### Table 1: Expected photometric performance item external internal notes

"... In PAGE 5: ...02 mag. Table1 summarizes the expected variances, in magnitudes, for the particular case of pre- COSTAR f/96 observations with the 512z 1024 format, and with F220W being the only color lter. The variances are split into two categories.... ..."

### Table 1 Verification performance as function of decision rule and photometric normalisation, PC subspace. The verification threshold (Thr), equal error rate (EER), false acceptance (FA), false rejection (FR) and weighted error rate (WE, in these experiments simply the mean of FA and FR) are shown for different classifiers (Cls) and normalisation techniques (Nrm). The classifiers are the Euclidean distance (EDs), normalised correlation (NCr) and support vector machines (SVM). The photometric normalisation techniques are no normalisation (A2), zero mean and unit variance (ZMn), and histogram equalisation (HEq). The SVM kernel is the RBF function (AD BP BCBMBCBD).

### Table 2 Verification performance as function of decision rule and photometric normalisation, LD subspace. The verification threshold (Thr), equal error rate (EER), false acceptance (FA), false rejection (FR) and weighted error rate (WE, in these experiments simply the mean of FA and FR) are shown for different classifiers (Cls) and normalisation techniques (Nrm). The classifiers are the Euclidean distance (EDs), normalised correlation (NCr) and support vector machines (SVM). The photometric normalisation techniques are no normalisation (A2), zero mean and unit variance (ZMn), and histogram equalisation (HEq). The SVM kernel is the RBF function (AD BP BCBMBCBD).

### Table 2: Photometric Summary

"... In PAGE 4: ... All lamps, including those used for task lighting, were 3500K and had a CRI of 80 or better. Table2 summarises spot photometric measurements and power measurements for the nine lighting conditions. Procedure and Dependent Variables Participants arrived at the institution at 8:30 am, in same-sex groups of 3 to 6 people.... ..."

### Table 3 : Photometric Data

"... In PAGE 12: ...evel, and can be straighforwardly corrected (cf. Yan et al. 1996). The mean values for the coe cients `a apos; and `b apos; in Equation 2, along with their 1 errors and the net 1 residuals of tting this equation to the data, are given in Table3... ..."

