Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 114 references

TOI-6038 A b: A dense sub-Saturn in the transition regime between the Neptunian ridge and savanna

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper establishes TOI-6038 A b as a dense, core-dominated sub-Saturn at the boundary between the Neptunian ridge and savanna, and shows the wide binary companion alone probably cannot explain its orbit.

desk verdict A solid, standard sub-Saturn characterization; the unexplained exclusion of 14 RVs is the one gap that needs a referee's attention. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.02272 v1 pith:XWMCRHJK submitted 2025-01-04 astro-ph.EP

Sanjay Baliwal , Rishikesh Sharma , Abhijit Chakraborty , K. J. Nikitha , A. Castro-González , Hareesh G. Bhaskar , Akanksha Khandelwal , David W. Latham
show 8 more authors
Allyson Bieryla Vincent Bourrier Neelam J.S.S.V. Prasad Kapil K. Bharadwaj Kevikumar A. Lad Ashirbad Nayak Vishal Joshi Jason D. Eastman
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords sub-SaturnNeptunianridgesavannaradialvelocityTESSphotometryinternalstructurehigh-eccentricitytidalmigrationwidebinary
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper reports the discovery and characterization of TOI-6038 A b, a sub-Saturn exoplanet orbiting a bright, metal-rich late F-type star that is itself the primary of a wide binary system. Combining TESS transit photometry with PARAS-2 radial velocities, the authors establish a mass of $78.5^{+9.5}_{-9.9}\,M_\oplus$, a radius of $6.41^{+0.20}_{-0.16}\,R_\oplus$, and a bulk density of $1.62^{+0.23}_{-0.24}\,\mathrm{g\,cm^{-3}}$, placing the planet at the border between the Neptunian ridge and the Neptunian savanna. The high density matches the ridge population, which has been proposed to arrive at short periods through high-eccentricity tidal migration, yet a first-order dynamical analysis says the wide stellar companion cannot by itself drive such migration. This makes the system a test bed for distinguishing dynamically driven migration, disk-driven migration, and in-situ formation for planets in this transition regime.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by joint modeling of TESS photometry and PARAS-2 radial velocities within EXOFASTv2, which simultaneously fits the transit, radial-velocity, spectral energy distribution, and MIST stellar models to produce stellar and planetary parameters; a circular orbit is adopted because AIC/BIC strongly favor it. The population placement depends on the period-radius and density-period diagrams defined by Castro-González et al. (2024a,b), which separate the Neptunian ridge from the desert and savanna. Internal-structure claims rest on the photoevolver code, using the Otegi et al. (2020) rocky-core mass-radius relation and the Chen & Rogers (2016) envelope model to solve for core mass and envelope fraction. The migration assessment uses the vZLK timescale and the short-range force parameters $\epsilon_\mathrm{GR}$, $\epsilon_\mathrm{rot}$, and $\epsilon_\mathrm{td}$ from Liu et al. (2015) to evaluate whether the wide stellar binary can excite the eccentricity needed for high-eccentricity tidal migration.

What would settle it

Measure the Rossiter-McLaughlin effect in the stellar lines during transit: a large spin-orbit misalignment would contradict the paper's conclusion that the wide companion cannot drive high-eccentricity migration and would reopen that channel, while a small misalignment would favor disk-driven, coplanar migration.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

