arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.sr] 2 Apr 2018

RW Dor: a newly formed shallow-contact binary with a possible substellar companion arxiv:1804.00384v1 [astro-ph.sr] 2 Apr 2018 Sarotsakulchai T. 1,4,5, S.-B. Qian 1,2,3,4, Soonthornthum B. 5, X. Zhou 1,2,3, J. Zhang 1,2,3, W.-P. Liao 1,2,3, Reichart D. E. 6, Haislip J. B. 6, Kouprianov V. V. 6, Poshyachinda S. 5 and Rujopakarn W. 7 1 Yunnan Observatories, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 650216 Kunming, China huangbinghe@ynao.ac.cn 2 Key Laboratory of the Structure and Evolution of Celestial Objects, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 650216 Kunming, China 3 Center for Astronomical Mega-Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 20A Datun Rd., Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100012, China 4 University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 19 A Yuquan Rd., Shijingshan, 100049 Beijing, China 5 National Astronomical Research Institute of Thailand, Ministry of Science and Technology, Bangkok, Thailand 6 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of North Carolina, CB #3255, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA 7 Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, Chulalongkorn University, 254 Phayathai Rd., Pathumwan, Bangkok 10330, Thailand (Received ; accepted ) Abstract The results of BV(RI) c CCD photometric monitoring of RW Dor, performed with the PROMPT-8 robotic telescope at CTIO in Chile from March 2015 to March 2017, are presented. The light curves exhibit variation with very weak O Connell effect and gradually change from symmetry to asymmetry. This variation can be explained by spot activities. By analysing with the Wilson-Devinney code, it is shown that RW Dor is a W-subtype shallow contact binary with a dark spot on the hotter and less massive component. In addition, the orbital period changes of the system are investigated by using thirteen new times of light minima together with those complied from the literature. A secular decrease (dp/dt = 9.27 10 9 d yr 1 ) is found to be superimposed on a cyclic oscillation (A 3 = 0.0058 days and P 3 = 95.38 yrs). The light-travel time effect due to the presence of a third component is the most plausible explanation of the cyclic period change. The minimum mass of the third body is estimated as M 3 0.06 M that is below the stable hydrogen-burning limit of M 3 0.072M, and thus it may be a brown dwarf. Its orbital separation from the 1

center of the system is less than 22.35 AU. Both the shallow-contact configuration and the long-term period decrease may suggest that RW Dor is a new formed contact binary via a Case A mass transfer. Key words: binaries: close binaries: eclipsing stars: individual: (RW Dor) 1. Introduction RW Dor (HD 269320, HIP 24763) is a short-period W UMa-type binary with an orbital period of 0.285 days. A new period distribution for EW-type contact binaries was recently given by Qian et al. (2017). It was shown that the peak of the period distribution for this type of binaries is near 0.29 days. This indicated that RW Dor is typical W UMa-type contact binary. The system is near the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC), but not a member of LMC as pointed out by Russo et al. (1984) and Marino et al. (2007). RW Dor was discovered as a variable star by Leavitt (1908)and later classified as a W UMa-type eclipsing binary by Hertzsprung (1925). The first spectral classification of the variable was made by Cannon (1921) with the spectral type of K5. This was subsequently confirmed by McLaughlin (1927) who also classified the system as late-type eclipsing binary with K5 spectra type. The first photographic times of light minima were reported by Hertzsprung (1928), who gave an orbital period of 0.143 days. Later, a lot of photometric minima were obtained by many authors (Russo et al. 1984; Marton et al. 1989; Kaluzny & Caillault 1989; Ogloza & Zakrzewski 2004; Marino et al. 2007) and linear ephemeris was also corrected. The complete light curves were analysed with Wilson-Devinney method(wilson& Devinney 1971) and photometric elements were published independently by Marton et al. (1989) and Kaluzny & Caillault (1989). Those solutions indicated that RW Dor belongs to a W-subtype contact binary with components are not in poor thermal contact which predicted by the thermal relaxation oscillations theory (Lucy & Wilson 1979). Additionally, it was found that the light curves of RW Dor exhibited a significant difference in depths of the minima and showed variation. Marton et al. (1989) explained the asymmetry in the light curves as a hot spot on the cooler and more massive component located near the neck connecting the stars, while Kaluzny & Caillault (1989) reported that their light curves (observed September 1986) were only marginally asymmetric (different maxima 0.009 mag in V-band) and did not show any scatter more than the observational errors. However, as the large range of possible values in the determination of the mass ratio via photometric solutions, spectroscopic observations were carried out to determine more precise mass ratio. In 1992, Hilditch et al. (1992) published their results from radial velocity measurements of RW Dor, using the 3.9 m telescope of Anglo-Australian Observatory. They found that RW Dor was composed of two K1 type stars and the system was confirmed to be a W-subtype contact binary with mass ratio q sp =0.68±0.03 (or 1/q =1.47±0.07 as published 2

