ner_tags: B-EntityOfFutureInterest I-EntityOfFutureInterest O B-Telescope O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-EntityOfFutureInterest I-EntityOfFutureInterest O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-EntityOfFutureInterest I-EntityOfFutureInterest O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O B-EntityOfFutureInterest I-EntityOfFutureInterest O O O O O O O O O O B-EntityOfFutureInterest I-EntityOfFutureInterest O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Model O B-Dataset O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-EntityOfFutureInterest I-EntityOfFutureInterest O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-EntityOfFutureInterest I-EntityOfFutureInterest O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
tokens: hot Jupiters from Kepler , coupled with the complex targeted nature of the survey (cf. the untargeted surveys used in our sample), means that these results need to be approached with some caution. Our result () confirms the giant planetmetallicity correlation seen in previous studies, but suggests that it is marginally weaker for hot Jupiters than it is for the longer period giant planets such as in the survey outlined above. We summarize our result and the previous results in Table 1 . Table 1. values. Our value is lower than all previously published results in Table 1 . We are within 1 of the result of Johnson etal. ( 2010 ); however, if we accounted for the mass dependency in our calculation as they have, we would expect our value for to decrease further (though not significantly so, as the stellar masses in our sample have a range of only 1M ). We have 2.32 and 2.31 from Valenti Fischer ( 2005 ) and Schlaufman ( 2014 ), the two other results from RV surveys, respectively. While these hint at a difference in the strength of the correlation between cool and hot Jupiters, we have 1.55 from Guo etal. ( 2017 ) and 2.75 from Petigura etal. ( 2018 ), the two hot Jupiter specific studies. Though again it should be noted that both hot Jupiter studies have a very small sample size. 5.2 Potential biases The metallicity offset ( c ) is needed to calibrate between the metallicities in Besanon and SWEET-Cat, but adds an extra degree of uncertainty compared with a survey that has a uniformly determined set of metallicities for both hot Jupiter hosts and field stars. However, the metallicity offset appears fairly well constrained from the sample distribution in Fig. 4 , and is relatively small in comparison to the overall spread of metallicities (cf. Fig. 3 ). The metallicity offset does correlate with (see Fig. 4 ), which results in a relatively large and slightly asymmetric uncertainty on . There is also a correlation between the radius of a star and its metallicity: the increase in opacity with the presence of metals results in the star having a larger radius. As transit depth decreases with the square of a stars radius, planets would be more difficult to detect around higher metallicity stars via the transit method. This would act to decrease our value of , but it has been found by Petigura etal. ( 2018 ) that planet detectability does not significantly depend on stellar metallicity. RV surveys will preferentially find planets around metal-rich stars as it is easier to perform the method when there are stronger and/or more metal lines present in the host star spectra. We do not expect the detection of a planet via the transit method to depend significantly on metallicity of the host star and this is one of the advantages of using a sample of hot Jupiter planets from transit survey discoveries. However, it should be noted that confirmation of planets from transit surveys is based on RV follow-up, which will still be subject to the bias described above.