759    31.9     9.0    2455786.4827996   50.87    0.51
   2455972.8507044    46.9     9.0    2455787.4566297   49.97    0.36
   2456034.8259987    11.9     9.0    2455992.7730262    9.21    0.39
   2456037.8192588    27.9     9.0    2455993.7048066    9.29    0.52
   2456160.4758000    -6.1     9.0    2456063.6469346   34.67    0.78
   2456164.4757457    -9.1     9.0    2456064.6145915   35.94    0.45
   2456381.7122851    15.9     9.0    2456065.6564584   36.26    0.43
   2456463.5427541    -23.1    9.0    2456183.4873901   -31.26   0.60
   2456464.6240954    -35.1    9.0    2456442.6772101   -46.63   0.46
   2456465.6419917    -45.1    9.0    2456443.6828424   -46.21   0.77
   2456467.5931893    -26.1    16.0   2456444.6629996   -45.18   0.91
   2456467.6621264    -24.1    9.0    2456450.4938930   -40.30   0.62
   2456676.8044908    19.8     9.0    2456462.6290393   -36.01   0.54
   2456734.7225188    -35.2    10.0   2456463.5862333   -35.50   0.80
   2456752.8173417    -30.2    12.0   2456562.4755850   -3.37    0.56
   2456823.7074373     1.8     14.0                             
   2456825.7157702     6.8     12.0                             
   2456881.5522933     4.8     12.0                             
   2456882.5702439    20.8     15.0                             
  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- -------- ------

  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- -------- ------ --------------- --------- ------
                     CORALIE                            HARPS                            MIKE    
                                                                                                 
   2455269.8328453    31.9     12.0   2454253.7711993   10.50    3.17   2452864.57934    43.03    7.14
   2455269.8477334    30.9     12.0   2454253.7786414    9.06    2.22   2453130.83712    -6.28    2.65
   2455349.6897288     9.9     14.0   2454367.5565354   -23.81   1.09   2453872.73696    28.04    2.62
   2455349.7090115     6.9     15.0   2454368.5376348   -23.64   1.13   2453987.50506    38.49    3.45
   2455350.6957245    -5.2     17.0   2454578.7885789   -83.52   0.83   2453988.49460    25.06    2.81
   2455350.7085995    -11.2    22.0   2454581.8076461   -81.90   0.92   2454190.80550    0.00     3.43
   2455351.6772114     3.9     13.0   2455271.8809609   19.62    0.77   2454217.84734    -7.02    3.38
   2455351.6921046    -0.2     14.0   2455649.7540214   -83.51   0.94   2454277.65819   -29.11    3.43
   2455352.6804150    -8.2     13.0   2455786.5132754   -30.99   0.89   2454299.55951   -37.73    3.04
   2455352.6925204     2.9     12.0   2455992.7979663   55.69    1.23   2454300.58038   -36.03    2.51
   2455465.4819439    -37.2    19.0   2455993.7269629   65.78    0.89   2454339.50049   -52.16    3.39
   2455465.4921698    -41.2    18.0   2456063.6718947   68.27    2.14   2454501.87197   -94.15    3.01
   2455466.4810091    -44.2    20.0   2456064.6371793   65.24    0.87   2454650.68383   -105.06   6.82
   2455467.4908225    -36.2    13.0   2456065.6805773   64.11    0.80   2454925.87115    21.04    2.76
   2455786.5181546    -28.2    13.0   2456184.5078021   53.36    0.84   2454963.75707    34.93    3.05
   2455787.5128697    -32.2    12.0   2456442.6901584   -22.67   0.90   2454965.78744    31.39    2.82
   2455788.5005189    -18.2    12.0   2456443.6959898   -19.26   1.96   2455019.67861    27.65    2.46
   2455967.8637123    48.8     14.0   2456444.7117386   -20.46   1.79                            
   2455969.8564628    55.8     14.0   2456462.6564547   -25.82   0.97                            
   2455970.8440395    49.8     14.0                                                              
   2455971.8236578    61.8     14.0                                                              
   2455972.8379866    52.8     14.0                                                              
   2456034.8111668    73.8     14.0                                                              
   2456037.8046599    73.7     12.0                                                              
   2456160.4914594    49.7     11.0                                                              
   2456161.4914636    58.7     12.0                                                              
   2456162.5761051    53.7     18.0                                                              
   2456164.4909267    46.7     12.0                                                              
   2456381.7216801    -14.3    15.0                                                              
   2456381.7325023    -13.3    14.0                                                              
   2456463.6056985    -23.3    12.0                                                              
   2456465.6944440    -22.3    12.0                                                              
   2456467.5744277    -75.3    23.0                                                              
   2456554.5120400    -28.3    16.0                                                              
   2456554.5219817    -49.3    20.0                                                              
   2456555.5573278    -33.3    13.0                                                              
   2456676.8679860    -68.4    14.0                                                              
   2456734.7382463    -61.4    12.0                                                              
   2456752.8000194    -39.4    13.0                                                              
   2456754.7548507    -51.4    13.0                                                              
   2456823.7338512    -33.4    13.0                                                              
   2456825.7551623    -36.4    13.0                                                              
   2456881.6125148     5.6     12.0                                                              
   2456882.6036411    17.6     15.0                                                              
   2457281.5366030    71.5     19.0                                                              
  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- -------- ------ --------------- --------- ------