Table 1. Coordinates of RW Dor, the comparison, and the check stars. Targets Names α 2000 δ 2000 magnitude Variable star RW Dor 05 h 18 m 32.5 s 68 13 32.7 11.16 The comparison GSC0916200441 05 h 18 m 43.2 s 68 07 33.9 12.25 The check GSC0916200808 05 h 17 m 52.4 s 68 13 23.3 12.55 in 1992). The extensively spectroscopic observations were done by Duerbeck & Rucinski (2007) and q sp =0.63±0.03 was obtained. Recently, Marino et al. (2007) reported that some light curves of RW Dor exhibited asymmetry, which had happened similar to the results published by Marton et al. (1989). They re-computed the spectroscopic mass ratio by using the radial velocities given by Hilditch et al. (1992) combined together with the values given by Duerbeck & Rucinski (2007). They also reviewed all times of light minima and found a secular decrease trend with a rate of P/P 6.3 10 11. In this paper, we will extensively examine the light curve variations of asymmetry from our new photometric data, comparing results to the other investigators and some aspects from long-term monitoring of phased light curves obtained by the All Sky Automated Survey (ASAS, Pojmanski 1997, 2002; Pojmanski et al. 2008) between 2000 and 2004. The orbital period changes will be investigated and the third component in the system will be taken into consideration. 2. Photometric observations The photometric observations of RW Dor in BV(RI) C bands were done from March 2015 to March 2017 with back illuminated Apogee F42 2048 2048 CCD photometric system, attached to the 0.60 m Cassegrain reflecting telescope of PROMPT-8 1 robotic telescope. It located at the Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory (CTIO) in Chile. The web-based SKYNET client allowed us to request and retrieve image remotely via the internet. It also provided nightly calibration images, including bias, dark, and flat-field images(layden& Broderick 2010). The CCD reduction and aperture photometry were done with standard procedure packages of IRAF 2. The comparison (C) and check stars (Ch) are listed in Table 1 and the complete light curves of observations are displayed in Fig. 1 for September, October, November 2016 and March 2017. 1 PROMPT-8 is the Thai Southern Hemisphere Telescope (TST), operated in collaboration between National Astronomical Research Institute of Thailand(NARIT) and the University of North Carolina(UNC) at Chapel Hill in a part of the UNC-led PROMPT project, http://skynet.unc.edu. 2 The Image Reduction and Analysis Facility (IRAF), http://iraf.noao.edu. 3

Fig. 1. Complete light curves in BVR c I c bands obtained with the 0.6-m telescope at CTIO during September 2016 to March 2017. The differential magnitude between the comparison and check stars in BVR c I c bands are also shown at the bottom of figure. 3. Orbital period investigation Earlier epoches and times of light minima of RW Dor were collected and published by many authors, e.g., Hertzsprung (1928), Marton & Grieco (1981, 1983), Marton et al. (1989), Russo et al. (1984) and Ogloza & Zakrzewski (2004). Recently, Marino et al. (2007) revised all times of light minima with their new data and found a trend to period decrease ( P/P 6.3 10 11 ). Based on our observations, thirteen times of light minima were obtained and listed in Table 2. The variations of the orbital period were analysed by using O C (observed minus calculated) method. All available times of light minima were collected from literature and listed in Table 3, the (O C) 1 curve with the linear ephemeris given by Kreiner (2004), Min.I(HJD)=2451869.076+0 d.2854633e, (1) is shown in the upper panel of Fig 2. To get a better fit for the trend of (O C) 1 curve, we 4

Fig. 2. The four data sets of phased light curves in BVR c I c bands from September 2016 to March 2017 were put together. The differential magnitude between the comparison and check stars (C-Ch) in B, V, R c and I c bands were used to calibrate all data sets in each band. The left panel shows light curves before calibration and right panel for after calibration, respectively. Table 2. New times of light minima for RW Dor. Date HJD(2400000+) Error(days) Min. Filters 20150331 57112.6009 0.0001 II BR c 20150406 57118.5968 0.0001 II BVI c 20160228 57446.7363 0.0001 I BVR c 20160229 57447.5930 0.0001 I BV 20160913 57644.8485 0.0002 I BV 20160914 57645.8477 0.0001 II BV 20160930 57661.8334 0.0002 II BR c I c 20161025 57686.6689 0.0003 II BV 20161025 57686.8119 0.0002 I BV 20161128 57720.6390 0.0002 II BV 20161129 57721.6383 0.0002 I BVR c 20170314 57826.5461 0.0002 II BR c 20170315 57827.5454 0.0002 I VI c 5