### Table 4. Results of Photometric Analysis

"... In PAGE 7: ...or the year (column 4). These are typically 0.0001 or 0.0002 mag and demonstrate the precision with which we measure the yearly means. Table4 gives the results of our photometric analyses. The semi-amplitudes are derived from sine-curve ts to the photometric data, assuming the planetary orbital periods given in Table 2, and serve as estimates of the maximum photometric variability possible at the orbital period.... In PAGE 7: ...etermined to high precision (i.e., 0:1%), our assessment of photometric semi-amplitude is not signi cantly altered if we permit the period of the sine curve to vary within several standard deviations of the period measurement error. All semi-amplitudes in Table4 are within 1 ? 2 of zero; i.e.... In PAGE 11: ... The standard deviation of the yearly means from the mean of the means, the measure of long-term variability, is 0.0008 mag ( Table4 ), signi cantly larger than the precision with which we typically measure the yearly means. To search for photometric pulsations at the value of the inferred orbital period of the planet, the year-to-year photometric variation was removed by shifting the data from each season to the mean brightness of the rst observing season.... In PAGE 11: ... Zero phase is the time of mid-transit for favorable orbital inclinations. The semi-amplitude of a sine-curve t to the data with the period xed to the planetary orbital period is 0:00011 0:00009 mag ( Table4 ). This result is a tighter constraint on variability than we were able to report in Paper II.... In PAGE 14: ... The standard deviation of the yearly mean magnitudes (Table 3, column 5) from the mean of the mean magnitudes is 0.0002 mag ( Table4 ), indicating no detectable long-term variations in 51 Peg. The photometric observations from the ve observing seasons are plotted in the top panel of Figure 4 against the orbital phase of the planetary companion computed with the ephemeris JDconj = 2; 450; 027:271 + 4:2310E (2) of Marcy (1998).... In PAGE 16: ...00016 0.00013 mag ( Table4 ), which is zero considering its uncertainty. The portion of the phase curve near the time of conjunction is replotted in the bottom panel of Figure 5, where two additional nights of intensive observations (not included in the top panel of Figure 5 for reasons listed previously) acquired with the 0.... In PAGE 18: ... The 210 nightly observations from these two observing seasons are plotted in Figure 6 (top panel) against the orbital phase of 1 Cnc b computed with the ephemeris JDconj = 2; 450; 206:04 + 14:649E (4) of Marcy (1998). Fourier analysis of these data at the planetary period gives a semi- amplitude of 0:00011 0:00009 mag ( Table4 ), a somewhat tighter constraint than we reported in Paper II, which used the old comparison star. Periodogram analysis of the data reveal no signi cant periodicities between 1 and 100 d.... In PAGE 20: ... The standard deviation of the yearly mean magnitudes from column 5 of Table 3 from the mean of the means, given as 0.0001 mag in Table4 , does not include the results of the fth and sixth observing seasons. The photometric observations from the six seasons are plotted modulo the planetary orbital period in the top panel of Figure 7.... In PAGE 20: ... The individual observations in seasons 1, 2, 5, and 6 have been adjusted so that their yearly means equal those of seasons 3 and 4. Fourier analysis of these data at the planetary period gives a semi-amplitude of 0:00011 0:00009 mag ( Table4 ), so any real light variation at this period must be extremely small. The portion of the phase curve near the time of conjunction is replotted in the bottom panel of Figure 7 with an expanded scale on the abscissa.... In PAGE 22: ... Fourier analysis of the adjusted data