TOI-6038 A b is a dense sub-Saturn with $M_P = 78.5^{+9.5}_{-9.9}\,M_\oplus$, $R_P = 6.41^{+0.20}_{-0.16}\,R_\oplus$, and a circular orbit with period $P = 5.8267311^{+0.0000074}_{-0.0000068}$ days around a $1.291^{+0.066}_{-0.060}\,M_\odot$ late F-type star. The paper's central claim is that this object occupies the outer boundary of the Neptunian ridge, the orbital-period over-density of super-Neptunes and sub-Saturns at $3.2$--$5.7$ days, and that its density of $1.62^{+0.23}_{-0.24}\,\mathrm{g\,cm^{-3}}$ places it with the dense ridge population ($\rho_P \simeq 1.5$--$2.0\,\mathrm{g\,cm^{-3}}$) rather than the low-density savanna. Internal-structure modeling yields a rocky/iron core of about $58\,M_\oplus$ and an H/He envelope mass fraction $f_\mathrm{env} \approx 0.26$, so the planet is core-dominated. The authors further argue that vZLK oscillations induced by the wide companion at $\approx 3217$ AU are probably suppressed by relativistic apsidal precession, leaving high-eccentricity migration by an undetected companion or early disk-driven migration as open formation routes.

Load-bearing premise

The measured mass and radius are secure, but the inferred core mass of $58\,M_\oplus$ and envelope fraction of $0.26$ assume a two-layer planet whose core obeys the Otegi et al. (2020) rocky mass-radius relation and whose envelope follows Chen & Rogers (2016); if the true interior composition deviates from these models, the compositional claims would change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • TOI-6038 A b becomes a benchmark for the ridge-savanna transition: any successful theory of Neptunian-planet migration and evolution should reproduce a dense, core-dominated planet on a 5.83-day circular orbit in a wide binary.
  • The density dichotomy between ridge and savanna is reinforced by this object, supporting the view that the two regimes correspond to different formation or migration sub-populations rather than a single mass-loss sequence.
  • With a bright host star, the planet is observable for spin-orbit (Rossiter-McLaughlin) and atmospheric-escape (e.g., metastable helium) studies, which can discriminate between the proposed migration histories.
  • The derived core mass of about $58\,M_\oplus$ and envelope fraction of $0.26$ provide a constraint on the timing of gas accretion and disk dissipation for sub-Saturns.
  • The system adds to the small sample of hot sub-Saturns in multiple star systems, enabling statistical tests of whether wide companions trigger high-eccentricity migration.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If a future Rossiter-McLaughlin measurement finds a small spin-orbit angle, the dynamically hot migration channel would be largely ruled out for this planet and disk-driven migration would become the leading explanation, implying that the ridge population may contain many dynamically cold members.
  • The position of this planet at the edge of the ridge makes the boundary an empirical probe: discovering more planets just inside and outside 5.7 days would reveal whether the ridge-savanna transition in density is sharp or continuous.
  • A metastable-helium observation that sets an upper limit on atmospheric escape would independently test the thin-envelope structure; escape rates much larger than expected for a core-dominated planet would call the internal-structure model into question.
  • The authors' preliminary result that GR precession suppresses vZLK-driven migration for a formation radius near 5 AU suggests that similar transition planets in wide binaries could serve as clean tests of whether distant stellar companions ever drive close-in migration.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. TOI-6038 A b is presented as a newly discovered dense sub-Saturn orbiting a bright, metal-rich late F star in a wide binary system. The analysis combines nine TESS transits from Sectors 18 and 58 with 29 PARAS-2 radial velocities, and uses EXOFASTv2 to jointly model the photometry, RVs, SED, and MIST isochrones. The adopted circular-orbit, high-stellar-mass solution yields P = 5.8267311 days, R_P = 6.41 R_Earth, M_P = 78.5 M_Earth, and a bulk density of 1.62 g/cm3, placing the planet at the boundary between the Neptunian ridge and savanna. Internal-structure modeling gives a core mass of about 58 M_Earth and a 26% H/He envelope mass fraction. The paper discusses tidal circularization, a possible von Zeipel-Lidov-Kozai migration pathway driven by the binary companion, and future atmospheric and orbital follow-up opportunities.