(O-C) 1 (days) (O-C) 2 (days) Residuals (days) 0.04 0.02 0.00-0.02-0.04-0.06-0.08 0.01 0.00-0.01 0.01 0.00-0.01 RW Dor -150000-125000 -100000-75000 -50000-25000 0 25000 E Fig. 3. The (O C) 1 diagram was constructed using the linear ephemeris in Eq. (1) derived by Kreiner (2004). The solid line in the upper panel refersto a combinationof along-termperiod decreaseand asmall-amplitude cyclic oscillation, while the dashed line refers to the long-term decrease of the orbital period. combined a long-term period decrease with an additional sinusoidal term when assuming that the period oscillation is cyclic. By using a least-square method, the equation was determined: Min.I(HJD) = 2451869.07685(±0.00009) + 0.285463228(±0.000000004)E [0.3624(±0.0035) 10 11 ]E 2 +0.0058(±0.0001) sin[0.00295e+177.138(±1.313)] According to Eq. (2), the semi-amplitude of cyclic oscillation is 0.0058 days and the sinusoidal term suggests that it has an oscillation with a period of 95.38 yrs. The residuals from Eq. (2) are plotted in the lower panel of Fig 3. The quadratic term in Eq. (2) also reveals a continuous period decrease at a rate of dp/dt= 9.27 10 9 d yr 1. 4. Photometric solutions Since our observations performed a few days in different months and obtained light curves showing a gradually change from symmetry to asymmetry. We obtained four data sets of light curves and put them together to compare each other as shown in Fig 2, we found that only phased light curves in 14-15 March 2017 exhibited clearly of asymmetry with small difference of 6 (2)

Table 3. Times of light minima of RW Dor. HJD(2400000+) Error(days) E (O C) 1 Method Min. Ref. 11298.835-142120.5-0.05407 pg II (1) 14168.883-132066.5-0.05409 pg II (1) 15621.901-126976.5-0.04429 pg II (1) 16013.836-125603.5-0.05040 pg II (1) 16489.714-123936.5-0.03972 pg II (1) 17075.903-121883.0-0.04961 pg I (1) 23784.600-98382.0-0.02562 pg I (1) 24172.537-97023.0-0.03324 pg I (1) 30938.602-73321.0-0.01968 pg I (10) 44313.581 0.001-26467.5 0.00519 BV II (2) 44464.876 0.001-25937.5 0.00474 BV II (2) 44581.7728 0.0008-25528.0 0.00392 UBV I (2) 44608.6063 0.0005-25434.0 0.00387 UBV I (2) 44608.7488 0.0006-25433.5 0.00364 UBV II (2) 44609.6063 0.0008-25430.5 0.00475 UBV II (2) 44609.7493 0.0005-25430.0 0.00502 UBV I (2) 44610.7487 0.0009-25426.5 0.00530 UBV II (2) 44825.8462 0.0008-24673.0 0.00620 UBV I (3) 44826.8442 0.0004-24669.5 0.00508 UBV II (3) 44873.8038 0.0006-24505.0 0.00597 UBV I (3) 44874.6594 0.0003-24502.0 0.00518 UBV I (3) 44874.8010 0.0004-24501.5 0.00404 UBV II (3) 44958.5851 0.0004-24208.0 0.00467 UBV I (3) 44961.5843 0.0006-24197.5 0.00650 UBV II (3) 44961.7239 0.0006-24197.0 0.00337 UBV I (3) 44962.5815 0.0007-24194.0 0.00458 UBV I (3) 44962.7267 0.0005-24193.5 0.00705 UBV II (3) 45021.6738 0.0003-23987.0 0.00598 UBV I (3) 45049.5058 0.0006-23889.5 0.00531 UBV II (3) 45049.6486 0.0008-23889.0 0.00537 UBV I (3) 45050.6484 0.0003-23885.5 0.00605 UBV II (3) 45076.4815 0.0004-23795.0 0.00472 UBV I (3) 45370.6556 0.0001-22764.5 0.00889 B II (4) 45370.6558 0.0003-22764.5 0.00909 V II (4) 45370.6564 0.0004-22764.5 0.00969 U II (4) 45376.6502 0.0001-22743.5 0.00876 B II (4) 45376.6507 0.0002-22743.5 0.00926 V II (4) 45376.6517 0.0002-22743.5 0.01026 U II (4) 46680.7878 0.001-18175.0 0.00728 V I (5) 46681.7865 0.001-18171.5 0.00686 B II (5) 46690.7785 0.0001-18140.0 0.00676 VI I (6) 46695.7745 0.0001-18122.5 0.00715 VI II (6) 48500.0470-11802.0 0.00887 I (10) 50559.9437 0.0004-4586.0 0.00239 I (7) 50560.0865 0.0003-4585.5 0.00246 II (7) 51158.5603 0.0002-2489.0 0.00245 I (7) 51158.7027 0.0002-2488.5 0.00212 II (7) 51505.6820 0.0002-1273.0 0.00078 I (7) 51505.8252 0.0002-1272.5 0.00125 II (7) 7

