All Figures

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3003fig1.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 1: Period-eccentricity diagram for the selected $S\!_{B^9}$ objects with an HIP entry.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3003fig2.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 2: Distribution of the orbital periods for the selected $S\!_{B^9}$ objects with an HIP entry.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3003fig3.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 3: Comparison of the Pr₂ and Pr₃ statistics for the whole sample of 1374 stars, showing that Pr₂ and Pr₃ are not equivalent. Crosses correspond to systems with $F2_{\rm TI} > 2.37$ , where $F2_{\rm TI}$ is the goodness-of-fit for the Thiele-Innes model (Eq. (6)); open squares correspond to systems with $F2_{\rm TI} < -1.95$ .
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3003fig4.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 4: F2 (goodness of fit) versus Pr₃ for systems complying with Pr₂ < 5%. The envelope of these points is well reproduced with the theoretical curve (solid line) assuming Pr₂ = 5% and 59 observations (which corresponds to the average number of observations for the considered systems). The dashed line corresponds to Pr₂ = 1%.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3003fig5.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 5: Percentage of astrometric binaries detected among $S\!_{B^9}$ stars as a function of orbital period. The error bars give the binomial error on each bin.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\mbox{\resizebox{5.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{3003fi6a.eps}}\hf... ...eps}}\hfill \resizebox{5.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{3003fi6c.eps}} }\end{figure}$ Figure 6: Left panel: period-parallax diagram for the selected $S\!_{B^9}$ objects with an HIP entry. Middle panel: period-parallax diagram for non-detected objects. Right panel: stars flagged as astrometric binaries by the Pr₁, Pr₂ and Pr₃ tests at the 5% level and with $F2_{{\rm TI}}< 2.37$ .
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\resizebox{8.8cm}{!}{\includegraphics{3003fi7a.eps}}\par\vspace*{2mm} \resizebox{8.8cm}{!}{\includegraphics{3003fi7b.eps}} \end{figure}$ Figure 7: Comparison of the orbital inclinations derived by the Thiele-Innes and Campbell approaches. The 282 stars displayed in the upper panel all comply with the 4 criteria for astrometric wobbledetection (namely Pr₁, Pr₂ and Pr₃ < 0.05 and $F2_{{\rm TI}}< 2.37$ ; see text), but their astrometric orbital elements are not always reliably determined as not all points fall along the diagonal. The lower panel displays the 122 stars complying with the Pr₁, Pr₂ and Pr₃ tests at the 0.006% level.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3003fig8.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 8: Distribution of the orbital periods for the 70 solutions retained.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3003fig9.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 9: Comparison of the inclinations derived from the Thiele-Innes constants and from the Campbell elements for the 70 systems retained. Compare with Fig. 7.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3003fi10.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 10: Comparison of the inclinations derived from the Thiele-Innes constants and from the Campbell elements for the 1304 systems not retained. The 39 rejected systems with a solution in the DMSA/O annex (Table 5) are represented by a filled square.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\resizebox{8.8cm}{!}{\includegraphics{3003f11a.eps}}\par\vspace*{2mm} \resizebox{8.8cm}{!}{\includegraphics{3003f11b.eps}} \end{figure}$ Figure 11: Upper panel: distribution of the mass ratio (M₂/M₁) for systems from Table 3 with a main-sequence primary star. Lower panel: distributions of M₁ (dashed line) and M₂ (solid line).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3003fi12.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 12: The ( $e, \log P)$ diagram for the 70 systems with reliable astrometric orbital elements. Systems with giant primaries are represented by black squares, and main-sequence primaries with crosses. The point labels refer to the companion mass.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3003fig1.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 1: Period-eccentricity diagram for the selected $S\!_{B^9}$ objects with an HIP entry.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3003fig2.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 2: Distribution of the orbital periods for the selected $S\!_{B^9}$ objects with an HIP entry.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3003fig3.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 3: Comparison of the Pr₂ and Pr₃ statistics for the whole sample of 1374 stars, showing that Pr₂ and Pr₃ are not equivalent. Crosses correspond to systems with $F2_{\rm TI} > 2.37$ , where $F2_{\rm TI}$ is the goodness-of-fit for the Thiele-Innes model (Eq. (6)); open squares correspond to systems with $F2_{\rm TI} < -1.95$ .
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3003fig4.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 4: F2 (goodness of fit) versus Pr₃ for systems complying with Pr₂ < 5%. The envelope of these points is well reproduced with the theoretical curve (solid line) assuming Pr₂ = 5% and 59 observations (which corresponds to the average number of observations for the considered systems). The dashed line corresponds to Pr₂ = 1%.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3003fig5.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 5: Percentage of astrometric binaries detected among $S\!_{B^9}$ stars as a function of orbital period. The error bars give the binomial error on each bin.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\mbox{\resizebox{5.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{3003fi6a.eps}}\hf... ...eps}}\hfill \resizebox{5.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{3003fi6c.eps}} }\end{figure}$	Figure 6: Left panel: period-parallax diagram for the selected $S\!_{B^9}$ objects with an HIP entry. Middle panel: period-parallax diagram for non-detected objects. Right panel: stars flagged as astrometric binaries by the Pr₁, Pr₂ and Pr₃ tests at the 5% level and with $F2_{{\rm TI}}< 2.37$ .
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3003fig8.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 8: Distribution of the orbital periods for the 70 solutions retained.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3003fig9.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 9: Comparison of the inclinations derived from the Thiele-Innes constants and from the Campbell elements for the 70 systems retained. Compare with Fig. 7.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3003fi10.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 10: Comparison of the inclinations derived from the Thiele-Innes constants and from the Campbell elements for the 1304 systems not retained. The 39 rejected systems with a solution in the DMSA/O annex (Table 5) are represented by a filled square.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\resizebox{8.8cm}{!}{\includegraphics{3003f11a.eps}}\par\vspace*{2mm} \resizebox{8.8cm}{!}{\includegraphics{3003f11b.eps}} \end{figure}$	Figure 11: Upper panel: distribution of the mass ratio (M₂/M₁) for systems from Table 3 with a main-sequence primary star. Lower panel: distributions of M₁ (dashed line) and M₂ (solid line).
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3003fi12.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 12: The ( $e, \log P)$ diagram for the 70 systems with reliable astrometric orbital elements. Systems with giant primaries are represented by black squares, and main-sequence primaries with crosses. The point labels refer to the companion mass.
Open with DEXTER