NASA NTRS2017
Quantifying the ability of a transiting planet survey to recover transit signals has commonly been accomplished through Monte-Carlo injection of transit signals into the observed data and subsequent running of the signal search algorithm (Gilliland et al., 2000; Weldrake et al., 2005; Burke et al., 2006). In order to characterize the performance of the Kepler pipeline (Twicken et al., 2016; Jenkins et al., 2017) on a sample of over 200,000 stars, two complementary injection and recovery tests are utilized:1. Injection of a single transit signal per target into the image or pixel-level data, hereafter referred to as pixel-level transit injection (PLTI), with subsequent processing through the Photometric Analysis (PA), Presearch Data Conditioning (PDC), Transiting Planet Search (TPS), and Data Validation (DV) modules of the Kepler pipeline. The PLTI quantification of the Kepler pipeline's completeness has been described previously by Christiansen et al. (2015, 2016); the completeness of the final SOC 9.3 Kepler pipeline acting on the Data Release 25 (DR25) light curves is described by Christiansen (2017).2. Injection of multiple transit signals per target into the normalized flux time series data with a subsequent transit search using a stream-lined version of the Transiting Planet Search (TPS) module. This test, hereafter referred to as flux-level transit injection (FLTI), is the subject of this document. By running a heavily modified version of TPS, FLTI is able to perform many injections on selected targets and determine in some detail which injected signals are recoverable. Significant numerical efficiency gains are enabled by precomputing the data conditioning steps at the onset of TPS and limiting the search parameter space (i.e., orbital period, transit duration, and ephemeris zero-point) to a small region around each injected transit signal.The PLTI test has the advantage that it follows transit signals through all processing steps of the Kepler pipeline, and the recovered signals can be further classified as planet candidates or false positives in the exact same manner as detections from the nominal (i.e., observed) pipeline run (Twicken et al., 2016, Thompson et al., in preparation). To date, the PLTI test has been the standard means of measuring pipeline completeness averaged over large samples of targets (Christiansen et al., 2015, 2016; Christiansen, 2017). However, since the PLTI test uses only one injection per target, it does not elucidate individual-target variations in pipeline completeness due to differences in stellar properties or astrophysical variability. Thus, we developed the FLTI test to provide a numerically efficient way to fully map individual targets and explore the performance of the pipeline in greater detail. The FLTI tests thereby allow a thorough validation of the pipeline completeness models (such as window function (Burke and Catanzarite, 2017a), detection efficiency (Burke Catanzarite, 2017b), etc.) across the spectrum of Kepler targets (i.e., various astrophysical phenomena and differences in instrumental noise). Tests during development of the FLTI capability revealed that there are significant target-to-target variations in the detection efficiency.