Significance. If the derived parameters hold, the paper delivers a precise mass and radius for a sub-Saturn in a sparsely populated region of parameter space, with a density consistent with the high-density ridge population and a wide binary companion that is relevant for testing high-eccentricity migration scenarios. The analysis has several strengths: contamination is quantified with TESS-cont; the planetary origin of the RV signal is supported by in-phase TESS photometry and null activity-indicator periodograms; speckle imaging and Gaia RUWE rule out close stellar companions; and both circular/eccentric and high/low stellar-mass solutions are compared. The two main weaknesses are the undocumented exclusion of 14 radial velocities from the fit and a numerical inconsistency in the quoted Kozai timescale; both are fixable and do not, by themselves, invalidate the central mass and radius measurement.

major comments (2)
  1. [§2.3, Table 4] The manuscript states that fourteen additional PARAS-2 spectra were excluded from the RV analysis 'due to poor seeing conditions', but these points are never listed, their orbital phases are not shown, and no fit including them is reported. Since the reported semi-amplitude K = 23.5 ± 2.8 m/s is the sole basis for the headline mass M_P = 78.5 ± 9.9 M_Earth, a phase-dependent selection could bias K by more than its formal uncertainty. Please provide the excluded epochs and RVs (or at minimum their phases, uncertainties, and a seeing/SNR criterion), and either include them in a fit with appropriate weights or demonstrate explicitly that their exclusion is phase-independent and does not shift K.
  2. [§4.2] The quoted von Zeipel-Lidov-Kozai timescale is numerically inconsistent with the stated parameters. Using the paper's formula t_vZLK = (a_comp/a_1,0)^3 (m_primary/m_comp) t_P,0 with a_comp = 3217 AU, a_1,0 = 5 AU, m_primary/m_comp ≈ 1.5, and t_P = 5.8267 days gives t_vZLK ≈ 6 × 10^6 yr, not 4 × 10^9 yr; the quoted 4 Gyr would correspond to a_1,0 ≈ 0.5 AU rather than 5 AU. Please correct the numerical value or the assumed initial semi-major axis and re-evaluate the sentence claiming that the timescale is 'comparable to the age of the system'. The qualitative conclusion based on epsilon_GR ≈ 3 may be unaffected, but the stated timescale is wrong as written.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§3.6, Tables 2 and 5] The low-mass stellar solution is reported only in the appendix and is not discussed in the main text. Since it gives M_P ≈ 72.5 M_Earth versus 78.5 M_Earth for the adopted high-mass solution, a sentence in §3.6 stating that the low-mass solution is within the quoted 68% interval and leaves the density and ridge/savanna classification unchanged would help readers judge the robustness of the result.
  2. [§4.1, Table 3] The internal-structure results (M_core ≈ 58 M_Earth, f_env ≈ 0.26) are computed with one core mass-radius relation (Otegi et al. 2020) and one envelope model (Chen & Rogers 2016). Please state explicitly that these values are model-dependent, and if possible quote the spread from an alternative envelope model (for example Lopez & Fortney 2014) rather than only the formal fit uncertainty.
  3. [§2.1] The TESS aperture contains a 10.4% flux contribution from TOI-6038 B (Star 1). Although the PDCSAP light curves are corrected for crowding and the paper reasonably does not include an extra dilution factor, a fit with a free dilution parameter constrained by the TESS-cont estimate would directly test the sensitivity of R_P and hence of the density to residual contamination errors.
  4. [§3.5] There is a minor wording error: 'not additional relevant peaks pop up' should read 'no additional relevant peaks pop up.'
  5. [§3.2] The sentence 'TOI-6038 is only the fifth known multiple star system...' should refer to TOI-6038 A, since TOI-6038 names the whole binary system.
  6. [§4.1, Table 3] The quantity labeled 'envelope radius' appears to be the envelope thickness R_P - R_core rather than a radius in the usual sense; consider renaming it to 'envelope thickness' for clarity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: TOI-6038 A b's mass and radius are measured from independent PARAS-2 RVs and TESS photometry, with cited models supplying only interpretation.

