Multifractal detrended moving average analysis of Kepler stars with surface differential rotation traces
D. B. de Freitas M. M. F. Nepomuceno J. G. Cordeiro M. L. Das Chagas J. R. De Medeiros


firstpage–lastpage
Differentially private sub-Gaussian location estimators
    Marco Avella-Medina Columbia University, Department of Statistics, marco.avella@columbia.edu Victor-Emmanuel Brunel ENSAE ParisTech, Department of Statistics, victor.emmanuel.brunel@ensae.fr
    December 30, 2023
==================================================================================================================================================================================================





A multifractal formalism is employed to analyse high-precision time-series data of Kepler stars with surface differential rotation traces. The multifractal detrended moving average analysis (MFDMA) algorithm has been explored to characterize the multi-scale behaviour of the observed time series from a sample of 662 stars selected with parameters close to those of the Sun, e.g., effective temperature, mass, effective gravity and rotation period. Among these stars, 141 have surface differential rotation traces, whereas 521 have no detected differential rotation signatures. In our sample, we also include the Sun in its active phase. Our results can be summarized in two points: first, our work suggests that starspots for time series with and without differential rotation have distinct dynamics, and second, the magnetic fields of active stars are apparently governed by two mechanisms with different levels of complexity for fluctuations. Throughout the course of the study, we identified an overall trend whereby the differential rotation is distributed in two H regimes segregated by the degree of asymmetry A, where H-index denotes the global Hurst exponent which is used as a measure of long-term memory of time series. As a result, we show that the degree of asymmetry can be considered a segregation factor that distinguishes the differential rotation behaviour when related to the effect of the rotational modulation on the time series. In summary, the multifractality signals in our sample are the result of magnetic activity control mechanisms leading to activity-related long-term persistent signatures.






stars: rotation – methods: data analysis – stars: solar-type









§ INTRODUCTION


Differential rotation is a key parameter for understanding the stellar dynamo and transport processes in the interiors of stars. Different methods can be used to measure differential rotation (DR). For example, the rotational broadening of spectral line profiles is directly measurable by means of deconvolution techniques that are based on Fourier analysis <cit.> or Doppler imaging and Zeeman-Doppler imaging <cit.>. Recently, <cit.> showed that the lifetime of the starspot pattern can be measured from the decay of the height of successive autocorrelation peaks and that the lifetime determined in this manner affects the possibility of measuring the DR with a two-spot model.

The Kepler space mission now offers the ability to measure the rotation periods of thousands of stars based on high-precision photometry <cit.>. This measurement opens a new perspective for the study of DR. In a recent paper, <cit.> identified, from the entire Kepler database of time series for more than 800 stars observed over 17 quarters, 17 stars with the signature of DR and with sufficiently stable signals. The authors used a simple two-spot model combined with a Bayesian information criterion for this sample in the search to measure the amplitude of surface DR <cit.>. Prior to that paper, <cit.> used a procedure based on the Lomb-Scargle periodogram for a pre-whitening approach, resulting in a large sample of stars with the DR signature.

A substantial portion of the database from <cit.> belongs to the <cit.> sample. In that sample, they extended the number to over 40,000 active stars, for which 24,124 primary rotation periods (P1) between 0.5 and 45 days were found, with a mean of ⟨ P1 ⟩=16.3 days. In addition, the authors found evidence of surface DR in 18,616 stars.

In the present study, we analysed the multifractal nature of a sample of 662 active stars extracted from <cit.> using the multifractal detrending moving average (MFDMA) algorithm, which was proposed by <cit.> and tested by <cit.> for Kepler and CoRoT stars.

In general, multifractal analysis and its different methods and procedures <cit.>, which were developed over more than 5 decades, are applied in a wide variety of fields as inspired by <cit.>. In several areas, such as medicine <cit.> and geophysics <cit.>, multifractality has already been adopted as a determinant approach for analysing the behaviours of time series with nonlinearity, nonstationarity and correlated noise, which are just a few of the properties that this analysis is able to describe <cit.>. More recently, <cit.> showed that the multifractal analysis of sunspot numbers is a crucial procedure for understanding the behaviour of the magnetic field of the Sun.

Beginning in 2013, <cit.> showed that multifractality analysis of stellar activity is a powerful tool for estimating physical properties based on the multifractality spectrum. More specifically, a set of four multifractal indexes that are extracted from geometric features of the singularity spectrum (see the next section) are used to describe the fluctuations in the different scales. In particular, these authors showed that the Hurst exponent has a strong correlation with the rotation period when used for a wide range of periods. In the present work, we restricted the interval of the period to a solar regime of between 24.5 and 33.5 days. Our motivation was to eliminate the correlation cited above and, therefore, verify whether there are other multifractal indexes affected by stellar rotation. This procedure can be useful for investigating details in a time series that a conventional method cannot determine.

As mentioned by <cit.>, multifractal analysis is an under-exploited approach for quantifying and investigating the behaviour of astrophysical time series that exhibit magnetic activity. Indeed, most papers <cit.> that address time series still use procedures that summarize the photometry of the star as a purely Gaussian (normal) process and use methods that rely on a statistically limited analysis. Among the limitations are the lack of criteria for analysing the presence of memory with noisy backgrounds and the shapes of the probability distributions, which are associated with the dependences of different statistical moments. These canonical methods consider only the first (i.e., mean) and second (i.e., variance) statistical moments. Thus, the analysis omits other moments, such as asymmetry, kurtosis and higher-order moments, which are denoted by parameter q in the multifractal scenario (see the next section). However, multifractal time series are not normally distributed, and all q-order statistical moments should be considered <cit.>.

Our paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we provide a detailed description of multifractal analysis in which we emphasize a set of indexes that are extracted from the multifractal spectrum. In Section 3, we describe the working sample. Section 4 is dedicated to a detailed discussion of the results. In the last section, our final remarks are summarized.




























§ MULTIFRACTAL ANALYSIS

Recently, <cit.> used multifractal analysis to investigate the multi-scale behaviour of a set of 34 M dwarf stars observed by the Kepler mission as well as the Sun in its active phase. <cit.> showed that the MFDMA algorithm, which was developed by <cit.>[MATLAB codes for MFDMA analysis can be found in the  version of <cit.>'s paper: ] and <cit.>, is a powerful technique that provides invaluable information on the dynamic structure of a time series.

<cit.> summarized the MFDMA algorithm in the following steps:


	
  * Step 1: Calculate the time-series profile over time t=1,2,3,...,N:


    y(t)=∑^t_i=1x(i),    t=1,2,3,...,N,

where the above equation is a sequence of cumulative sums and x(i) is the observed time series.


	
  * Step 2: Calculate the moving average function of Eq. (<ref>) in a moving window:


    ỹ(t)=1/s∑^⌈ s-1⌉_k=0y(t-k),

where s is the window size, and ⌈ (x)⌉ is the smallest integer that is not smaller than argument (x).


	
  * Step 3: Detrend the series by removing the moving average function, ỹ(i), and obtain the residual sequence, ϵ(i), through:


    ϵ(i)=y(i)-ỹ(i).

where s ≤ i≤ N. The residual series, ϵ(i), is divided into N_s disjoint segments with the same size of s. In our code, N_s is an input parameter, which we set to a value of 30, as suggested by <cit.>. On the other hand, the box size s is an output parameter and varies in the range of [10,N/10]. In addition, each segment can be expressed by ϵ_ν, where ϵ_ν(i)=ϵ(l+i) such that 1≤ i ≤ s and l=(ν-1)s.


	
  * Step 4: Calculate the root-mean-square (RMS) fluctuation function, F_ν(s), for a segment of size s:


    F_ν(s)={1/s∑^s_i=1ϵ^2_ν(i)}^1/2.



	
  * Step 5: Generate the function, F_q(s), of the qth order:


    F_q(s)={1/N_s∑^N_s_ν=1F^q_ν(s)}^1/q,

for all q≠ 0. According to the <cit.>’s formalism, we assume q to be a real number in the interval [-5,5]. The qth-order function is the statistical moment (e.g., for q=2, we have the variance), and for q=0,

    ln[F_0(s)]=1/N_s∑^N_s_ν=1ln [F_ν(s)],

where the scaling behaviour of F_q(s) follows the relationship that is given by F_q(s)∼ s^h(q), and h(q) denotes the Holder exponent or generalized Hurst exponent. Each value of q yields a slope, h.


	
  * Step 6: Given h(q), the multifractal scaling exponent, τ(q), can be computed:


    τ(q)=q h(q)-1.


Finally, the singularity strength function, α(q), and the multifractal spectrum, f(α), are obtained via a Legendre transform:

    α(q)=dτ(q)/dq

and

    f(α)=qα-τ(q).

In addition, for a monofractal signal, h is the same for all values of q. For a multifractal signal, h(q) is a function of q, and the multifractal spectrum is parabolic (see Figure <ref>). In particular, for q=2, we have a specific value of h denoted by H and known as the global Hurst exponent.




 §.§ Multifractal indexes

We tested the set of four multifractal descriptors that were extracted from the spectrum f(α), as proposed by <cit.>. A scheme of indexes used to quantify the multifractal spectrum in this work is shown in Figure <ref>. <cit.> have used this same figure to describe the shape of the multifractal spectrum. Several types of scaling parameters are used to parameterize the multifractal structure of the time series. Here, we list four parameters, which were identified by <cit.>:



  §.§.§ Degree of asymmetry (A)

This index, which is also called the skewness in the shape of the f(α) spectrum, is expressed as the following ratio:

    A=α_max-α_0/α_0-α_min,

where α_0 is the value of α when f(α) is maximal. The value of this index A indicates one of three shapes: right-skewed (A>1), left-skewed (0<A<1) or symmetric (A=1). The right endpoint α_max and the left endpoint α_min represent the maximum and minimum values of the singularity strength function, α(q), respectively.