Table 3. -continued. HJD(2400000+) Error(days) E (O C) 1 Method Min. Ref. 51548.5020-1123.0 0.00129 I (10) 51869.0760 0.0 0.00000 I (10) 54036.5947 7593.0-0.00414 I (10) 54036.7411 7593.5-0.00047 II (10) 54037.5995 7596.5 0.00154 II (10) 54037.7384 7597.0-0.00229 I (10) 54041.7335 7611.0-0.00368 I (10) 54049.5878 7638.5 0.00038 II (10) 54059.7177 7674.0-0.00366 I (10) 54087.9783 0.0001 7773.0-0.00393 BV I (8) 54091.1189 0.0002 7784.0-0.00343 BV I (8) 54095.1150 0.0001 7798.0-0.00381 BV I (8) 54107.6761 7842.0-0.00310 I (10) 56950.7446 17801.5-0.00633 I (10) 57112.6009 0.0001 18368.5-0.00773 CCD II (9) 57118.5968 0.0001 18389.5-0.00656 CCD II (9) 57446.7363 0.0001 19539.0-0.00712 CCD I (9) 57447.5930 0.0001 19542.0-0.00681 CCD I (9) 57644.8485 0.0002 20233.0-0.00645 CCD I (9) 57645.8477 0.0001 20236.5-0.00637 CCD II (9) 57661.8334 0.0002 20292.5-0.00662 CCD II (9) 57686.6689 0.0003 20379.5-0.00642 CCD II (9) 57686.8119 0.0002 20380.0-0.00615 CCD I (9) 57720.6390 0.0002 20498.5-0.00646 CCD II (9) 57721.6383 0.0002 20502.0-0.00628 CCD I (9) 57826.5461 0.0002 20869.5-0.00624 CCD II (9) 57827.5454 0.0002 20873.0-0.00606 CCD I (9) Notes. (1) Hertzsprung 1928, (2) Marton & Grieco 1981, (3) Marton & Grieco 1983, (4) Russo et al. 1984, (5) Marton et al. 1989, (6) Kaluzny & Caillault 1989, (7) Ogloza & Zakrzewski 2004, (8) Marino et al. 2007,(9) the present authors, (10) http://var.astro.cz/ocgate. Max-I and Max-II. Therefore, the light curves can be distinguishable in two groups; symmetry and asymmetry (data set-1: 28-29 November 2016, data set-2: 13-14 September 2016 and data set-3: 14-15 March 2017). Later, we found that data set-2 was symmetric as the same in data set-1, thus we consider only data set-1 and set-3. Our two data sets in B, V, R C and I C bands were analysed separately using the Wilson & Devinney (W-D) code (Wilson & Devinney 1971; Wilson 1990, 1994, 2012; van Hamme & Wilson 2007) and we used data set-1 of symmetric light curves with smallest magnitude difference of Max-I and Max-II to determine the basic photometric elements by assuming no spot on either component. Then, asymmetric light curves of data set-3 were analysed later with those initial physical elements by adding spot model. The photometric parameters of RW Dor had been derived by many authors, e.g., Russo et al. (1984); the two groups by Marton et al. (1989) and Kaluzny & Caillault (1989), who obtained mass ratio q = 1.75 and 1.80, respectively; Hilditch et al (1992); Marino et al. (2007) and most recently by Deb & Singh (2011). The photometric determination with initial input we used the spectral classification reported by Duerbeck & Rucinski (2007) with the Tycho-2 mean color index B V=0.66, 8

0.0236 0.0234 set-1 set-3 0.0232 0.0230 0.0228 0.0226 0.0224 0.0222 0.0220 0.0218 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 q Fig. 4. Relation between the mass ratio q and the sum of weighted square deviations from data set-1 and set-3. The graph presents for general q-search from 1.0 to 3.0 and the results indicate that the best fit of mass ratio q is in the range between 1.7 and 2.3. corresponding to a spectral type of G4/5V. While the color index in SIMBAD database reveals a B V = 0.69. Forour solutions, the effective temperature ofthe primary star (T 1 ) was assumed as 5500 K corresponding to its spectral type (Cox 2000). We assume that the convective envelopes already developed. Thus, the bolometric albedos for star 1 and 2 were taken as A 1 = A 2 = 0.5 and the values of the gravity-darkening coefficients g 1 = g 2 = 0.32 were used. The monochromatic and bolometric limb-darkening coefficients were taken from van Hamme s table (van Hamme 1993) by using logarithmic law. All fixed parameters are listed in Table 4. The adjustable parameters are the inclination (i), the mass ratio (q), the temperature of star 2 (T 2 ), the monochromatic luminosity of star 1 (L 1B, L 1V, L 1Rc and L 1Ic ), the dimensionless potential of star 1 (Ω 1 =Ω 2 ) in model 3 for contact configuration. For precise mass ratio determination, Hilditch et al. (1992) had published results of radial velocity measurements and gave mass ratio q sp =0.68±0.03. Later, Duerbeck & Rucinski (2007) obtained q sp =0.63±0.03. However, to check the mass ratio we used a q-search method with our photometric data to determine its photometric mass ratio q ph and then set mass ratio as an adjustable parameter to get a better fit from data set-1 and set-3. The results of q-search method are plotted in Fig. 4. The initial photometric mass ratio we obtained is q = 1.6 and 9