  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- --------- ------ --------------- -------- ------
                     CORALIE                             HARPS                            MIKE   
                                                                                                 
   2455268.8296124    66.7     9.0    2454365.5676419   -165.09   4.83   2453189.66944    0.00    3.38
   2455269.8954986    58.7     9.0    2454580.8338639    86.26    2.48   2453190.64093   -9.92    3.36
   2455270.8623072    41.7     9.0    2454581.8459239    77.96    1.73   2453191.65473   -5.91    3.56
   2455349.7478270     4.7     9.0    2454724.4802846   -117.74   1.27   2453551.62308   -72.79   5.00
   2455351.7263025    -9.3     9.0    2454725.4983255   -121.37   1.56   2454339.53949   134.00   4.93
   2455352.7243194     3.7     9.0    2454726.4832450   -120.54   1.57   2455001.70315   156.04   4.48
   2455465.5203302    38.7     9.0    2455271.8407105   124.30    1.42                           
   2455466.5103888    25.7     9.0    2455649.7654997   -73.82    2.01                           
   2455467.5077317    39.7     9.0    2455786.5492317   -102.21   2.08                           
   2455468.4926389    32.7     9.0    2455787.4838577   -93.49    1.66                           
   2455786.5547221   -195.3    9.0    2455787.6993011   -92.88    2.53                           
   2455787.5512296   -190.3    9.0    2455788.4587689   -86.93    1.92                           
   2455788.5404119   -170.3    9.0    2455788.6109888   -91.50    2.10                           
   2455968.8355111    100.7    9.0    2455788.7074614   -83.90    3.01                           
   2455970.8644298    74.7     9.0    2455992.8338522   -77.92    1.67                           
   2456034.8536087    -19.3    9.0    2455993.7871396   -80.38    2.00                           
   2456037.8611090     8.7     9.0    2455994.7989047   -90.35    2.11                           
   2456160.5035894    15.7     9.0    2456063.7089752   250.12    3.48                           
   2456161.5099351    22.7     9.0    2456064.7231089   258.36    1.87                           
   2456164.5890537    55.7     9.0    2456183.4686863   223.49    3.03                           
   2456307.8687079    112.7    9.0    2456184.4750146   219.57    3.41                           
   2456308.8690886    117.7    9.0    2456442.7882798    95.12    2.19                           
   2456381.7577061   -119.3    9.0    2456444.7375998    62.78    3.16                           
   2456463.6629499   -189.3    9.0                                                               
   2456464.6620073   -190.3    9.0                                                               
   2456554.5635006    144.7    9.0                                                               
   2456555.4998324    118.7    9.0                                                               
   2456676.8378428    -0.3     9.0                                                               
   2456733.8400326    -56.8    12.0                                                              
   2456734.7541033    -50.8    11.0                                                              
   2456735.7646576    -55.8    11.0                                                              
   2456736.8330743    -47.8    12.0                                                              
   2456752.8898318    50.2     14.0                                                              
   2456754.7704681    76.2     13.0                                                              
   2456823.7610291   -155.8    14.0                                                              
   2456824.7569383   -181.8    14.0                                                              
   2456825.8288093   -168.8    14.0                                                              
   2456881.6254682    130.2    14.0                                                              
   2456882.6396241    151.2    13.0                                                              
   2456883.5912828    149.2    13.0                                                              
   2457179.6595698   -126.8    16.0                                                              
   2457180.6006537   -127.8    15.0                                                              
   2457181.5978747   -142.8    13.0                                                              
   2457182.5980141   -120.8    13.0                                                              
   2457183.7046858   -119.8    14.0                                                              
   2457184.6231976   -111.8    13.0                                                              
  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- --------- ------ --------------- -------- ------