  §.§.§ Degree of multifractality (Δα)

This index represents the broadness:

    Δα=α_max-α_min,

where α_max and α_min are as defined above. A low value of Δα indicates that the time series is close to fractal, and the multifractal strength increases when Δα increases <cit.>.




  §.§.§ The singularity parameters Δ f_L, Δ f_R and C

The parameters Δ f_L(α) and Δ f_R(α) characterize the broadness, which is defined as the difference between the maximum (f^max(α)=1) and minimum values of the singularity spectrum, where the left-side endpoint is denoted by f^min_L(α) and the right-side endpoint by f^min_R(α). The ratio between Δ f_L(α) and Δ f_R(α) is denoted by C as follows:

    C=Δ f_L(α)/Δ f_R(α)=1-f^min_L(α)/1-f^max_R(α),

where the index C can be interpreted as a direct measure of the depth of the tail of the spectrum f(α). If C<1, the left-hand side is less deep, while if C>1, this side is deeper, and if C=1, the depths of the tails are the same on both sides. As quoted by <cit.>, a longer left tail implies that the singularities are stronger, whereas a longer right tail indicates that the singularities are weaker <cit.>.



  §.§.§ The Hurst exponent (H)

According to <cit.>, the exponent H denotes Brownian motion when H=1/2, i.e., past and future fluctuations are uncorrelated. However, if H>1/2, fluctuations have a tendency to long-term persistence, i.e., an increase in value will most likely be followed by another increase in the short term, and a decrease in value will most likely be followed by another decrease in the short term, while for H<1/2, the fluctuations tend not to continue in the same direction but instead turn back on themselves, which results in a less smooth time series <cit.>.



 §.§ Sources of multifractality


Figures <ref> to <ref> show two other methods, namely, shuffling (green dots) and surrogates (blue dots), which are used to verify the source of the multifractality. Each multifractality source can be investigated using h(q), which is a function of q (see Eq. <ref>), as shown in the right middle panels of Figures <ref> to <ref>. These behaviours occur in all stars of our sample; thus, the analysis emphasized here is general.

Shuffling a time series destroys the memory signature but preserves the distribution of the data with h(q)=0.5 if the source of the multifractality in the time series presents only long-range correlations <cit.>. However, the origin of multifractality can also be due to the presence of fat-tailed probability distributions in the original time series. More specifically, the non-Gaussian (non-linear) effects can be weakened by creating phase-randomized surrogates, thereby preserving the amplitudes of the Fourier transform and the linear properties of the original series by randomizing the Fourier phases <cit.>. In this case, if the source of multifractality is a heavy-tailed distribution that is obtained by the surrogate method, the values of h(q) will be independent of q, and h(q)=0.5 will not always hold.



 §.§ Effect of fluctuations on the profile of f(α)


Figure <ref> indicates three types of time series. The first is an uncorrelated-noise time series; therefore, it is expected that the multifractal spectrum is monofractal. In this case, for all scales, s, and for all q parameters, we expect a Hurst exponent of h=0.5. On the top right panel of the figure, we plot a random number series with a heavy-tailed distribution such as a Cauchy distribution. As shown in this figure, the time series has strong multifractality, likely only because of the distribution. The third time series is a set of two sine functions without noise, containing only semi-sinusoidal variability that is similar to rotational modulation. Its multifractal spectrum is opposite to that found in multifractal Cauchy noise, as mentioned above. According to this figure, the asymmetry in the singularity spectra of time series contains information on the composition of the time series (cf. bottom right panel).

Smaller fluctuations (when q<0) correspond to a broad right-sided f(α), i.e., f(α) is more multifractal in its arrangement of smaller fluctuations than in its arrangement of larger fluctuations (q>0). The MFDMA method is able to quantify the structure of fluctuations within periods that have small and large fluctuations. Again, Figure <ref> shows the effect of these fluctuations using multifractal and monofractal time series. In particular, the standard deviation in a monofractal time series does not vary over time. However, in the multifractal time series, the presence of large fluctuations increases the standard deviation in different parts of the time series. In addition, in the presence of noncorrelated background noise, the left tail shrinks; consequently, the signal becomes almost fractal. In contrast, the presence of a strong deterministic signature, e.g., starspots, enlarges the right tail <cit.>.

In general, different frequencies of small and large fluctuations reveal that the right and left sides of a multifractal spectrum do not belong to the same hierarchical organization. An asymmetrical profile indicates that right- and left-sided multifractal spectra are characterized by an imbalance in fractal complexity between fluctuations of different amplitudes. Indeed, such a profile suggests that variability due to the smaller fluctuations has a hierarchical organization that is different from that of larger fluctuations.






 §.§ Correlation methods: Spearman and Pearson coefficients, and Student t-test

To better understand the level of the relationship among different parameters (e.g., Δα and ΔΩ), we used two bivariate analysis techniques denoted by Pearson’s product moment correlation coefficient r_P and Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient r_S <cit.>. Qualitatively, the Pearson method measures the strength of the linear relationship between normally distributed variables. However, the variables cannot be normally distributed or the relationship between the variables is not linear. In this case, the Spearman method is more appropriate than the Pearson method because the former is less sensitive to the presence of outliers and its statistical distribution is independent of the distributions of the two correlated variables <cit.>. 

Quantitatively, Pearson’s coefficient is given by 
	
    r_P=S_xy/√(S_xxS_yy),

	where S denotes the covariance. The value of r_P lies between -1 and +1, inclusive, where a value of +1 denotes a complete positive correlation, -1 a complete negative correlation, and a value near zero indicates that the variables x and y are uncorrelated. In cases where the relationship is non-linear, it can sometimes be transformed into a linear one by using the ranks of the variables rather than their actual values. Spearman’s coefficient of rank correlation, denoted by r_S, can be calculated by applying Eq. (<ref>) to the ranks, although it is more usual to use the formula given by
	
    r_S=1-6∑^n_i=1d^2_i/n(n^2-1),

	where d_i represents the difference between the ranks of variables x and y (for example, x=Δα and y=ΔΩ) and n is the number of observations. The following t-statistic of r_S is used to test the null hypothesis
	
    t=r_S√(n-21-r^2_S),

	which is distributed approximately according to Student’s distribution with n-2 degrees of freedom <cit.>.

It is worth mentioning that if the condition |r_S|>|r_P| occurs, a monotonic relationship is stronger than linear one. Essentially, a monotonic behaviour between the variables can imply a linear relationship, and consequently, the analysis of the results becomes more complex. On the other hand, the presence of outliers may cause this discrepancy between the values of the coefficients. In this case, it is necessary to remove the outliers, recalculate the coefficients and verify any change. To further clarify the correlation, one can use a t-statistic to estimate the significance of the correlation coefficient.

For the case of the analysis of the two different distributions, we use the two-sample Student’s t-test. For this test, the null hypothesis assumes that the data come from independent random samples from normal distributions with equal means, whereas the alternative hypothesis indicates that the data come from populations with unequal means. In the present study, the t-test is calculated using the MATLAB function [For more details, see https://www.mathworks.com/help/stats/ttest2.html], where  can assume values 0 and 1,  is a probability used to reject or not the null hypothesis, and  contains information about the test statistic, for instance, the calculated t-statistic denoted by t_calculated and confidence interval. In particular, if , the test rejects the null hypothesis at a given significance level, and if , the opposite is true. In the present study, we adopted a significance threshold of 0.001 because significance levels greater than 1% can lead to wrong conclusions.

We follow the same procedure adopted by <cit.>. First, we define the null hypothesis between the variables x and y. Second, a t-table is used to find the critical value (t_critical) based on the degrees of freedom <cit.>. Subsequently, the critical value defines the region on the t-test distribution where the null hypothesis can or cannot be rejected. Finally, if and only if the value of the calculated t-statistic is greater than t_critical, the null hypothesis can be rejected in favour of the alternative hypothesis. Otherwise, the null hypothesis is accepted <cit.>. 




§ WORKING SAMPLE AND DATA ANALYSIS

The Kepler mission performed 17 observational runs for ∼90 days each, and these runs, designated as Quarters[], were composed of long-cadence (data sampling every 29.4 min <cit.>) and short-cadence (sampling every 59 s) observations <cit.>; detailed discussions of the public archive can be found in many Kepler team publications, e.g., <cit.>, <cit.>, <cit.>, and <cit.>. Regarding the data format, the Kepler archive provides both simple aperture photometry data (SAP) (processed using a standard treatment that removes only the most relevant spacecraft artefacts) and pre-search data conditioning (PDC) data, which are processed using a refined treatment based on the Kepler pipeline <cit.>. This method removes more thermal and kinematic effects arising from spacecraft operation <cit.>.

Based on a working sample adopted by <cit.> with well-determined rotation periods, we constructed our light curves using only Quarter 3 (Q3) long-cadence data. All time series have been normalized to the median value of Q3. Our final working sample consisted of 662 active stars with physical properties similar to those of the Sun, defined by T_ eff between 5579 and 5979 K, log g between 3.94 and 4.94 dex <cit.>, and (primary) rotation periods between 24 and 34 days. As proposed by <cit.>, the active stars are selected using the so-called variability range R_var. From visual inspection, these authors found that active stars are defined by values of R_var≥ 0.003 (3 parts per thousand). In addition, the authors assumed that variability range is a key measure to distinguish between active and inactive stars. The detailed procedure concerning R_var can be found in <cit.>. All of the active stars occupy the dwarf regime, with log g>3.5.