full rationale

The paper's central results—MP=78.5+9.5-9.9 M_Earth and RP=6.41+0.20-0.16 R_Earth—are obtained by a joint EXOFASTv2 fit to PARAS-2 radial velocities and TESS transit photometry (Sects. 2.3, 3.6). Nothing in that fit is defined in terms of the reported planet properties: the Keplerian RV model and Mandel & Agol transit model are standard forward models, and the fitted parameters (P, TC, K, depth, limb darkening, jitter) do not presuppose the headline mass or radius. The mass follows from the measured semi-amplitude K=23.5±2.8 m/s and the fitted stellar mass, while the radius follows from the transit depth and stellar radius; these are independent observables. The internal-structure interpretation (Sect. 4.1) uses published mass-radius relations (Otegi et al. 2020; Chen & Rogers 2016) as external inputs and reports core mass, core radius, envelope radius, and fenv as outputs; the outputs are not fed back into the RV or transit fit, so the compositional inference is model-dependent but not circular. Self-citations to Baliwal et al. (2024) describe the PARAS-2 pipeline and speckle reduction used here and are not used to force the target result; citations to Castro-González et al. (2024a,b) supply the ridge/savanna definitions and density dichotomy that frame the discussion, but the paper does not derive those definitions from its own data. The exclusion of fourteen RV points for poor seeing is a data-quality choice; absent a demonstration of phase bias it is a robustness concern, not a circular reduction, because the reported K is not constructed to equal any later output. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no claimed result reduces by construction to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim (mass, radius, density) is a direct measurement with minimal free parameters beyond the standard fitted nuisance parameters. The composition and migration interpretations rely on a few model choices (core/envelope models, tidal Q, assumed formation radius, binary separation proxy) that should be kept in mind when evaluating the derived results.

free parameters (4)
  • Adopted stellar mass solution = 1.291 Msun (high-mass branch)
    EXOFASTv2 posterior is bimodal with peaks at 1.145 and 1.291 Msun; authors adopt the high-mass solution with 87% probability. The low-mass solution gives MP=72.5 Mearth and RP=6.34 Rearth, which would slightly alter the reported parameters.
  • Tidal quality factor Qp = 1e5
    Assumed in the tidal circularization timescale calculation (Section 3.7). With Qp=1e5.5, tau_circ increases from 3.6 to 11.3 Gyr, changing the interpretation of whether the orbit is circularized.
  • Initial semi-major axis a1,0 for vZLK estimate = 5 AU
    Assumed for the planet's formation location in the vZLK timescale calculation (Section 4.2). The suppression by general relativistic precession (epsilon_GR~3) depends on this choice.
  • Binary semi-major axis in vZLK estimate = 3217 AU (projected separation)
    Used as the binary semi-major axis in the vZLK timescale; authors note that using the projected separation may underestimate the true semi-major axis, affecting the conclusion that HEM is unlikely.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Keplerian orbits and Mandel-Agol transit model accurately describe the system
    EXOFASTv2 uses these models for RV and transit fitting (Section 3.6).
  • domain assumption The observed radial velocity signal is of planetary origin, not stellar activity
    Based on periodogram analysis, lack of correlation with FWHM/BIS, and phase consistency with the transit (Section 3.5).
  • domain assumption The transit signal originates from TOI-6038 A, not from the contaminating nearby star Star 1 (TIC 194736419)
    Star 1 contributes 10.4% of the aperture flux; the authors argue that the RV signal has the same period and phase as the transit, and since the RV fiber excludes Star 1, the transit must be on A (Sections 2.1, 2.3, 3.5).
  • domain assumption The PDCSAP light curves are correctly corrected for dilution from nearby stars
    The SPOC pipeline computes optimal apertures and corrects for crowding; if the correction is imperfect, the planet radius and density would be biased (Section 2.1).
  • domain assumption MIST stellar evolutionary models are appropriate for the host star
    Used to derive stellar mass, radius, and age via SED and isochrone fitting (Section 3.6); the bimodality in the posterior is a known feature of MIST.
  • domain assumption The Otegi et al. (2020) and Chen & Rogers (2016) models for rocky cores and H/He envelopes apply to this planet
    The inferred core mass and envelope fraction rest entirely on these models (Section 4.1).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of TOI-6038 A b: A dense sub-Saturn in the transition regime between the Neptunian ridge and savanna." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XWMCRHJK