  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- -------- ------ -------------- ------- -----
                     CORALIE                            HARPS                          MIKE   
                                                                                              
   2455786.6489688    -41.7    9.0    2454253.8065363   -20.75   1.75   2452917.4972   -24.3   6.2
   2456463.6745808    14.3     9.0    2454367.5811986   -22.95   1.00   2453542.6649   22.5    3.3
   2456464.7049704    17.3     9.0    2454579.8264105   -29.21   0.72   2453872.8022   -8.5    2.5
   2456465.6766024     8.3     9.0    2455649.8008277   -30.70   1.01   2453987.5436   -10.3   2.8
   2456555.5745883    -0.8     9.0    2455650.7595904   -29.43   0.96   2453988.5202   -12.6   2.7
   2456676.8549118     2.2     15.0   2455651.8003619   -29.35   0.84   2454190.8274   -13.7   2.9
   2456733.8533258    -1.2     13.0   2455786.5261504   -22.51   0.96   2454277.6950   -19.7   3.4
   2456734.8495354    -17.2    11.0   2455787.5966780   -22.46   0.85   2454299.6134   -19.6   3.3
   2456735.8130233    -10.2    12.0   2455992.9178275    1.25    1.01   2454725.5353   -35.1   2.6
   2456736.8653294     7.8     15.0   2455993.8444865    3.09    0.93   2454925.9161   -29.2   2.4
   2456752.8688188     8.8     12.0   2456064.7106335   19.86    0.89   2454963.7753   -22.6   2.7
   2456754.7851172     0.8     14.0   2456184.5322797   44.23    0.93   2454993.7093   -27.5   2.4
   2456823.7916933    16.8     13.0   2456442.7259868   24.77    0.90   2455001.7291   -25.3   2.9
   2456824.7696220    -3.2     13.0   2456443.7319729   27.81    1.62   2455017.6624   -28.5   2.4
   2456825.8154610    -8.2     13.0   2456444.7714764   25.93    1.28   2455019.6938   -22.5   2.2
   2456881.6859346    10.8     13.0   2456462.7752093   19.99    1.30                         
   2456882.6527789    -10.2    12.0   2456561.5772596   18.97    1.25                         
                                      2456563.5044073   18.41    1.18                         
  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- -------- ------ -------------- ------- -----

  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- --------- ------ --------------- --------- ------
                     CORALIE                             HARPS                            MIKE    
                                                                                                  