Among the total of 662 stars, 141 were detected to have DR traces, while the rest were identified as having rigid-body rotation. The period interval for the abovementioned selection was based on the results from <cit.>, for which the rotational periods of the Sun are between 24.5 days (equator) and 33.5 days (poles). Values for the rotational periods were estimated using an autocorrelation function and were taken from <cit.>, and the temperature and gravity were obtained from the <cit.> (corrected Sloan Digital Sky Survey [SDSS] temperature and Kepler Input Catalogue [KIC] surface gravity). These restrictions were chosen so that our results did not present biases due to mass, temperature or effective gravity. Further details on the final Kepler star sample are shown in Section 3.1.

Our sample also included a dataset of continuous solar observations obtained by Variability of solar Irradiance and Gravity Oscillations (VIRGO) <cit.>. The VIRGO experiment is a component of the payload of the SOHO spacecraft and is based on four instruments, including the Differential Absolute Radiometer (DIARAD), the Luminosity Oscillations Imager (LOI), the PMO6 and a Sun PhotoMeter (SPM). In the present paper, we use the VIRGO data in the green (500 nm) and red (862 nm) bandwidths of the SPM instrument, as proposed by <cit.>[The VIRGO/SPM data can be downloaded from http://www.spaceinn.eu/data-access/calibrated-sohovirgospm-data/]. The VIRGO data analysed in the present work consist of the spectral solar irradiance (SSI) time series with a temporal cadence of 1 min and a date range from April 11, 1996 to March 30, 2014, corresponding to solar cycles 23 and 24 (see Figure <ref>). To properly compare these results with the stellar case, we averaged the time series into 30-min cadences to match the Kepler measurements. This dataset consists of ∼18 years of continuous observations; however, because the temporal window of the Kepler Q3 quarter data is ∼90 days, we chose a region in the VIRGO/SPM data with few large gaps from April 22, 1999 to July 20, 1999, which was within the Sun’s active phase.



 §.§ Impact of the Kepler pipeline on the multifractal indexes


To determine the multifractal indexes, we followed the procedure described in the previous section. Table <ref> summarizes our results for stars with DR traces. However, we found different behaviour as a function of the Kepler pipeline and, in particular, the procedure adopted by <cit.> used to remove the outliers.

Our database was extracted from <cit.>, which uses the PDC pipeline. This pipeline modifies stellar variability on timescales longer than a few days and, therefore, has difficulty distinguishing between astrophysical and instrumental signals. The removal of variability from the light curves can affect the analysis, as mentioned by <cit.> (see also Sect. 5.15 of the Kepler Data Characteristic Handbook KSCI-19040-005[https://archive.stsci.edu/kepler/manuals/Data_Characteristics.pdf]). In general, signals with timescales longer than a few days are expected to be attenuated, affecting the measurement of the multifractal indexes. SAP data are less affected by this attenuation. In this case, we used a 4th-order polynomial fitted to the SAP data to detrend the time series in the Q3 quarter (hereafter called SAP4).


First, we verified the effects of the trends that can be due to stellar variability. For this, we compared the multifractal indexes measured by two types of data: i) PDC data and ii) SAP4 data. Figure <ref> shows the correlation between these data for index H, considering the stars with and without DR traces shown in the bottom and top figures, respectively. In this figure, we found a slight trend in the data; however, in general, the values of H measured by the SAP4 pipeline are higher than those measured by the PDC pipeline. We verified that other multifractal indexes have the same behaviour.

The second effect on the Kepler pipeline is outliers. This effect should be considered and quantified. To verify this effect, we compared the SAP4 and SAP4+Quality+Linear Interpolation (hereafter SAP4QLI) data. Here, only the data with flag SAP_QUALITY=0 are retained in this analysis. SAP_QUALITY is a flag that contains information on the quality of the data. A linear interpolation is applied to fill in the gaps produced by discarding data with SAP_QUALITY different from zero. Figure <ref> shows that the correlation between the indexes calculated by two types of data is strong, as indicated by the Spearman and Pearson coefficients, r_S and r_P, respectively. In general, we verified that the results obtained in both procedures are in agreement and that the outlier effect can be neglected.

Finally, we examined the effect of gaps in the time series after the removal of outliers. We performed a comparison between the SAP4Q and SAP4QLI data. According to the four panels in Figure <ref>, the four multifractal indexes significantly changed. We verified that the gaps underestimate the values of A, C and H, whereas the degree of multifractality (Δα) is overestimated. Generally, the gaps make the time series more complex from a multifractal point of view; therefore, the difference between small and large fluctuations is more pronounced.

We also examined the effect on the Kepler pipeline when another method was used to remove the outliers. The method proposed by <cit.> was tested for a sample of 4206 CoRoT light curves that present well-defined semi-sinusoidal signatures. Basically, a moving average was used to compute a smoothed time series that was subsequently subtracted to compute the residuals. A 5-σ clipping was then applied to remove the outliers as described by <cit.>. We verified that this method is in good agreement with removal using quality flags. The data obtained by this method were named SAP4deM. Figure <ref> shows a strong correlation between the Hurst exponents of the data obtained by the different methods used to find the outliers.































 §.§ Photon shot noise effect

The data can be sensitive to photon noise. As mentioned by <cit.>, there are several ways to compute the influence of photon noise in data. We have followed the same procedure described by those authors, and we have used the methodology proposed by <cit.>. To this end, we calculated the minimum and maximum photon shot noise in the time series of the selected stars. Figure <ref> shows the standard deviation of the smoothed time series as a function of the Kepler magnitude using a MATLAB function [For more details, see https://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/ref/smoothdata.html.] specifically adopted for noisy data. The grey dashed and solid lines indicate the lower and upper photon noise levels, respectively, as defined by <cit.>. From Figure <ref>, we conclude that there is no correlation between stellar variability and the estimated magnitude of the stars in the Kepler band. Moreover, most of the standard deviations of smoothed time series are above the estimated values for the contribution of photon noise.




§ RESULTS AND DISCUSSION


Mostly, we found that the values of α_0-α_min are less than α_max-α_0 (see Eq. <ref>). Consequently, shorter tails are observed with q<0 and A>1 (see Table <ref>). This observation means that the fluctuations caused by larger magnitudes are more likely to be monofractals than in the case of q<0 (see Figures <ref> and <ref>, right bottom panels). According to these figures, the abovementioned result is associated with either right or a left truncation, which originates from the levelling of the qth-order Hurst exponent for negative or positive values of q, respectively <cit.>.

In the same figures, the left side of f(α) is determined by the positive q values, which filter out larger events, and the opposite applies to its right side. Hence, asymmetry in f(α) reveals non-uniformity, indicating that the corresponding large- and small-scale fluctuations are driven by different mechanisms <cit.>. If there is a balance between the mechanisms that control each side of the multifractal spectrum, it will be symmetrical. This equilibrium is broken when one of the fluctuations (small or large) stands out from the other. For example, a sinusoidal signal without background noise produces a wide right tail and a very narrow left tail. A noise-like signal yields the opposite behaviour.

Our results show that the multifractal origins of the rotation behaviour for stars with and without DR are the same; however, there is an important difference. As is the case for stars with no DR traces, the stars with DRs are also related to the long-term persistence measured by the exponent, H. However, the right bottom panel of Figure <ref> shows that the median value of H is lower for stars without DR traces than for stars with such traces. Moreover, the probability of finding high values of H is lower for stars with DR than for stars without DR. This observation suggests that the DR can increase the randomization of data and therefore reduce the values of H. This figure highlights other suitable results. Similarly, this process occurs for the distribution of degree of asymmetry, A. Previously, for the multifractal indexes, Δα and C, the distributions had the same profile for both types of stars. For example, what percentage of stars with or without DR have a A that is less than 2? The vertical dashed line at 2 shows us that 70% of stars without DR and 49% of stars with DR traces have a A of less than 2, respectively. However, only 30% of stars without DR have a A of more than 2, compared with 51% of stars with DR.

In addition, multifractality suggests the existence of different physical mechanisms in the rotational behaviours of stars. Indeed, any active star should show a clear right-handed asymmetry, similar to profile in Figures <ref> to <ref>. The opposite behaviour is expected for inactive stars <cit.>.

We also analysed the behaviour of the degree of multifractality, Δα, as a function of the relative absolute shear, ΔΩ, for our sample of 141 stars despite the narrow range of rotational periods considered in this study, i.e., from 24.5 to 33.5 days. Figure <ref> shows the behaviour of Δα versus ΔΩ, from which we can observe a soft correlation of increasing Δα towards stronger DR traces. For instance, as shown by <cit.>, the relative DR shear (Δ P/P) increases with longer rotation periods, which is in agreement with previous observations <cit.> and theoretical approaches <cit.>. In conclusion, we found a slight trend between Δα and ΔΩ, and stars with stronger DR (Δα>0.6) seem to be more complex than stars with weaker DR.

We estimate that the correlation between Δα and ΔΩ can be neglected, since the Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients are very weak, r_P=0.007 and r_S=0.003, respectively. In other words, this result does not allow us to reject the null hypothesis that there is no correlation between Δα and ΔΩ. The two-sided t-statistic also reveals that the null hypothesis cannot be rejected in favour of the alternative hypothesis, since as -2.576<t_calculated(0.036)<2.576 at the 1% significance level. Here, 2.576 is the critical value t_critical.

In Figure <ref>, we plot β and ΔΩ as a function of the Hurst exponent, H, for each of the 141 Sun-like stars with the DR traces that were identified in <cit.>. Here, β:=|P1-P2|/max{P1,P2}, and the absolute horizontal shear is defined as ΔΩ:=2π/|1/P1-1/P2|.

The overall distributions of β and ΔΩ in Fig. <ref> show two regimes separated by a dashed line. The stars in the two regimes are shown with different sizes to indicate that more asymmetric multifractal spectra are found to the right of the dashed line and less asymmetric ones are localized to the left of the line. In this figure (top panel), the distributions of H for values greater than 0.93 indicate that the broadness of ΔΩ is narrower. This result means that the difference between periods P1 and P2 is small. In contrast, for the same regime of H, β is spread more widely; regardless, the highest values of A are found there. In addition, the regime of H<0.93 shows a maximum scatter of about a factor of 3 for parameters β and ΔΩ. In addition, this result shows that for a star rotating closer to a rigid body, the asymmetry between the tails of the multifractal spectrum is stronger; therefore, weak singularities (q<0) are dominant in the signal, indicating that the star has a weak magnetic activity on its surface.