m Residuals -2.2-2.0-1.8 I -1.6 R -1.4-1.2-1.0 V -0.8-0.6-0.4-0.2 B 0.0 0.2 0.4 set1: symmetric light-curve (without third light) 0.2 0.4 I 0.6 0.8 R 1.0 V 1.2 1.4 B -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 Phase Fig. 5. Theoretical light curves (solid lines) calculated using the W-D method compared to the normal points of the observed light curves of data set-1; symmetric light curves without third light. then the differential correction was performed until the final solutions were derived at q = 1.69±0.03 or 1/q = 0.59±0.01. Theoretical light curves (solid lines) compare to the normal points of the observed symmetric light curves are shown in Fig. 5. As Fig. 6 for data set-3 (March 2017) without spot model, all observed light curves in B, V and (RI) C bands seem to fit well, except some part of light curves from phase 0.1 to phase 0.4 which the normal model cannot fit well the data. In this case of late-type contact binaries, the O Connell effect is possibly caused by solar-type spot activities (e.g., Qian et al. 2013b; Zhang et al. 2018). Thus, we try to add one cool spot or hot spot at or both primary and secondary components in the modeling process to get better fit. In W-D code, a spot has four parameters: θ is the latitude and ψ is the longitude of spot center (in degrees), while spot angular radius (r s ) in radians and T f is the spot temperature factor (the ratio between the spot temperature and the photosphere surface temperature of the star surround the spot). As the result, we found that a cool spot model on the hotter and less massive primary component is 10

m Residuals -2.2-2.0-1.8 I -1.6 R -1.4-1.2-1.0 V -0.8-0.6-0.4-0.2 B 0.0 0.2 0.4 set3: asymmetric light-curve (without third light & spot) 0.2 0.4 I 0.6 0.8 R 1.0 V 1.2 1.4 B -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 Phase Fig. 6. Theoretical light curves (solid lines) calculated using the W-D method compared to the normal points of the observed light curves of data set-3; asymmetric light curves without third light and spots. the best fit for our data as shown in Fig. 7 In addition, as the (O C) diagram which shows a cyclic variation that may be caused by light-travel time effect via the presence of a third companion. Therefore, we added the third light (l 3 ) as an adjustable parameter in order to check the luminosity contribution of such third companion, but the ultimate results show the negative values. The solutions are listed in Table 4 and theoretical light curves (solid lines) are plotted in Figs. 5 and 6 for data set-1 and set-3 without third light and spot, respectively. The geometrical structures of RW Dor for data set-3 with a cool spot on the primary component are shown in Fig. 8. 5. Discussions and conclusions Several sets of multi-color light curves in BV(RI) c bands were obtained by using the PROMPT-8 robotic telescope at CTIO in Chile from March 2015 to March 2017. Comparing to the light curves observed by the ASAS from 2000 and 2004 as shown in Fig. 9, they are 11

m -2.2-2.0-1.8 I -1.6 R -1.4-1.2-1.0 V -0.8-0.6-0.4 B -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 set3: asymmetric light-curve (with cool spot at m1) -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 Phase Fig. 7. Theoretical light curves (solid lines) calculated using the W-D method compared to the normal points of the observed light curves of data set-3; asymmetric light curves with a cool spot at primary star. phase 0.00 phase 0.25 phase 0.50 phase 0.75 Fig. 8. Geometrical structures with a cool spot on the primary at phases of 0.00, 0.25, 0.50 and 0.75 12