at the 116.67-d period gives a semi-amplitude of 0:00020 0:00011 ( Table4 ), in agreement with our results in Paper I. Periodogram analyses of the data reveal no signi cant periodicities between 1 and 200 d.... In PAGE 22: ...002 mag, but we suspect at least some of this to be a dimming of the comparison star. Therefore, the long-term variation in 70 Vir, given in Table4 as 0.0010 mag, is an upper limit.... In PAGE 24: ... Therefore, the long-term standard deviation of 0.0004 mag given in Table4 is an upper limit. The 242 nightly observations are plotted in the top panel of Figure 9 against the orbital phase of the planet computed with the ephemeris JDconj = 2; 449; 099 + 1035E (7) where the time of conjunction has been derived from an updated orbital ephemeris (Marcy 1998).... In PAGE 24: ...0 is our rst observing season. Fourier analysis on the planetary orbital period gives a semi-amplitude of 0:00048 0:00013 mag ( Table4 ), but this apparant variation is likely from variability in the comparison star, as discussed above. Therefore, the semi-amplitude on the planetary orbital period is an upper limit to variability in 47 UMa.... In PAGE 26: ...0002 mag; the standard deviation of the two yearly means from their mean is 0.0001 mag ( Table4 ). Therefore, we nd no evidence so far of any photometric variability in Gl 411.... In PAGE 27: ...0001 or 0.0002 mag ( Table4 ). For 47 UMa, we have shown that photometric variations on the 2.... In PAGE 29: ...f the star and planet. Hatzes et al. (1998) have searched for this re ected light of the planetary companion of 51 Peg in their high-resolution spectra. Their negative result implies that the planet is at least 2000 times fainter than the star, in agreement with the small semi-amplitude of our photometry listed in Table4 . We examine here the possibility that we might similarly detect in our photometry the re ected light from one of the short-period planets as the planet apos;s illumination changes the combined light as a function of orbital phase.... In PAGE 29: ....00008 mag. The precision of our photometry is approaching the precision needed to detect phase e ects of this magnitude. The semi-amplitudes of the photometric data and their errors listed in Table4 come directly from least-squares sine ts to the data on the planetary orbital periods.... In PAGE 29: ... This is when the dark, unlit hemisphere of the planet faces the earth. The semi-amplitude results in Table4 show that we have achieved the highest precision for Boo, 1 Cnc, and CrB. The phases of minimum of the sine ts to the photometry of these systems are 0.... In PAGE 30: ... However, the transit probabilities are very small for these last three systems (Table 4). Using the transit probabilites in Table4 , computed as the ratios of the stellar radii to the semi-major axes of the planetary orbits (Schneider 1996), we calculate the probability of nding at least one transit from among the six planets that have negative transit-search results. This is given by P (one transit) = 1 ? P (no transits) (8) where P (no transits) is the probabability of nding no transits.... In PAGE 30: ... This is given by P (one transit) = 1 ? P (no transits) (8) where P (no transits) is the probabability of nding no transits. This, in turn, is given by P (no transits) = P1(no transits) P2(no transits) ::: P6(no transit) (9) where Pi(no transits) is one minus the transit probability from Table4 . Then, P (no transits) = 0:61:... In PAGE 31: ....4. Year-to-Year Stellar Photometric Variations Our measure of year-to-year photometric variations is the standard deviation of a star apos;s yearly mean magnitudes (from Table 3) with respect to the mean of the yearly means. These standard deviations are given as long in column 3 of Table4 . We nd signi cant... ..."