Our main hypothesis is to determine whether the degree of asymmetry, A, is a segregation factor. Thus, as the restriction of the period to the solar values (as described in Section 3) weakens the correlation between the rotation period and the Hurst exponent, the impact of the degree of asymmetry on the correlations between H and ΔΩ and β can be attenuated.

To test this hypothesis, we separate the parameters A into two populations with known standard deviations. The first sample contains the values of A for H<0.93, while the second is defined for the values of H>0.93. The value found of =1 indicates that the null hypothesis can be rejected at the 0.1% significance level. As a result, we found that the distributions of A are from populations with unequal means, and therefore the two samples do not come from a common distribution. To reinforce this result, a one-sided test was done. The t-statistic reveals that, as t_calculated(7.003)> t_critical(3.291), the null hypothesis can be rejected in favour of the alternative hypothesis, which assumes that the means are different. In this case, we conclude that the degree of asymmetry A can be considered a segregation factor for both correlations shown in Figure <ref>. 




 §.§ Origin of multifractality in the working sample


As cited in Section 2.2, multifractality can have two sources: long-range correlations (memory) and a fat-tailed probability distribution. In the case of astrophysical time series, <cit.> showed that the first source of multifractality applies and that the second source has no effect because the probability distribution is roughly Gaussian.

In the vast majority of our sample stars, the multifractal spectrum showed not only that the time series of active Kepler stars and the Sun are multifractals but also that they have strong right-handed asymmetry, i.e., the degree of asymmetry, A, exceeds unity (see Figures <ref> to <ref>). The right side of f(α) is determined by the negative q values, which filter out smaller events, and the opposite applies to its left side. As mentioned by <cit.>, this behaviour indicates that multifractality operates on small-scale fluctuations (seen through q<0), whereas the dynamics of large-scale fluctuations (q>0) are reduced in this context. Droz et al. still emphasize that asymmetries found in the multifractal spectrum can provide important insights into the series structure.

We verified that the randomization destroyed the correlations, causing the results to closely resemble those for white noise (see first panel in Figure <ref>). In addition, the multifractal spectra (see Figures <ref> to <ref>) reveal that the green curves are closer to h=0.5. Moreover, our time series do not present significant non-Gaussian effects. Furthermore, the surrogate time series is very similar to the original series, as shown in Figures <ref> and <ref> (bottom right, blue curves). Thus, we conclude that the multifractality of our sample is actually due to correlations that physically originated from the dynamics of the starspots.




 §.§ Origin of the tails of the multifractal spectra


For the sake of clarity, Figures <ref> shows only the fluctuation functions, F_q(s) as a function of scale with size s for the original KIC002450531 time series. We also show the different types of data as mentioned by Figures <ref> to <ref>. In this way, the reader can understand the behaviour of the fluctuation functions in further detail. For negative qs, the spread of F_q(s) is considerably increased. Consequently, the width of the right tail of the multifractal spectrum is increased. Undoubtedly, a relevant question is the origin of the tail in the multifractal spectrum.

According to <cit.>, an alternative way to illustrate the origin of the tail of the multifractal spectrum, f(α), is to use a binomial cascade model with a Gaussian N(λ,σ) distribution defined by the mean, λ, and variance, σ. One binomial cascade already accounts for the symmetric spectrum, just as when the spectrum is a result of the average of the spectra produced by each cascade, considering different λ and fixed σ <cit.>.

In the model presented by the authors, they concluded that the left-sided asymmetry is observed because the small fluctuations are dominant in such cascades and therefore approach the central limit theorem (white noise), which reduces the right tail to a monofractal. This process destroys the complexity on the level of small fluctuations more so than on the level of the large fluctuations <cit.>. The theorem considers that when independent random variables are added (in the present case, superimposing cascades with abundances of small fluctuations), their accurately normalized sum yields a Gaussian distribution. Indeed, this effect occurs even if the distributions of the original variables are non-Gaussian <cit.>.

In summary, the smaller fluctuations produce a strong multifractal hierarchical structure, whereas the larger fluctuations are reduced towards a monofractal structure. In the case of right-sided asymmetry, the opposite process occurs, i.e., a larger level of complexity for the smaller fluctuations and more noise-like features for the larger fluctuations. Nevertheless, this procedure is not easy and requires refinement as described below.

<cit.> developed a technique that adds the randomization of the larger fluctuations to the binomial cascade model for λ=1.05. Those investigators selected events larger than 4.7σ (approximately 1% of the sample) of the λ=1.05 model. Afterwards, their values were replaced by the sum of events larger than 4.7σ and for N(0,1) white noise. The final result of this construction preserves the structure of the original small fluctuations and randomizes the largest ones.

We simulated multifractal data using the code developed by <cit.>. Figure <ref> is the result of this compilation. This code[The code is available at ] allows the creation of a time series based on the multiplicative lognormal cascade, similar to the process used by <cit.>. We adopted the same parameters and procedures cited by <cit.> in which λ equals 1.05 and 1.5 to analyse the left-sided asymmetry, whereas for the right-sided asymmetry, only λ=1.05 was used. σ=1 was used for both cases. The final time series comprised two parts: i) the original cascade series and ii) white noise. As shown in Figure 4 from <cit.>, large fluctuations are more abundant than small fluctuations, and therefore, the degree of asymmetry is positive, confirming that the hierarchical structure was reversed as intended. Thus, the model applied here corroborates the conclusions found by <cit.>.

From the multifractal perspective, the rotational signature due to the lifetime of active regions has a dual nature. The results above indicate that the magnetic fields of stars in the active phase seem to function via two mechanisms operating on different scales. In addition, stars in the inactive phase have less complex magnetic fields than active ones. However, the inactive stars exhibit a reduced or absent starspot signature and strong background noise. A more detailed study would be necessary to verify whether this difference is real or merely a statistical artefact.



§ FINAL REMARKS

First, we conclude that an analysis that incorporates the multifractal method can add diagnostic power to contemporary methods of time-series analysis for studying the signatures of rigid bodies and those with DR. We suggest an alternative explanation for the effects of DR in Sun-like stars that is based on its multifractal nature. We also suggest that the DR measured by parameters β and ΔΩ for the stars that were studied here is linked to the degree of asymmetry. This result was possible because we restricted the interval of rotation period to one solar period and thus eliminated the strong correlation between the exponent, H, and period <cit.>. Consequently, the degree of asymmetry, A, is the second multifractal index that is related to the effect of the rotational modulation on the photometric time series. We also verified that the degree of multifractality, Δα, is associated with the DR. Figure <ref> shows the behaviour of ΔΩ versus Δα, from which we can observe a soft trend of increasing Δα as DR becomes stronger. In general, it indicates that our sample is not affected by the level of complexity of the time series, as measured by Δα.

The first impactful result of this work is the suggestion that starspots for time series with and without DR have distinct dynamics. In addition, our approach suggests that the DR signature and rigid-body rotation period are explicitly governed by local fluctuations with smaller magnitudes. Additionally, we identified the overall trend whereby the DR, which is represented by parameters β and ΔΩ, is distributed in two H regimes segregated by the degree of asymmetry, A.

The second impactful result concerns the fact that the magnetic fields of active stars are apparently governed by two mechanisms with different levels of complexity for fluctuations. Similar to results obtained by <cit.> to the singularity spectra with a right asymmetry, the present study revealed that the behaviour for generating right-sided asymmetry is the inverse of that for left-sided asymmetry. This inversion is characterized by a higher level of complexity for smaller fluctuations and a more noise-like profile for larger fluctuations.

The results of the present paper are not the final results of the analysis of stellar rotation as a multifractal process. Indeed, there is an outstanding question regarding the multifractal behaviours present in the Kepler time series that can motivate further research. We are examining a large sample of stars in the inactive phase. It is theoretically expected that stars in this stage exhibit inverse behaviour to that found in active stars, i.e., the asymmetry of the multifractal spectrum is left. One hypothesis to be tested is whether the exponent H for inactive stars is correlated to the value of H measured when these stars are in the active phase. If so, we will have a method for calibrating the Hurst exponent and thus for inferring the rotation periods of inactive stars.

In summary, the observed multifractality is primarily a consequence of such correlated inputs that generate a heterogeneous multifractal output. In this case, the multifractality is a result of magnetic activity control mechanisms for activity-related long-term persistent signatures. From an astrophysical perspective, the detection of multifractal signatures in the Kepler time series is of interest because it indicates that the control mechanisms regulating the magnetic activity may interact on different timescales in a system operating far from equilibrium. Furthermore, these results indicate that stellar magnetic activity behaviour is even more complex than models can extract using the Fourier transform or Gaussian processes. Finally, this paper poses a new theoretical effort to develop statistical models of stellar rotation and the processes within starspot formation.





§ ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


DBdeF acknowledges financial support 
from the Brazilian agency CNPq-PQ2 (grant No. 311578/2018-7). Research activities of STELLAR TEAM of Federal University of Ceará are supported by continuous grants from the Brazilian agency CNPq. JRM acknowledges CNPq, CAPES and FAPERN agencies for financial support. This paper includes data collected by the Kepler mission. Funding for the Kepler mission is provided by the NASA Science Mission directorate. All data presented in this paper were obtained from the Mikulski Archive for Space Telescopes
(MAST).