Table 4. Photometric solutions for data set-1 and set-3 of RW Dor. Parameters data set-1 (without spot) set-3 (without spot) set-3 (with spot) T 1 (K) 5500 assumed fixed g 1 =g 2 0.32 assumed fixed A 1 =A 2 0.50 assumed fixed q(m 2 /M 1 ) 1.69(±0.03) 1.77(±0.05) 1.76 (±0.01) T 2 (K) 5199(±1) 5211(±14) 5220(±22) T 1 T 2 (K) 301 289 280 i( o ) 77.209(±0.156) 77.202(±0.204) 76.785(±0.258) Ω in 3.0448 3.0012 3.2800 Ω out 2.6989 2.6676 2.8681 Ω 1 =Ω 2 4.7474(±0.0494) 4.8411(±0.0767) 4.8279(±0.0105) L 1 /(L 1 +L 2 )(B) 0.4764(±0.0061) 0.4634(±0.0088) 0.4581(±0.0002) L 1 /(L 1 +L 2 )(V) 0.4544(±0.0056) 0.4424(±0.0080) 0.4385(±0.0014) L 1 /(L 1 +L 2 )(R c ) 0.4425(±0.0053) 0.4311(±0.0077) 0.4271(±0.0021) L 1 /(L 1 +L 2 )(I c ) 0.4337(±0.0051) 0.4227(±0.0075) 0.4198(±0.0018) r 1 (pole) 0.3199(±0.0016) 0.3166(±0.0024) 0.3169(±0.0013) r 1 (side) 0.3352(±0.0017) 0.3318(±0.0026) 0.3322(±0.0016) r 1 (back) 0.3714(±0.0017) 0.3687(±0.0026) 0.3689(±0.0017) r 2 (pole) 0.4038(±0.0065) 0.4112(±0.0098) 0.4101(±0.0011) r 2 (side) 0.4283(±0.0085) 0.4373(±0.0129) 0.4358(±0.0014) r 2 (back) 0.4589(±0.0122) 0.4689(±0.0187) 0.4673(±0.0015) f 11.4%(±2.4%) 12.8%(±1.8%) 12.5%(±1.3%) θ( ) 11 ψ( ) 95 r s (rad) 0.646 T f 0.675 T spot (K) 3713 ΣW i (O C) 2 i 0.0207 0.0208 0.0115 13

symmetric and no exhibited the O Connell (O Connell 1951) effect (also see Deb& Singh 2011). However, the present light curves are gradually changing from symmetry to asymmetry. The variable O Connell effect was also found in other contact binaries e.g., AB And (Djurasevic et al. 2000), BX Peg (Lee et al. 2004), EQ Tau (Li et al. 2014), CW Cas (Wang et al. 2014), CSTAR 038663 (Qian et al. 2014) and EPIC 211957146 (Sriram et al. 2017). From the solutions with the W-D method, it is detected that RW Dor is a W-subtype and shallow-contact binary with a degree of contact of 11.4(±2.4)% and a high mass ratio of q = 1.69(±0.03), where the hotter component is the less massive one. According to its spectral type of G4/5 V, the mass of hotter component (the primary) is estimated (Cox 2000) and the mass of the secondary can be determined from the derived mass ratio of q = 1.69. The absolute dimensions of RW Dor were determined by using the photometric elements together with spectroscopic parameters (Duerbeck & Rucinski 2007), as results: M 1 = 0.49M, M 2 = 0.83M,a=2.03R,R 1 =0.69R,R 2 =0.87R,L 1 =0.39L andl 2 =0.49L. Theseparameters are close to those recently derived by Deb & Singh (2011). In general, the asymmetric light curve of subtype W systems can be explained by cool spots on the more massive components (Mullan 1975). However, the solution of the dark spot is definitely not unique (Qian et al. 2013b). In our result, the variations of the light curves are fitted well with a dark spot model on the less massive component. The O Connell effect is likely a consequence of the gas streams in contact binaries (Paczynski et al. 2006). The spot from magnetic activity in late-type stars of W-subtype contact binaries is consistent with the X-ray survey results that RW Dor is an X-ray source (e.g., Schmidtke et al. 1994, Stepien et al. 2001; Chen et al. 2006). By analyzing the O C diagram, it is discovered that the orbital period of RW Dor is decreasing at a rate of dp/dt= 9.27 10 9 d yr 1 while it undergoes a cyclic oscillation. The type of variations, i.e., a long-term decrease combined with a cyclic change, is also found in other contact binary stars. Some examples are MR Com (Qian et al. 2013a), DI Hya (Liao et al. 2017) and V1073 Cyg (Tian et al. 2018). This long-term period decrease can be explained by the mass transfer from the more massive component to the less massive or the angular momentum loss via magnetic braking. If the long-term period decrease is due to conservative mass transfer, the mass transfer rate can be determined with the following equation, P P = 3 M 1 ( 1 M 1 1 M 2 ) (3) as dm 1 /dt=1.96 10 8 M yr 1. The timescale of mass transfer can be estimated as M 2 / M 1 3.58 10 7 yr, which is close to its thermal timescale of the more massive component 4.28 10 7 yr. It means that the orbital period decrease should be due to the mass transfer between the two components. This is in agreement with the conclusion derived by Qian et al. (2017, 2018) that some EW-type contact binaries were formed from short-period EA-type systems via Case A mass transfer. The situation of RW Dor is similar to that of MR Com. Both the shallow- 14