   2455268.8925184    -51.4    9.0    2454367.5951401   225.90    0.69   2453189.71323   -141.83   2.89
   2455286.7126041   -133.4    12.0   2454368.6185060   227.85    1.10   2453190.70833   -143.62   2.73
   2455286.7482435   -137.4    12.0   2454578.8112608    82.73    0.61   2453191.72040   -147.14   3.33
   2455287.7447603   -130.4    12.0   2454581.8703510    71.32    0.52   2453254.50616   175.30    2.60
   2455287.7803973   -136.4    12.0   2455271.8920649   -18.52    0.63   2453596.68926   130.45    3.10
   2455288.7337184   -139.4    11.0   2455649.8248173   -195.00   0.66   2453810.90968    -5.00    2.56
   2455288.7776633   -138.4    12.0   2455786.5972307   -87.04    0.66   2453872.81362   260.75    2.45
   2455349.7906916    161.6    10.0   2455993.8674482   -126.00   0.78   2454189.87086   -80.09    3.62
   2455350.8687367    177.6    10.0   2455994.8361631   -98.02    0.83   2454189.87898   -90.28    3.52
   2455351.7067623    173.6    10.0   2456063.7424430    53.14    1.25   2454190.84022   -57.35    2.84
   2455352.7571340    172.6    9.0    2456064.7465191    50.37    0.66   2454215.86050   242.59    2.52
   2455353.6007870    135.6    10.0   2456065.7448182    48.70    0.74   2454216.78927   243.77    2.54
   2455354.6329905    151.6    10.0   2456183.5270912   188.65    0.85   2454217.87254   250.94    2.76
   2455354.7244421    136.6    11.0   2456442.7630531   -86.65    0.69   2454277.70250    67.40    2.74
   2455355.6194464    135.6    11.0   2456443.7800510   -86.90    1.29   2454299.62096    0.00     2.64
   2455355.7115550    148.6    11.0   2456462.7983801   -163.39   0.91   2454339.55738   -145.72   4.15
   2455433.5945428    -58.4    11.0   2456462.8102434   -164.91   1.02   2454501.89596   -143.22   2.71
   2455434.5939320    -68.4    10.0   2456561.4986867    39.66    0.85   2455018.68932   213.92    2.17
   2455467.5419737   -152.4    11.0   2456563.5280947    36.30    0.89                            
   2455468.5360292   -140.4    11.0                                                               
   2455786.6672674   -128.5    10.0                                                               
   2456034.8785575    94.5     9.0                                                                
   2456037.8864541    86.5     9.0                                                                
   2456160.5115180    -99.5    11.0                                                               
   2456161.5235072    -68.5    12.0                                                               
   2456164.5556060    60.5     13.0                                                               
   2456381.7967325    47.5     10.0                                                               
   2456463.6867223   -212.5    10.0                                                               
   2456464.7194041   -226.5    10.0                                                               
   2456734.8670344    -17.5    9.0                                                                
   2456735.8301098    -20.5    9.0                                                                
   2456823.8058978    153.5    11.0                                                               
   2456825.8537984    178.5    11.0                                                               
   2456882.6789128    44.5     11.0                                                               
  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- --------- ------ --------------- --------- ------

  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- -------- ------
                     CORALIE                            HARPS   
                                                                