99
[Affer et al.2012]afferAffer L., Micela G., Favata F., Flaccomio E., 2012, MNRAS, 424, 11

[Aigrain et al.2015]aigrain
Aigrain S. et al., 2015, MNRAS, 450, 3211


[Aschwaden2011]a2011
Aschwanden, M. J. 2011, Self-Organized Criticality in Astrophysics. The Statistics
of Nonlinear Processes in the Universe, Springer-Praxis: New York

[Basri et al.2011]basri2011
Basri et al., 2011, , 141, 20

[Basri, Walkowicz & Reiners2013]basriBasri, G., Walkowicz, L. M., & Reiners, A. 2013, ApJ, 769, 37

[Batalha et al.2010]batalha
Batalha, N. M., Borucki, W. J., Koch, D. G., et al. 2010, ApJL,
713, L109

[Borucki et al.2009]boru2009Borucki, W., Koch, D., Batalha, N., et al. 2009, IAU Symposium, 253, 289

[Borucki et al.2010]boruBorucki W. J. et al., 2010, Science, 327, 977

[Cordeiro & de Freitas2019]defreitas2019Cordeiro, J. G., & de Freitas, D. B., 2019, in preparation

[Das Chagas et al.2016]daschagas2016
Das Chagas, M. L., Bravo, J. P., Costa, A. D., Ferreira Lopes, C. E., Silva Sobrinho, R., Paz–Chinchon, F. et al. 2016, MNRAS, 463, 1624

[De Medeiros et al.2013]demedeiros2013
De Medeiros, J. R., Lopes, C. E. F., Leão, I. C., et al. 2013, , 555, 63

[de Freitas & De Medeiros2009]defreitas2009
de Freitas, D. B., & De Medeiros, J. R. 2009, Europhys. Lett, 88, 19001

[de Freitas et al.2013a]defreitas2013b
de Freitas, D. B., França, G. S., Scherrer, T. M., Vilar, C. S., & Silva, R. 2013a, Europhys. Lett., 102, 39001

[de Freitas et al.2013b]defreitas2013
de Freitas, D. B., Leão, I. C., Lopes, C. E. F., De Medeiros, J. R., et al. 2013b, ApJL, 773, L18

[de Freitas et al.2016]defreitas2016
de Freitas, D. B., Nepomuceno, M. M. F., de Moraes Junior, P. R. V., Lopes, C. E. F., Leão, I. C. et al. 2016, ApJ, 831, 87

[de Freitas et al.2017]defreitas2017
de Freitas, D. B., Nepomuceno, M. M. F., de Moraes Junior, P. R. V., Lopes, C. E. F., Leão, I. C. et al. 2017, ApJ, 843, 103

[Drozdz & Oswiecimka2015]drozDrozdz, S. & Oswiecimka, P., 2015, Physical Review E, 91, 030902

[Donner & Barbosa2008]db2008
Donner, R. V., & Barbosa, S. M. 2008, Nonlinear Time Series Analysis in the Geosciences–Applications in
Climatology, Geodynamics and Solar-Terrestrial Physics (Berlin: Springer)

[Elia et al.2018]elia Elia, D., Strafella, F., Dib, S., Schneider, N. et al., 2018, MNRAS, 481, 509

[Feder1988]feder1988
Feder, J. 1988, Fractals, Plenum Press, New York    


[Fröhlich et al.1995]virgo1
Fröhlich, C., Romero, J., Roth, H., Wehrli, C., Andersen, B. N., et al., 1995, Sol. Phys., 162, 101

[Fröhlich et al.1997]virgo2
Fröhlich, C., Crommelynck, D., Wehrli, C., Anklin, M., Dewitte, S. et al., H. J. 1997, Sol. Phys., 175, 267

[Gilliland et al.2015]gill Gilliland, R. L., Chaplin, W. J., Jenkins, J. M., Ramsey, L. W., & Smith, J. C. 2015, AJ, 150, 133


[Gu & Zhou2010]gu2010
Gu, G.-F., & Zhou, W.-X. 2010, Phys. Rev. E, 82, 011136


[Hampson & Mallen2011]hm
Hampson, K. M., & Mallen, E. A. H. 2011, Biomedical Optics Express, 2, 464


[Hurst1951]hurst1951
Hurst, H. E. 1951, Trans. Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., 116, 770

[Hurst, Black & Simaika1965]hurst1965
Hurst, H. E. & Black, R. P., & Simaika, Y. M. 1965, Long-term storage: an experimental study, Constable, London

[Ihlen2012]ihlen
Ihlen, E. A. F. 2012, Front. Physiology 3, 141

[Ivanov et al.1999]ivanov1999
Ivanov, P. Ch., Amaral, L. A. N., Goldberger, A. L., et al. 1999, , 399, 461

[Jenkins et al.2010a]Jenkins2010
Jenkins et al., 2010a, , 713, L87

[Jenkins et al.2010b]Jenkins2010bJenkins, J. M., Caldwell, D. A., Chandrasekaran, H., et al. 2010b, ApJL, 713, L120


[Kantelhardt et al.1999]Kantelhardt
Kantelhardt, J.W., Zschiegner, S.A., Koscienlny-Bunde, E., & Havlin, S. 2002, Physica A, 316, 87

[Koch et al.2010]kochKoch, D. G., Borucki, W. J., Basri, G., et al. 2010, ApJL, 713, L79

[Kuker & Rudiger2011]kukerKuker M., Rudiger G., 2011, Astron. Nachr., 332, 933

[Kwag & Kim2017]kwag
Kwag, S. G., & Kim, J. H. 2017, Korean J Anesthesiol., 70(2), 144

[Lanza et al.2003]lanzaLanza, A. F., Rodono, M., Pagano, I., Barge, P., & Llebaria, A. 2003, A&A, 403, 1135

[Lanza et al.2014]lanza2014
Lanza, A. F.; Das Chagas, M. L. and De Medeiros, J.R. 2014, , 564, A50



[Movahed et al.2006]movahed
Movahed, M.S., Jafari, G.R., Ghasemi, F., Rahvar, S., & Reza, M. R. T., 2006. Stat. Mech., 02003

[Mandelbrot & Wallis1969a]mw1969a
Mandelbrot, B., & Wallis, J. R. 1969a, Water Resour. Res., 5, 521

[Mandelbrot & Wallis1969b]mw1969b
Mandelbrot, B., & Wallis, J. R. 1969b, Water Resour. Res., 5, 967

[Mathur et al.2014]mathur2014a
Mathur, S., Salabert, D., Garcia, R. A., & Ceillier, T. 2014a, J. Space Weather Space Clim, 4, 15

[Mukaka2012]mukaka
Mukaka, M. 2012, Malawi Medical Journal, 24, 69

[Norouzzadeha, Dullaertc & Rahmani 2007]Norouzzadeha
Norouzzadeha, P., Dullaertc, W., & Rahmani, B. 2007, Physica A, 380, 333

[Noyes et al.1984]noyesNoyes, R.W., Hartmann, L.W., Baliunas, S.L., Duncan, D.K. & Vaughan, A .H., 1984, ApJ, 279, 763

[Pinsonneault et al.2012]penPinsonneault, M. H., An, D., Molenda-Zakowicz, J., et al. 2012, ApJS, 199, 30

[Press et al.2007]press
Press, W. H., Saul A. T., William T. V., & Brian P. F. 2007, Numerical Recipes in C: The Art of Scientific Computing, Third Edition, Cambridge University Press.


[Reinhold et al.2013]reinholdReinhold T., Reiners A., Basri G., 2013, A&A, 560, A4

[Reiners & Schmitt2003]Reiners2003
Reiners, A. & Schmitt, J.H.M.M. 2003, ., 398, 647


[Seuront2010]seuront
Seuront, L. 2010. Fractals and Multifractals in Ecology and Aquatic Science. CRC
Press, Boca Raton. 

[Strassmeier2009]Strassmeier2009
Strassmeier, K.G.2009, Cosmic Magnetic Fields: From Planets, to Stars and Galaxies, 259, 363

[Suyal, Prasad & Singh2009]sps2009
Suyal, V., Prasad, A., & Singh, H. P. 2009, Solar Phys., 260, 441

[Tanna & Pathak2014]tannaTanna, H.J., Pathak, K.N., 2014, Astrophys. Space Sci., 350, 47



[Tang et al.2015]tang
Tang, L., Lv, H., Yang, F., & Yu, L. 2015, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 81, 117


[Teslesca & Lapenna2006]telesca2006
Telesca, L., & Lapenna V. 2006, Tecnophys., 423, 115

[Thompson et al.2010]thompson
Thompson, S. E., Christiansen, J. L. , Jenkins, J. M., et al. 2
013, Kepler Data Release 23 Notes (KSCI-19063-001)

[Trauth2006]trauthTrauth, M. H. 2006, MATLAB Recipes for Earth Sciences Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York


[Van Cleve & Caldwell2009]van2
Van Cleve, J. E. & Caldwell, D. A. 2009, Kepler Instrument
Handbook, KSCI-19033

[Van Cleve et al.2010]vanVan Cleve, J. E., Jenkins, J. M., Caldwell, D. A., et al. 2010,
Kepler Data Release 5 Notes, KSCI-19045-001

[Wengert2010]wen
Wengert, C. “Multifractal  Model  of  Asset  Returns  (MMAR).” Last  modified  December 12,  2010.  






cccccccccccccc
	Results of the geometric analysis of the multifractal spectrum for the indexes A, Δα, Δ f_L(α), Δ f_R(α) and H for the Sun and 141 stars with differential rotation, using the SAP4 flux. The values of P1	P2, T_ eff, log g, M, P_ rot, β	and	ΔΩ were extracted from Reinhold et al. (2013).   
 KIC	   	P1	   	P2	   	T_ eff	   	log g	   	M	   	P_ rot	   	A	   	Δα	   	Δ f_L(α)	   	Δ f_R(α)	   	H	   	β	   	ΔΩ	

	   	days	   	days	   	K	   	cm/s^2	   	M_	   	days	   		   		   		   		   		   		   	rad/day	
 14c
	  – continued from previous page 