9.8 10.0 I-filter m 10.2 10.4 10.6 10.8 11.0 11.2 11.4 11.6 ASAS data Jan 2000 Feb 2004 11.8-0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 Phase V-filter Fig. 9. Light curves from ASAS database 2000 and 2004. contact configuration and the long-term period decrease may suggest that they may be new formed contact binaries (e.g., Qian et al. 2013a). In addition, the cyclic oscillation (semi-amplitude A 3 = 0.0058 days and oscillation period P 3 = 95.38 years) in orbital period variation can be possibly explained by two mechanisms, i.e., the Applegate mechanism (Applegate 1992) and the light-travel time effect (Liao & Qian 2010; Han et al. 2016). The Applegate mechanism suggested that the cyclic change is caused by magnetic activity-driven variations in the quadrupole moment of solar-type components. The quadrupole moment can be determined from equations given by Rovithis-Livaniou et al. (2000) and Lanza & Rodono (2002), P = [1 cos(2πp/p 3 )] A 3 (4) and P Q = 9 P Ma 2. (5) The result is P/P 7.39 10 7 and the quadruple moment Q is in order 10 48 g cm 2. However, the typical values for active contact binary range from 10 51 to 10 52 g cm 2. Thus, the cyclic oscillation may not be caused by the Applegate mechanism. Therefore, the cyclic period change may be caused by the light-travel time effect via the presence of a tertiary component. By assuming that the third body moves in a circular orbit, 15

Table 5. Parameters of the tertiary component. Parameters Value Error Units P 3 95.38 assumed yrs A 3 0.0058 0.0001 days a 12 sini 1.005 0.017 AU f(m) 0.0001 0.0000 M e 3 0.0 assumed - M 3 (i =90 ) 0.060 0.001 M M 3 (i =60 ) 0.070 0.001 M M 3 (i =45 ) 0.086 0.001 M M 3 (i =30 ) 0.124 0.002 M M 3 (i =10 ) 0.401 0.008 M a 3 (i =90 ) 22.35 0.55 AU a 3 (i =60 ) 22.25 0.55 AU a 3 (i =45 ) 22.08 0.55 AU a 3 (i =30 ) 21.69 0.54 AU a 3 (i =10 ) 19.33 0.52 AU the value of a 12sini is computed as 1.005AU by using the relation a 12sini = A 3 c, where A 3 is the semi-amplitude of the O C oscillation, c is the speed of light and i is the inclination of the orbit of the third component. Thus the mass function, the masses and the orbital radii of the third component in different inclination values can be determined with the following equation, f(m)= 4π2 GP 2 3 (a 12 sini ) 3 = (M 3 sini ) 3 (M 1 +M 2 +M 3 ) 2. (6) The corresponding values are displayed in Table 5. The lowest mass of the third component (i =90) is estimated as M 3 =0.06M. This value is below the stable hydrogen-burning limit of M 3 0.072M and it may be a brown dwarf candidate. The orbital separation of the third body from the center of the binary is less than 22.35 AU. To check for existence of the third companion, we search for the third light during the photometric solution, but the result indicated that the contribution of the third light is very small comparing to the total light of the system. It is possible that the third body is a substellar object. Recently, a possible substellar object orbiting the solar-like contact binary V2284 Cyg was reported by Wang et al. (2017). Both the shallow-contact configuration and the long-term period decrease may suggest that RW Dor is a newly formed contact binary via a Case A mass transfer. To understand more details about evolution and formation of this contact binary and its substellar companion, new photometric and spectroscopic observations are required. 16

