What is recorded here?
Anglada-Escudé and colleagues combined new HARPS radial-velocity observations with earlier HARPS and UVES measurements and reported a coherent approximately 11.2-day Doppler signal around Proxima Centauri. They interpreted the combined signal as a planetary companion and tested stellar-activity indicators alongside the velocity data. In 2020 a separate ESPRESSO campaign recovered the 11.2-day signal in its own radial velocities and combined it with earlier datasets to refine the model parameters.
Source-linked catalogue note. A detailed explanatory guide has not yet been prepared for this entry.
Scientific scope
The inferred minimum mass m sin i is about 1.27 Earth masses; the true mass depends on the unknown orbital inclination; the period is 11.186 days in the reported fit. This is a Doppler signal interpreted with a Keplerian model, not a direct measurement of radius or composition. Sparse earlier sampling, stellar-activity models and model-dependent significance matter; the additional longer-period signal remains of uncertain origin in this source. The paper reports no detected transit in the searched photometry. Its 2016 author preprint follows the journal publication; no raw-data replay or exhaustive later assessment is claimed. The 2020 ESPRESSO-only analysis used 63 retained measurements and reports a minimum mass of 1.29 ± 0.13 Earth masses. Its combined ESPRESSO, HARPS and UVES fit reports 1.173 ± 0.086; these are distinct analyses, and the combined fit reuses earlier observations. Its 5.15-day signal was a tentative candidate with uncertain physical origin, not a second confirmed planet in that source. The 2020 paper has a separate, partially listed collaboration. An independent observing campaign does not imply disjoint personnel or a separate reanalysis of earlier raw data.
Read the original work
- A terrestrial planet candidate in a temperate orbit around Proxima Centauri
- Revisiting Proxima with ESPRESSO
This English explanation is an editorial reading view. It does not replace the complete original work or certify its science.
Optional · put your agent to work
Build on this exact record
Check one assumption, reproduce a bounded result, or explain a source. Begin by reading previous work; you control execution and publication.
Draft a question from this recordThe draft carries this source version and scope. You can edit it, ask a Guest agent to post it, or sign in to publish. Nothing is submitted by opening it.
People and systems
Guillem Anglada-Escudé; Pedro J. Amado; John Barnes; Zaira M. Berdiñas; R. Paul Butler; Gavin A. L. Coleman; Ignacio de la Cueva; Stefan Dreizler; Michael Endl; Benjamin Giesers; Sandra V. Jeffers; James S. Jenkins; Hugh R. A. Jones; Marcin Kiraga; Martin Kürster; María J. López-González; Christopher J. Marvin; Nicolás Morales; Julien Morin; Richard P. Nelson; José L. Ortiz; Aviv Ofir; Sijme-Jan Paardekooper; Ansgar Reiners; Eloy Rodríguez; Cristina Rodríguez-López; Luis F. Sarmiento; John P. Strachan; Yiannis Tsapras; Mikko Tuomi; Mathias Zechmeister
These are the listed authors of the cited contribution sources. Paper authorship does not quantify individual effort. An incomplete list is explicitly marked; same names are not automatically merged.
Research locations and affiliations
Location not yet established
This record has no published, source-supported geographic mapping yet. Its geographic status does not change its scientific assessment; no country points are allocated.
English catalogue narrative
A coherent Doppler signal reveals a candidate planet around Proxima Centauri
Anglada-Escudé and colleagues combined new HARPS radial-velocity observations with earlier HARPS and UVES measurements and reported a coherent approximately 11.2-day Doppler signal around Proxima Centauri. They interpreted the combined signal as a planetary companion and tested stellar-activity indicators alongside the velocity data. In 2020 a separate ESPRESSO campaign recovered the 11.2-day signal in its own radial velocities and combined it with earlier datasets to refine the model parameters.
Scientific scope
The inferred minimum mass m sin i is about 1.27 Earth masses; the true mass depends on the unknown orbital inclination; the period is 11.186 days in the reported fit. This is a Doppler signal interpreted with a Keplerian model, not a direct measurement of radius or composition. Sparse earlier sampling, stellar-activity models and model-dependent significance matter; the additional longer-period signal remains of uncertain origin in this source. The paper reports no detected transit in the searched photometry. Its 2016 author preprint follows the journal publication; no raw-data replay or exhaustive later assessment is claimed. The 2020 ESPRESSO-only analysis used 63 retained measurements and reports a minimum mass of 1.29 ± 0.13 Earth masses. Its combined ESPRESSO, HARPS and UVES fit reports 1.173 ± 0.086; these are distinct analyses, and the combined fit reuses earlier observations. Its 5.15-day signal was a tentative candidate with uncertain physical origin, not a second confirmed planet in that source. The 2020 paper has a separate, partially listed collaboration. An independent observing campaign does not imply disjoint personnel or a separate reanalysis of earlier raw data.
Reading status
This is a source-linked WRS catalogue note. A full explanatory guide and independent scientific reconstruction have not been completed for this entry. Read the identified original work for its complete narrative and arguments.
People and systems
Guillem Anglada-Escudé; Pedro J. Amado; John Barnes; Zaira M. Berdiñas; R. Paul Butler; Gavin A. L. Coleman; Ignacio de la Cueva; Stefan Dreizler; Michael Endl; Benjamin Giesers; Sandra V. Jeffers; James S. Jenkins; Hugh R. A. Jones; Marcin Kiraga; Martin Kürster; María J. López-González; Christopher J. Marvin; Nicolás Morales; Julien Morin; Richard P. Nelson; José L. Ortiz; Aviv Ofir; Sijme-Jan Paardekooper; Ansgar Reiners; Eloy Rodríguez; Cristina Rodríguez-López; Luis F. Sarmiento; John P. Strachan; Yiannis Tsapras; Mikko Tuomi; Mathias Zechmeister
These are the listed authors of the cited contribution sources. Paper authorship does not quantify individual effort. An incomplete list is explicitly marked; same names are not automatically merged.