	KIC	   	P1	   	P2	   	T_ eff	   	log g	   	M	   	P_ rot	   	A	   	Δα	   	Δ f_L(α)	   	Δ f_R(α)	   	H	   	β	   	ΔΩ	
 
	   	days	   	days	   	K	   	cm/s^2	   	M_	   	days	   		   		   		   		   		   		   	rad/day	
 3cContinued on next page 
 Sun	   	24.5	   	33.5	   	5777	   	4.40	   	1.00	   	27.4	   	1.72	   	0.76	   	0.31	   	0.60	   	0.84	   	0.20	   	0.07	

1027740	   	26.57	   	20.46	   	5751	   	4.13	   	1.03	   	26.70	   	4.21	   	0.82	   	0.15	   	0.852	   	0.96	   	0.23	   	0.07	

1432022	   	30.69	   	23.12	   	5483	   	4.77	   	0.96	   	24.63	   	1.24	   	1.06	   	0.84	   	0.931	   	0.78	   	0.25	   	0.07	

2450531	   	22.53	   	18.16	   	5372	   	4.50	   	0.93	   	25.14	   	1.31	   	0.48	   	0.34	   	0.522	   	0.92	   	0.19	   	0.07	

2696717	   	22.53	   	17.12	   	5472	   	4.42	   	0.96	   	25.25	   	1.96	   	0.83	   	0.44	   	0.811	   	0.88	   	0.24	   	0.09	

2831979	   	25.43	   	20.23	   	5529	   	4.36	   	0.97	   	24.38	   	2.71	   	0.86	   	0.22	   	0.785	   	0.93	   	0.21	   	0.06	

2855272	   	22.25	   	28.26	   	5583	   	4.53	   	0.99	   	25.41	   	1.10	   	0.81	   	0.62	   	0.586	   	0.82	   	0.21	   	0.06	

3003084	   	23.42	   	28.26	   	5490	   	4.16	   	0.96	   	24.75	   	2.04	   	0.97	   	0.46	   	0.95	   	0.86	   	0.17	   	0.05	

3540789	   	19.78	   	25.07	   	5507	   	4.65	   	0.97	   	24.09	   	2.32	   	0.86	   	0.28	   	0.808	   	0.89	   	0.21	   	0.07	

3643036	   	12.19	   	10.53	   	5511	   	4.53	   	0.97	   	24.12	   	2.02	   	0.91	   	0.46	   	0.828	   	0.86	   	0.14	   	0.08	

3646779	   	23.42	   	16.64	   	5358	   	4.71	   	0.93	   	25.65	   	1.87	   	0.66	   	0.34	   	0.556	   	0.92	   	0.29	   	0.11	

4038557	   	11.95	   	10.29	   	5389	   	4.45	   	0.94	   	24.22	   	0.90	   	0.73	   	0.75	   	0.684	   	0.75	   	0.14	   	0.08	

4048325	   	26.97	   	34.90	   	5432	   	4.68	   	0.95	   	24.29	   	1.91	   	1.01	   	0.54	   	0.866	   	0.88	   	0.23	   	0.05	

4067498	   	24.39	   	18.54	   	5537	   	4.66	   	0.98	   	24.24	   	2.62	   	0.93	   	0.38	   	0.964	   	0.86	   	0.24	   	0.08	

4150703	   	23.42	   	18.74	   	5411	   	4.61	   	0.94	   	24.23	   	1.61	   	0.63	   	0.30	   	0.522	   	0.88	   	0.20	   	0.07	

4355501	   	28.71	   	20.70	   	5384	   	4.41	   	0.93	   	25.16	   	1.45	   	0.46	   	0.20	   	0.414	   	0.92	   	0.28	   	0.08	

4570519	   	24.06	   	29.67	   	5488	   	4.82	   	0.96	   	24.74	   	1.08	   	0.46	   	0.29	   	0.373	   	0.91	   	0.19	   	0.05	

4820741	   	24.72	   	20.46	   	5427	   	4.29	   	0.95	   	24.71	   	2.16	   	0.78	   	0.43	   	0.777	   	0.91	   	0.17	   	0.05	

5009162	   	23.42	   	16.95	   	5573	   	4.58	   	0.98	   	24.17	   	2.57	   	0.61	   	0.19	   	0.634	   	0.95	   	0.28	   	0.10	

5091569	   	32.37	   	24.39	   	5500	   	4.54	   	0.97	   	26.45	   	0.93	   	0.25	   	0.14	   	0.187	   	0.96	   	0.25	   	0.06	

5201089	   	28.26	   	22.53	   	5439	   	4.39	   	0.95	   	28.16	   	1.40	   	0.33	   	0.23	   	0.312	   	0.96	   	0.20	   	0.06	

5352708	   	25.80	   	19.56	   	5756	   	4.50	   	1.04	   	25.25	   	3.16	   	0.78	   	0.17	   	0.807	   	0.94	   	0.24	   	0.08	

5353518	   	23.74	   	17.12	   	5388	   	4.54	   	0.94	   	24.20	   	1.47	   	0.48	   	0.20	   	0.334	   	0.93	   	0.28	   	0.10	

5525733	   	19.56	   	24.06	   	5434	   	4.55	   	0.95	   	24.20	   	2.84	   	0.52	   	0.07	   	0.458	   	0.94	   	0.19	   	0.06	

5530623	   	20.23	   	17.28	   	5702	   	4.59	   	1.02	   	24.06	   	1.83	   	0.55	   	0.22	   	0.444	   	0.93	   	0.15	   	0.05	

5709012	   	30.69	   	22.25	   	5413	   	4.80	   	0.94	   	26.27	   	0.91	   	0.58	   	0.48	   	0.341	   	0.89	   	0.28	   	0.08	

5966966	   	25.43	   	20.70	   	5442	   	4.91	   	0.95	   	25.27	   	3.07	   	0.98	   	0.34	   	0.993	   	0.89	   	0.19	   	0.06	

6198533	   	25.43	   	19.35	   	5641	   	4.02	   	1.00	   	27.54	   	2.50	   	0.98	   	0.47	   	0.9	   	0.91	   	0.24	   	0.08	

6286724	   	30.17	   	22.53	   	5371	   	4.84	   	0.93	   	24.22	   	1.20	   	0.68	   	0.44	   	0.6	   	0.82	   	0.25	   	0.07	

6347656	   	14.71	   	18.16	   	5414	   	4.35	   	0.94	   	28.44	   	1.82	   	0.46	   	0.20	   	0.515	   	0.92	   	0.19	   	0.08	

6442094	   	28.71	   	21.45	   	5428	   	4.77	   	0.95	   	24.80	   	1.34	   	0.88	   	0.63	   	0.797	   	0.79	   	0.25	   	0.07	

6526893	   	28.26	   	20.94	   	5435	   	4.89	   	0.95	   	27.53	   	0.93	   	0.76	   	0.58	   	0.479	   	0.78	   	0.26	   	0.08	

6762594	   	24.39	   	19.14	   	5462	   	4.42	   	0.96	   	24.31	   	2.11	   	0.77	   	0.41	   	0.637	   	0.90	   	0.22	   	0.07	

6764598	   	26.57	   	20.94	   	5433	   	4.61	   	0.95	   	25.96	   	0.97	   	0.66	   	0.52	   	0.459	   	0.80	   	0.21	   	0.06	

6836955	   	28.26	   	22.53	   	5344	   	4.61	   	0.92	   	26.35	   	3.94	   	0.80	   	0.13	   	0.809	   	0.95	   	0.20	   	0.06	

6867026	   	26.57	   	18.74	   	5531	   	4.61	   	0.97	   	26.09	   	2.19	   	0.51	   	0.21	   	0.462	   	0.96	   	0.30	   	0.10	

6960242	   	15.21	   	10.92	   	5336	   	4.36	   	0.92	   	24.93	   	4.29	   	0.92	   	0.17	   	0.989	   	0.91	   	0.28	   	0.16	

7037130	   	27.81	   	23.74	   	5455	   	4.67	   	0.95	   	26.30	   	2.85	   	0.92	   	0.40	   	0.992	   	0.90	   	0.15	   	0.04	

7037804	   	24.06	   	19.56	   	5498	   	4.68	   	0.96	   	24.43	   	1.05	   	0.80	   	0.70	   	0.438	   	0.86	   	0.19	   	0.06	

7104190	   	25.80	   	20.00	   	5558	   	4.57	   	0.98	   	25.09	   	1.22	   	0.87	   	0.69	   	0.637	   	0.85	   	0.23	   	0.07	

7117330	   	12.90	   	10.92	   	5536	   	4.35	   	0.97	   	24.87	   	1.91	   	1.02	   	0.58	   	0.903	   	0.83	   	0.15	   	0.09	

7204907	   	23.12	   	17.98	   	5447	   	4.93	   	0.95	   	24.69	   	1.00	   	0.93	   	0.75	   	0.648	   	0.75	   	0.22	   	0.08	

7255509	   	21.98	   	18.16	   	5433	   	4.61	   	0.95	   	24.43	   	2.85	   	0.71	   	0.17	   	0.609	   	0.96	   	0.17	   	0.06	

7267949	   	37.09	   	26.18	   	5413	   	4.41	   	0.94	   	25.11	   	1.31	   	0.92	   	0.69	   	0.514	   	0.88	   	0.29	   	0.07	

7430659	   	29.18	   	37.09	   	5566	   	4.28	   	0.98	   	28.39	   	4.37	   	0.90	   	0.18	   	0.892	   	0.96	   	0.21	   	0.05	

7517798	   	26.57	   	20.23	   	5415	   	4.70	   	0.94	   	24.77	   	1.64	   	1.01	   	0.65	   	0.829	   	0.85	   	0.24	   	0.07	