This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 11325315). We would like to thank Dr. Wiphu Rujopakarn and NARIT for time allocation to use PROMPT-8 for our observations. References Applegate, J. H. 1992, ApJ, 385, 621 Cannon, A. J. 1921, Harvard Bull., 754 Chen, W. P., Sanchawala, K., Chiu, M. C. 2006, AJ, 131, 990 Cox, A. N. 2000, Allen s Astrophysical Quantities(4th ed.; New York: Springer) Deb, S. & Singh, H. P. 2011, MNRAS, 412, 1787 Djurasevic, G. et al. 2000, A&A, 364, 543 Duerbeck, H. W., & Rucinski, S. M. 2007, AJ, 133, 169 Han, Zhong-Tao., Qian, Sheng-Bang., Voloshina, Irina., Metlov, Vladimir G., Zhu, Li-Ying., Li, Lin- Jia. 2016, RAA, 16, 156 Hertzsprung, E. 1925, BAN, 77, 218 Hertzsprung, E. 1928, BAN, 146, 154 Hilditch, R. W., Hill, G., Bell, S. A. 1992, MNRAS, 255, 285 Kaluzny, J. 1986a, Acta Astron., 36, 105 Kaluzny, J. 1986b, Acta Astron., 36, 113 Kaluzny, J. 1986c, Acta Astron., 36, 121 Kaluzny, J. & Caillault, J.-P. 1989, Acta Astron., 39, 27 Kreiner, J. M. 2004, Acta Astron., 54, 207 Lanza, A. F., & Rodono, M. 2002, AN, 323, 424 Layden, A. C. & Broderick, A. J. 2010, PASP, 122, 1000 Leavitt, H. 1908, Harvard Annals, 60, 100 Lee, Jae Woo., Kim, Chun-Hwey., Han, Wonyong., Kim, Ho-Il; Koch., Robert H. 2004, MNRAS, 352, 1041 Li, K., Qian, S.-B., Hu, S.-M., & He, J.-J. 2014, AJ, 147, 98 Liao, W.-P., & Qian, S.-B. 2010, MNRAS, 405, 1930 Liao, W.-P., Qian, S.-B., Li, L.-J., Zhou, X., Zhao, E.-G., Zhang, J. 2017, PASP, Volume 129, Issue 973, pp. 034201 Lucy, L. B. & Wilson, R. E. 1979, ApJ, 231, 502 Marino, B. F., Walker, W. S. G., Bembrick, C., Budding, E. 2007, PASA, 24, 199 Marton, S. F. & Grieco, A. 1981, IBVS, No. 1960 Marton, S. F. & Grieco, A. 1983, IBVS, No. 2346 Marton, S. F., Grieco, A., Sistero, R. F. 1989, MNRAS, 240, 931 McLaughlin, D. B. 1927, AJ, 38, 45 Mullan, D. J. 1975, ApJ, 198, 563 O Connell D. J. K. 1951, Riverview Pub., 2, 85 Ogloza, W. & Zakrzewski, B. 2004, IBVS, No. 5507 17

Paczynski, B., Szczygiel, D. M., Pilecki, B., Pojmanski, G. 2006, MNRAS, 368, 1311 Pojmanski, G. 1997, Acta Astron., 47, 467 Pojmanski, G. 2002, Acta Astron., 52, 397 Qian, S.-B., Liu, N.-P., Liao, W.-P., He, J.-J., Liu, L., Zhu, L.-Y., Wang, J.-J., & Zhao, E.-G. 2013, AJ, 146, 38 Qian, S.-B., Liu, N.-P., Li, K., He, J.-J., Zhu, L.-Y., Zhao, E.-G., et al. 2013, ApJS, 209, 13 Qian, S.-B., Wang, J.-J., Zhu, L.-Y., Boonrucksar, S., et al. 2014, ApJS, 212, 4 Qian, S.-B., He, J.-J., Zhang, J., Zhu, L.-Y., Shi, X.-D., Zhao, E.-G., Zhou, X. 2017, RAA, 17, 87 Qian, S.-B., Zhang, J., He, J.-J., Zhu, L.-Y., Zhao, E.-G., Shi, X.-D., Zhou, X., Han, Z.-T 2018, ApJS, 235, 5 Rovithis-Livaniou, H., Kranidiotis, A. N., Rovithis, P., Athanassiades, G. 2000, A&A, 354, 904 Rucinski, S. M. & Lu, W. 1999, AJ, 118, 2451 Russo, G., Vittone, A. A., Milano, L. 1984, A&AS, 57, 69 Schmidtke, P. C., Cowley, A. P., Frattare, L. M., Mcgrath, T. K., et al. 1994, PASP, 106, 843 Sriram, K., Malu, S., Choi, C. S., Vivekananda Rao, P. 2017, AJ, 153, 231 Stȩpień, K., Schmitt, J. H. M. M., & Voges, W. 2001, A&A, 370, 157 Tian, Xiao-Man., Zhu, Li-Ying., Qian, Sheng-Bang., Li, Lin-Jia., Jiang, Lin-Qiao. 2018, RAA, 18, 20 van Hamme, W. 1993, AJ, 106, 2096 Wang, J. J., Qian, S. B., He, J. J., Li, L. J., & Zhao, E. G. 2014, 148, 95 Wang, J.-J.; Jiang, L.-Q.; Zhang, B.; Zhao, S.-Q.; Yu, J. 2017, PASP, Volume 129, Issue 982, pp. 124202 Wilson, R. E. 1990, ApJ, 356, 613 Wilson, R. E. 1994, PASP, 106, 921 Wilson, R. E. 2012, AJ, 144, 73 Wilson, R. E. & Devinney, E. J. 1971, ApJ, 166, 605 Van Hamme, W., & Wilson, R. E. 2007, ApJ, 661, 1129 Zhang, B., Qian, S.-B., Michel, R., Soonthornthum, B., Zhu, L.-Y. 2018, RAA, 18, 30 18