### Table 3. Summary of Photometric Observations

"... In PAGE 7: ... When available, updated values obtained through private communication are listed. Table3 summarizes our precision photometry on each star. The yearly mean magnitudes are in the Stromgren (b + y)=2 bandpass except for Gl 411, which is in the Johnson (B + V )=2 bands.... In PAGE 7: ...ithin 1 ? 2 of zero; i.e., within the uncertainties of the photometry, the stars are constant at the orbital periods. A measure of the long-term (year-to-year) variability of each star, long, is given as the standard deviation of the star apos;s yearly mean magnitudes (from column 5 of Table3 ) with respect to the mean of the star apos;s mean magnitudes. Most, but not all, are... In PAGE 11: ...ariations. In April 1997, we acquired 234 group observations with the 0.75 m APT by devoting several nights around the time of opposition to constant monitoring of Boo and its comparison stars. Our six years of photometry, including the intensive monitoring in 1997, are summarized in Table3 . The yearly mean magnitudes are di erential (b + y)=2 magnitudes in the sense Boo minus the comparison star HD 121560 (F6 V).... In PAGE 11: ...nexplained 116-d periodicity in the Ca II record reported in Paper II (see x4.1.2 below). The small standard deviations of the nightly observations ( Table3 , column 6) provide additional evidence for the short-term photometric non-variability of Boo. These results, plus the lack of periodic changes in the shapes of Boo apos;s spectroscopic line pro les (Brown et al.... In PAGE 14: ...75 m APT. The results are summarized in Table3 . The yearly mean magnitudes in column 5 are di erential (b + y)=2 magnitudes in the sense 51 Peg minus the comparison star HD 218235 (F6 V).... In PAGE 16: ....3.1. Photometry The 121 nightly photometric observations taken with the 0.80 m APT over two observing seasons are summarized in Table3 . The yearly mean magnitudes in column 5 are di erential (b + y)=2 magnitudes in the sense of And minus the comparison star HR 409 (F7 V).... In PAGE 18: ...variable. Therefore, in this paper we limit our discussion to the second and third observing seasons, summarized in Table3 . Di erential magnitudes, still in the (b + y)=2 pass band, have been computed with respect to 61 Cnc.... In PAGE 18: ... Di erential magnitudes, still in the (b + y)=2 pass band, have been computed with respect to 61 Cnc. The standard deviations in Table3 show no evidence for intra-season variability of 1 Cnc; the two yearly mean magnitudes also suggest no longer-term variability. The 210 nightly observations from these two observing seasons are plotted in Figure 6 (top panel) against the orbital phase of 1 Cnc b computed with the ephemeris JDconj = 2; 450; 206:04 + 14:649E (4) of Marcy (1998).... In PAGE 19: ...75 m APT. Results from the six observing seasons are given in Table3 . Yearly mean magnitudes are di erential (b + y)=2 magnitudes in the sense CrB minus CrB (HD 140716), the best of our three comparison stars.... In PAGE 19: ... Periodogram analysis of the individual observing seasons and of the six seasons taken together reveal no signi cant periodicities in the range 1 { 100 d. The photometric results in Table3 show both intra- and inter-seasonal photometric stability in CrB. The range in the yearly mean magnitudes is insigni cant, only 0.... In PAGE 20: ... While we cannot con rm the fading of CrB because of even greater photometric variations in the other two comparison stars, the non-variability of CrB is supported by the comparative atness of its Ca II record (Figure 1). The standard deviation of the yearly mean magnitudes from column 5 of Table3 from the mean of the means, given as 0.0001 mag in Table 4, does not include the results of the fth and sixth observing seasons.... In PAGE 22: ....6.1. Photometry In Paper I, we presented photometric observations of 70 Vir over three observing seasons; here we extend our coverage to six seasons. The 387 nightly observations from these six seasons are summarized in Table3 and plotted in Figure 8 (top panel) against orbital phase of the companion computed with the ephemeris JDconj = 2; 450; 171:94 + 116:67E (6) where the time of conjunction was derived from an updated orbital solution (Marcy 1998). Di erential magnitudes are in the (b + y)=2 band pass and are computed with respect to the comparison star 71 Vir (K0 III).... In PAGE 22: ... Periodogram analyses of the data reveal no signi cant periodicities between 1 and 200 d. The standard deviations of the nightly observations in column 6 of Table3 are also consistent with short-term non-variability. The yearly mean magnitudes imply a gradual brightening of 70 Vir of over 0.... In PAGE 24: ...75 m APT. We now have 242 observations from three seasons; these are summarized in Table3 . Yearly mean magnitudes are di erential (b + y)=2 magnitudes in the sense 47 UMa minus HR 4264 (K2 III).... In PAGE 24: ... Yearly mean magnitudes are di erential (b + y)=2 magnitudes in the sense 47 UMa minus HR 4264 (K2 III). The standard deviations given in column 6 of Table3 are fairly small, indicating that 47 UMa is constant within each season. The mean magnitudes indicate a slight change of 0.... In PAGE 26: ...he 0.4 m APT. We have observations from two observing seasons, a much shorter time span than the orbital period reported for the companion. Yearly means of the photometry are given in Table3 along with their errors. Johnson B and V di erential magnitudes are in the sense Gl 411 minus the comparison star HD 95485 (V = 7:3, F0) and have been combined into a single (B + V )=2 pass band to improve precision.... In PAGE 31: ...4. Year-to-Year Stellar Photometric Variations Our measure of year-to-year photometric variations is the standard deviation of a star apos;s yearly mean magnitudes (from Table3 ) with respect to the mean of the yearly means. These standard deviations are given as long in column 3 of Table 4.... ..."

### Table 1. Log of Photometric Observations

"... In PAGE 6: ... In the data reduction, some of the exposures were not included due to either poor seeing ( 2:0 arcsec) or the sky brightness being too highly variable. As listed in Table1 , 13; 000 seconds good quality data were obtained on each of the three elds which have been included in the nal data reductions. The conditions were photometric for some of the nights, as is indicated in Table 1.... In PAGE 31: ... The median di erence for the 126 common measurements is K200 ? K60 = ?0:017 0:023 mag, the mean di erence is +0:010 0:018 mag, and the rms scatter is 0:20 mag. [bottom] The Palomar 200{inch K{band photometry (primary sample) compared to the Keck deep and shallow photometry (see Table1 ). For the comparison with the deep imaging, the median di erence of 14 common measurements is ?0:027 0:022 mag, the mean di erence is ?0:012 0:017 mag, and the rms is 0:062 mag.... ..."