7586869	   	28.71	   	22.53	   	5422	   	4.43	   	0.94	   	26.57	   	2.89	   	0.52	   	0.13	   	0.583	   	0.96	   	0.22	   	0.06	

7750731	   	30.17	   	23.12	   	5491	   	4.57	   	0.96	   	27.24	   	1.19	   	1.01	   	0.81	   	0.708	   	0.82	   	0.23	   	0.06	

7798090	   	27.81	   	23.12	   	5558	   	4.43	   	0.98	   	26.84	   	6.72	   	0.90	   	0.05	   	0.972	   	0.98	   	0.17	   	0.05	

7808399	   	13.69	   	9.62	   	5667	   	4.51	   	1.01	   	28.73	   	1.11	   	0.62	   	0.48	   	0.391	   	0.89	   	0.30	   	0.19	

7879315	   	24.06	   	18.94	   	5472	   	4.31	   	0.96	   	24.35	   	3.83	   	1.04	   	0.30	   	0.986	   	0.95	   	0.21	   	0.07	

7938914	   	25.80	   	18.16	   	5568	   	4.51	   	0.98	   	24.47	   	3.10	   	0.95	   	0.31	   	0.997	   	0.91	   	0.30	   	0.10	

8022329	   	34.23	   	25.07	   	5448	   	4.46	   	0.95	   	28.17	   	1.13	   	0.93	   	0.75	   	0.619	   	0.79	   	0.27	   	0.07	

8029079	   	26.97	   	19.14	   	5451	   	4.36	   	0.95	   	28.03	   	1.92	   	0.88	   	0.48	   	0.829	   	0.90	   	0.29	   	0.10	

8074818	   	26.97	   	20.23	   	5403	   	4.56	   	0.94	   	24.17	   	3.39	   	0.76	   	0.14	   	0.747	   	0.93	   	0.25	   	0.08	

8093179	   	28.71	   	20.94	   	5616	   	4.52	   	1.00	   	28.26	   	0.91	   	0.68	   	0.58	   	0.572	   	0.80	   	0.27	   	0.08	

8094374	   	30.17	   	24.06	   	5416	   	4.65	   	0.94	   	27.35	   	1.21	   	0.71	   	0.57	   	0.525	   	0.84	   	0.20	   	0.05	

8095149	   	26.18	   	21.19	   	5497	   	4.84	   	0.96	   	24.22	   	1.46	   	1.09	   	0.74	   	0.819	   	0.81	   	0.19	   	0.06	

8145579	   	23.74	   	19.56	   	5525	   	4.43	   	0.97	   	25.04	   	3.63	   	0.70	   	0.09	   	0.724	   	0.95	   	0.18	   	0.06	

8153705	   	23.42	   	19.35	   	5407	   	4.61	   	0.94	   	24.31	   	1.06	   	0.68	   	0.57	   	0.433	   	0.84	   	0.17	   	0.06	

8212665	   	32.37	   	23.42	   	5530	   	4.42	   	0.97	   	30.99	   	3.52	   	0.76	   	0.15	   	0.798	   	0.95	   	0.28	   	0.07	

8231309	   	26.18	   	20.70	   	5528	   	4.47	   	0.97	   	24.47	   	1.95	   	0.83	   	0.47	   	0.778	   	0.87	   	0.21	   	0.06	

8282808	   	26.97	   	20.94	   	5541	   	4.45	   	0.98	   	26.08	   	2.31	   	0.65	   	0.33	   	0.742	   	0.95	   	0.22	   	0.07	

8351578	   	26.18	   	21.19	   	5658	   	4.40	   	1.01	   	26.06	   	3.22	   	0.65	   	0.14	   	0.556	   	0.97	   	0.19	   	0.06	

8360859	   	19.78	   	16.48	   	5554	   	4.71	   	0.98	   	24.52	   	0.67	   	0.56	   	0.58	   	0.364	   	0.81	   	0.17	   	0.06	

8429890	   	30.17	   	24.39	   	5423	   	4.71	   	0.94	   	27.32	   	0.02	   	0.33	   	0.78	   	0.525	   	0.85	   	0.19	   	0.05	

8491487	   	20.46	   	17.98	   	5511	   	4.68	   	0.97	   	25.23	   	1.13	   	0.99	   	0.66	   	0.702	   	0.72	   	0.12	   	0.04	

8493268	   	26.97	   	22.53	   	5422	   	4.50	   	0.94	   	27.27	   	1.55	   	0.98	   	0.55	   	0.724	   	0.84	   	0.17	   	0.05	

8495770	   	25.07	   	18.94	   	5489	   	4.56	   	0.96	   	25.63	   	2.18	   	0.64	   	0.21	   	0.562	   	0.93	   	0.25	   	0.08	

8553548	   	24.39	   	19.35	   	5575	   	4.91	   	0.99	   	24.38	   	1.61	   	1.00	   	0.55	   	0.533	   	0.86	   	0.21	   	0.07	

8556908	   	24.39	   	19.35	   	5518	   	4.68	   	0.97	   	24.67	   	4.21	   	0.97	   	0.19	   	0.998	   	0.94	   	0.21	   	0.07	

8616755	   	34.23	   	25.43	   	5512	   	4.55	   	0.97	   	27.93	   	4.05	   	0.81	   	0.18	   	0.903	   	0.91	   	0.26	   	0.06	

8620514	   	27.81	   	34.90	   	5532	   	4.69	   	0.97	   	28.05	   	1.32	   	0.94	   	0.74	   	0.782	   	0.85	   	0.20	   	0.05	

8771390	   	25.43	   	20.00	   	5417	   	4.22	   	0.94	   	25.21	   	1.98	   	0.40	   	0.16	   	0.523	   	0.93	   	0.21	   	0.07	

8871159	   	26.18	   	21.98	   	5336	   	4.48	   	0.92	   	25.18	   	3.38	   	0.72	   	0.18	   	0.832	   	0.95	   	0.16	   	0.05	

8957265	   	30.17	   	24.72	   	5434	   	4.39	   	0.95	   	25.91	   	2.49	   	0.86	   	0.49	   	0.901	   	0.94	   	0.18	   	0.05	

8962193	   	25.80	   	19.78	   	5383	   	4.72	   	0.93	   	27.49	   	3.07	   	0.55	   	0.17	   	0.711	   	0.96	   	0.23	   	0.07	

8971874	   	25.43	   	19.78	   	5478	   	4.49	   	0.96	   	24.08	   	2.37	   	0.51	   	0.11	   	0.472	   	0.94	   	0.22	   	0.07	

9028802	   	26.18	   	19.78	   	5552	   	4.41	   	0.98	   	25.66	   	1.92	   	0.81	   	0.51	   	0.898	   	0.89	   	0.24	   	0.08	

9071286	   	13.28	   	11.79	   	5537	   	4.69	   	0.98	   	26.07	   	2.24	   	0.58	   	0.20	   	0.594	   	0.91	   	0.11	   	0.06	

9076541	   	21.71	   	15.62	   	5493	   	4.62	   	0.96	   	24.70	   	1.94	   	0.91	   	0.33	   	0.645	   	0.88	   	0.28	   	0.11	

9279550	   	23.12	   	16.48	   	5429	   	4.62	   	0.95	   	25.54	   	3.15	   	0.71	   	0.13	   	0.653	   	0.92	   	0.29	   	0.11	

9407118	   	25.07	   	31.23	   	5548	   	4.71	   	0.98	   	24.18	   	4.51	   	0.65	   	0.16	   	0.945	   	0.97	   	0.20	   	0.05	

9414450	   	25.07	   	19.78	   	5643	   	4.71	   	1.00	   	25.37	   	1.65	   	0.71	   	0.47	   	0.587	   	0.90	   	0.21	   	0.07	

9447022	   	13.09	   	11.71	   	5459	   	4.57	   	0.95	   	27.64	   	1.82	   	0.57	   	0.23	   	0.37	   	0.93	   	0.11	   	0.06	

9449447	   	29.67	   	23.12	   	5462	   	4.43	   	0.96	   	27.19	   	3.91	   	0.74	   	0.14	   	0.818	   	0.96	   	0.22	   	0.06	

9581214	   	28.26	   	21.98	   	5378	   	4.89	   	0.93	   	27.50	   	2.70	   	0.58	   	0.25	   	0.64	   	0.94	   	0.22	   	0.06	

9657969	   	32.37	   	24.72	   	5478	   	4.75	   	0.96	   	26.54	   	2.00	   	0.95	   	0.48	   	0.99	   	0.86	   	0.24	   	0.06	

9700186	   	27.81	   	22.53	   	5497	   	4.09	   	0.96	   	26.06	   	2.80	   	0.84	   	0.18	   	0.838	   	0.96	   	0.19	   	0.05	

9813448	   	25.07	   	18.35	   	5489	   	4.16	   	0.96	   	24.01	   	4.20	   	0.75	   	0.13	   	0.782	   	0.95	   	0.27	   	0.09	

9825207	   	26.18	   	20.46	   	5342	   	4.58	   	0.92	   	25.35	   	2.96	   	0.58	   	0.14	   	0.593	   	0.90	   	0.22	   	0.07	

9840009	   	29.18	   	22.82	   	5494	   	4.65	   	0.96	   	27.69	   	2.02	   	0.67	   	0.19	   	0.512	   	0.94	   	0.22	   	0.06	

9934371	   	24.39	   	20.23	   	5545	   	4.06	   	0.98	   	26.92	   	5.80	   	0.64	   	0.05	   	0.746	   	0.96	   	0.17	   	0.05	

9963105	   	27.39	   	21.71	   	5552	   	4.38	   	0.98	   	28.09	   	0.57	   	0.26	   	0.33	   	0.253	   	0.93	   	0.21	   	0.06	

