Interpreting High-resolution Spectroscopy of Exoplanets using Cross-correlations and Supervised Machine Learning

Fisher, Chloe; Hoeijmakers, H. Jens; Kitzmann, Daniel; Márquez-Neila, Pablo; Grimm, Simon L.; Sznitman, Raphael; Heng, Kevin (2020). Interpreting High-resolution Spectroscopy of Exoplanets using Cross-correlations and Supervised Machine Learning. The astronomical journal, 159(5), p. 192. American Astronomical Society 10.3847/1538-3881/ab7a92

Preview

Text Fisher_2020_AJ_159_192.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution (CC-BY). Download (4MB) | Preview

We present a new method for performing atmospheric retrieval on ground-based, high-resolution data of exoplanets. Our method combines cross-correlation functions with a random forest, a supervised machine-learning technique, to overcome challenges associated with high-resolution data. A series of cross-correlation functions are concatenated to give a "CCF-sequence" for each model atmosphere, which reduces the dimensionality by a factor of ~100. The random forest, trained on our grid of ~65,000 models, provides a likelihood-free method of retrieval. The precomputed grid spans 31 values of both temperature and metallicity, and incorporates a realistic noise model. We apply our method to HARPS-N observations of the ultra-hot Jupiter KELT-9b and obtain a metallicity consistent with solar (logM = − 0.2 ± 0.2). Our retrieved transit chord temperature ($T={6000}_{-200}^{+0}$K) is unreliable as strong ion lines lie outside of the extent of the training set, which we interpret as being indicative of missing physics in our atmospheric model. We compare our method to traditional nested sampling, as well as other machine-learning techniques, such as Bayesian neural networks. We demonstrate that the likelihood-free aspect of the random forest makes it more robust than nested sampling to different error distributions, and that the Bayesian neural network we tested is unable to reproduce complex posteriors. We also address the claim in Cobb et al. 2019 that our random forest retrieval technique can be overconfident but incorrect. We show that this is an artifact of the training set, rather than of the machine-learning method, and that the posteriors agree with those obtained using nested sampling.

Interest & Impact

Downloads

54 since deposited on 09 Mar 2021
21 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item