   2455698.7379179    -70.4    9.0    2454577.8573518   70.07    0.70
   2455786.6994564    36.6     13.0   2454578.8259992   67.18    0.80
   2455786.7108277    75.6     13.0   2454579.8512477   67.69    0.74
   2455787.6641024    35.6     12.0   2455650.8171652   -83.60   1.14
   2455787.6754805    35.6     12.0   2455786.6216504   -5.87    1.04
   2455788.6765746    48.6     13.0   2455787.4979049   -3.44    0.96
   2455788.6875372    67.6     13.0   2455788.6355855   -1.89    1.07
   2456034.9332917    20.6     12.0   2455993.8895322   -6.64    1.23
   2456381.8066463    54.6     12.0   2455994.8596255   -7.98    1.57
   2456381.8190355    47.6     12.0   2456063.7543293   -35.54   1.82
   2456463.7613374    59.6     9.0    2456064.7595490   -35.45   0.96
   2456464.7345595    11.6     9.0    2456065.7693045   -33.41   2.68
   2456555.5907771    -42.4    11.0   2456183.5412473   -15.93   1.13
   2456555.6041047    -39.4    9.0    2456442.8006921   14.89    1.18
   2456733.8878823    145.2    10.0   2456443.8064819   19.51    2.63
   2456735.8673459    111.2    10.0   2456444.8081381   17.67    1.57
   2456754.8071800    115.2    13.0   2456461.7756434   13.11    1.08
   2456823.8481613    112.2    11.0   2456462.8238912    9.33    1.42
   2456825.8695333    89.2     11.0   2456463.7557595   11.89    1.71
   2456881.7083646    99.2     11.0   2456561.4867891   -62.19   1.12
   2456883.6490320    85.2     10.0                             
   2457077.8839217    120.2    13.0                             
   2457183.7828036   -250.8    16.0                             
   2457184.6886555   -250.8    15.0                             
   2457312.5069791   -254.8    17.0                             
   2457318.4944200   -279.8    16.0                             
  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- -------- ------

  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- --------- ------ --------------- -------- ------
                     CORALIE                             HARPS                            MIKE   
                                                                                                 
   2455196.5457833    -63.9    9.0    2454365.6728323   -72.92    0.84   2453189.91295   -2.66    2.86
   2455197.5258897    -62.9    9.0    2454724.7162997    87.00    0.93   2453190.91771    0.00    3.27
   2455198.5268449    -54.9    9.0    2454725.6845580    87.50    1.02   2453191.91314    7.12    2.85
   2455352.9431841    -89.9    9.0    2454726.6664725    89.44    0.65   2453254.73446   -13.98   3.23
   2455465.6728602    -55.9    9.0    2454727.6026469    87.24    0.83   2454338.83927    3.92    3.86
   2455468.6569334    -51.9    9.0    2455786.8072676    -5.84    0.80   2454339.75448   -7.75    3.09
   2455497.5904524    -52.9    9.0    2455787.6269341   -12.49    0.96                           
   2455514.6207088    -42.9    9.0    2455787.8105224   -16.34    0.73                           
   2455786.8585090    37.1     9.0    2455787.9313791   -14.21    0.82                           
   2455787.8646502    25.1     9.0    2455788.5991810   -14.30    1.26                           
   2455788.8218648    53.1     19.0   2455788.7826534   -14.01    1.33                           
   2455877.6116650    93.1     22.0   2455883.5865245    46.83    1.19                           
   2455878.5958784    92.1     9.0    2455885.5121047    54.40    1.30                           
   2455879.6063410    108.1    9.0    2455885.5744505    52.39    1.53                           
   2455969.5203878    158.1    16.0   2455885.7033086    51.81    1.43                           
   2455970.5204393    167.1    16.0   2456064.9384446    67.21    0.85                           
   2456160.6541736    -25.9    16.0   2456183.7248653   -67.99    0.86                           
   2456164.7802416    -4.9     16.0   2456185.6754003   -70.76    1.02                           
   2456554.6541123    -68.9    9.0    2456442.9267855   -116.37   1.14                           
   2456554.6624176    -54.9    9.0    2456461.8887446   -110.55   1.03                           
   2456555.7132051    -76.9    9.0    2456561.7050322   -109.01   0.97                           
   2456675.5534417    -27.9    16.0                                                              
   2456824.9242966     5.9     13.0                                                              
   2457317.6711775    -3.1     36.0                                                              
  ----------------- --------- ------ ----------------- --------- ------ --------------- -------- ------

\[lastpage\]

[^1]: E-mail: jjenkins@das.uchile.cl

[^2]: Based on data obtained from the ESO Science Archive Facility under request number JJENKINS 50958.