9964492	   	22.82	   	18.74	   	5605	   	4.40	   	0.99	   	24.10	   	1.82	   	0.41	   	0.19	   	0.435	   	0.94	   	0.18	   	0.06	

9996105	   	27.81	   	22.82	   	5585	   	3.99	   	0.99	   	28.68	   	2.86	   	0.69	   	0.18	   	0.615	   	0.97	   	0.18	   	0.05	

10081120	   	24.72	   	20.00	   	5492	   	4.76	   	0.96	   	24.97	   	2.09	   	0.61	   	0.16	   	0.461	   	0.95	   	0.19	   	0.06	

10125100	   	31.23	   	25.43	   	5417	   	4.61	   	0.94	   	26.54	   	2.49	   	0.57	   	0.13	   	0.585	   	0.95	   	0.19	   	0.05	

10189540	   	25.07	   	20.23	   	5459	   	4.54	   	0.95	   	25.51	   	3.58	   	0.64	   	0.12	   	0.572	   	0.97	   	0.19	   	0.06	

10192060	   	28.26	   	21.45	   	5409	   	4.41	   	0.94	   	27.86	   	3.30	   	0.63	   	0.19	   	0.727	   	0.96	   	0.24	   	0.07	

10196130	   	13.91	   	11.13	   	5507	   	4.53	   	0.97	   	27.68	   	3.30	   	0.63	   	0.15	   	0.654	   	0.91	   	0.20	   	0.11	

10220780	   	24.72	   	20.23	   	5420	   	4.72	   	0.94	   	24.07	   	2.31	   	0.68	   	0.28	   	0.572	   	0.92	   	0.18	   	0.06	

10287800	   	24.72	   	20.23	   	5595	   	4.51	   	0.99	   	24.04	   	4.12	   	0.56	   	0.10	   	0.772	   	0.96	   	0.18	   	0.06	

10387740	   	29.18	   	22.53	   	5448	   	4.56	   	0.95	   	30.95	   	2.52	   	0.58	   	0.23	   	0.722	   	0.94	   	0.23	   	0.06	

10454270	   	12.54	   	11.34	   	5379	   	4.72	   	0.93	   	24.53	   	3.81	   	0.92	   	0.18	   	0.966	   	0.90	   	0.10	   	0.05	

10483450	   	25.43	   	19.78	   	5551	   	4.73	   	0.98	   	24.86	   	3.44	   	0.70	   	0.13	   	0.64	   	0.93	   	0.22	   	0.07	

10592740	   	21.71	   	18.16	   	5484	   	4.50	   	0.96	   	26.95	   	1.87	   	0.56	   	0.34	   	0.559	   	0.91	   	0.16	   	0.06	

10610300	   	32.97	   	25.07	   	5528	   	4.17	   	0.97	   	30.31	   	4.16	   	0.89	   	0.13	   	0.779	   	0.97	   	0.24	   	0.06	

10651440	   	20.70	   	25.07	   	5441	   	4.85	   	0.95	   	24.42	   	3.28	   	0.68	   	0.14	   	0.782	   	0.92	   	0.17	   	0.05	

10652090	   	14.02	   	15.62	   	5421	   	4.45	   	0.94	   	28.08	   	1.53	   	0.75	   	0.43	   	0.718	   	0.84	   	0.10	   	0.05	

10658860	   	24.39	   	20.00	   	5500	   	4.49	   	0.97	   	25.12	   	4.27	   	0.79	   	0.15	   	0.978	   	0.94	   	0.18	   	0.06	

10670950	   	24.72	   	20.23	   	5448	   	4.13	   	0.95	   	27.53	   	4.50	   	0.78	   	0.11	   	0.743	   	0.97	   	0.18	   	0.06	

10724980	   	24.06	   	17.45	   	5732	   	4.62	   	1.03	   	24.24	   	1.90	   	0.52	   	0.20	   	0.488	   	0.92	   	0.27	   	0.10	

10748260	   	22.53	   	18.74	   	5469	   	4.69	   	0.96	   	24.07	   	5.49	   	0.83	   	0.09	   	0.961	   	0.96	   	0.17	   	0.06	

10864340	   	30.69	   	22.82	   	5530	   	4.56	   	0.97	   	28.39	   	2.22	   	0.43	   	0.13	   	0.495	   	0.96	   	0.26	   	0.07	

10972390	   	25.07	   	30.69	   	5552	   	4.27	   	0.98	   	24.31	   	3.36	   	0.99	   	0.19	   	0.992	   	0.91	   	0.18	   	0.05	

10972620	   	13.49	   	17.12	   	5608	   	4.48	   	0.99	   	26.42	   	2.22	   	0.58	   	0.24	   	0.565	   	0.92	   	0.21	   	0.10	

11097790	   	25.80	   	19.35	   	5573	   	4.53	   	0.98	   	24.73	   	2.25	   	0.42	   	0.21	   	0.564	   	0.94	   	0.25	   	0.08	

11147150	   	30.69	   	24.39	   	5413	   	4.87	   	0.94	   	25.12	   	1.68	   	0.31	   	0.14	   	0.38	   	0.95	   	0.21	   	0.05	

11245710	   	26.57	   	20.46	   	5382	   	4.54	   	0.93	   	25.59	   	3.49	   	0.82	   	0.14	   	0.771	   	0.96	   	0.23	   	0.07	

11305180	   	27.39	   	20.70	   	5530	   	4.59	   	0.97	   	25.59	   	3.44	   	0.81	   	0.18	   	0.865	   	0.96	   	0.24	   	0.07	

11413690	   	28.26	   	22.25	   	5626	   	4.77	   	1.00	   	24.24	   	0.68	   	0.21	   	0.11	   	0.171	   	0.92	   	0.21	   	0.06	

11446080	   	29.18	   	24.72	   	5408	   	4.64	   	0.94	   	27.17	   	2.13	   	0.77	   	0.23	   	0.637	   	0.93	   	0.15	   	0.04	

11454110	   	14.13	   	17.45	   	5488	   	4.82	   	0.96	   	27.44	   	1.38	   	0.98	   	0.71	   	0.671	   	0.79	   	0.19	   	0.08	

11455230	   	26.18	   	20.46	   	5577	   	4.51	   	0.99	   	25.60	   	1.42	   	0.16	   	0.09	   	0.292	   	0.97	   	0.22	   	0.07	

11462110	   	12.45	   	14.96	   	5459	   	4.43	   	0.95	   	24.53	   	3.69	   	0.88	   	0.16	   	0.985	   	0.91	   	0.17	   	0.08	

11509110	   	25.80	   	21.45	   	5544	   	4.79	   	0.98	   	29.76	   	2.02	   	0.58	   	0.29	   	0.629	   	0.94	   	0.17	   	0.05	

11548990	   	12.81	   	15.35	   	5492	   	4.53	   	0.96	   	25.31	   	1.86	   	0.57	   	0.19	   	0.451	   	0.88	   	0.17	   	0.08	

11603050	   	23.12	   	19.14	   	5675	   	4.60	   	1.01	   	27.60	   	2.45	   	0.75	   	0.19	   	0.688	   	0.91	   	0.17	   	0.06	

11764150	   	27.39	   	19.35	   	5423	   	4.61	   	0.94	   	26.43	   	2.94	   	0.86	   	0.34	   	0.955	   	0.91	   	0.29	   	0.10	

11818770	   	28.26	   	21.98	   	5605	   	4.62	   	0.99	   	27.02	   	2.70	   	0.85	   	0.36	   	0.886	   	0.92	   	0.22	   	0.06	

11854160	   	25.43	   	20.70	   	5502	   	4.39	   	0.97	   	25.12	   	0.02	   	0.30	   	0.74	   	0.162	   	0.89	   	0.19	   	0.06	

11909840	   	13.49	   	12.03	   	5464	   	4.53	   	0.96	   	28.06	   	2.45	   	0.64	   	0.15	   	0.665	   	0.89	   	0.11	   	0.06	

11911790	   	22.53	   	15.89	   	5406	   	4.73	   	0.94	   	24.07	   	1.92	   	0.72	   	0.36	   	0.571	   	0.89	   	0.30	   	0.12	

11955130	   	25.07	   	20.23	   	5588	   	4.82	   	0.99	   	24.45	   	2.11	   	0.80	   	0.41	   	0.842	   	0.89	   	0.19	   	0.06	

11970930	   	25.07	   	19.35	   	5397	   	4.48	   	0.94	   	27.75	   	2.13	   	0.67	   	0.23	   	0.651	   	0.94	   	0.23	   	0.07	

11971380	   	26.97	   	21.98	   	5575	   	4.50	   	0.99	   	27.23	   	2.05	   	0.52	   	0.21	   	0.409	   	0.95	   	0.19	   	0.05	

12023900	   	23.74	   	18.94	   	5552	   	4.55	   	0.98	   	26.27	   	3.20	   	0.62	   	0.14	   	0.628	   	0.94	   	0.20	   	0.07	

12052640	   	26.97	   	21.98	   	5457	   	4.57	   	0.95	   	24.17	   	2.05	   	0.75	   	0.20	   	0.546	   	0.91	   	0.19	   	0.05	

12218610	   	26.57	   	21.45	   	5494	   	4.66	   	0.96	   	24.59	   	4.29	   	0.81	   	0.16	   	0.944	   	0.96	   	0.19	   	0.06	

12256700	   	26.97	   	20.70	   	5434	   	4.61	   	0.95	   	24.40	   	2.52	   	1.03	   	0.34	   	0.898	   	0.87	   	0.23	   	0.07	

12400710	   	26.57	   	20.00	   	5537	   	4.59	   	0.98	   	25.74	   	2.15	   	0.87	   	0.41	   	0.636	   	0.91	   	0.25	   	0.08	

	