@misc{pith2026250102272,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: TOI-6038 A b: A dense sub-Saturn in the transition regime between the Neptunian ridge and savanna},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XWMCRHJK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.02272}
}
abstract

We present the discovery and characterization of a sub-Saturn exoplanet, TOI-6038~A~b, using the PARAS-2 spectrograph. The planet orbits a bright ($m_V=9.9$), metal-rich late F-type star, TOI-6038~A, with $T_{\rm{eff}}=6110\pm100~\mathrm{K}$, $\log{g}=4.118^{+0.015}_{-0.025}$, and $[{\rm{Fe/H}}]=0.124^{+0.079}_{-0.077}$ dex. The system also contains a wide-orbit binary companion, TOI-6038~B, an early K-type star at a projected separation of $\approx3217$ AU. We combined radial velocity data from PARAS-2 with photometric data from the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) for joint modeling. TOI-6038~A~b has a mass of $78.5^{+9.5}_{-9.9}~M_\oplus$ and a radius of $6.41^{+0.20}_{-0.16}~R_\oplus$, orbiting in a circular orbit with a period of $5.8267311^{+0.0000074}_{-0.0000068}$ days. Internal structure modeling suggests that $\approx74\%$ of the planet's mass is composed of dense materials, such as rock and iron, forming a core, while the remaining mass consists of a low-density H/He envelope. TOI-6038~A~b lies at the transition regime between the recently identified Neptunian ridge and savanna. Having a density of $\rho_{\rm{P}}=1.62^{+0.23}_{-0.24}\rm~g\,cm^{-3}$, TOI-6038~A~b is compatible with the population of dense ridge planets ($\rho_{\rm{P}}\simeq$ 1.5-2.0 $\rm~g\,cm^{-3}$), which have been proposed to have reached their close-in locations through high-eccentricity tidal migration (HEM). First-order estimates suggest that the secular perturbations induced by TOI-6038~B may be insufficient to drive the HEM of TOI-6038~A~b. Therefore, it is not clear whether HEM driven by a still undetected companion, or early disk-driven migration, brought TOI-6038~A~b to its present-day close-in orbit. Its bright host star makes TOI-6038~A~b a prime target for atmospheric escape and orbital architecture observations, which will help us to better understand its overall evolution.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.02272 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Nearby sources contaminating the TOI-6038 A aperture. Left: TPF-shaped heatmap with the pixel-by-pixel flux fraction from TOI-6038 A in S58. The red grid is the SPOC aperture. The pixel scale is 21 arcsec pixel−1 . The two sources that most contribute to the aperture flux (Star 1: TIC 194736419 and Star 2: TIC 194736424) are highlighted in purple and green. Disk areas scale with the emitted fluxes. Right: Flux contr… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Detrended and normalized TESS light curves (LCs) of TOI-6038 A from S18 and S58 are shown with green and blue points, respectively. The full LC is displayed in the upper panel, while the phase-folded LC from both sectors is shown in the lower panel, with pink dots representing 20-minute binned data points. The black solid line in both panels represents the best-fit transit model for TOI-6038 A b (see Sec. 3.6). 200 … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. 5σ contrast curve in the V band for TOI-6038 A, obtained using the speckle imager on the PRL 2.5m tele￾scope. The speckle ACF is shown as an inset. No stellar companions are detected. light curves are shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left: Normalized TESS-SPOC PDCSAP light curve (LC) from S58, shown with grey points (full LC) and blue points (with transits removed). The pink dots represent 120-minute binned data points, while the solid black line shows the best-fit sinusoidal signal. Right: GLS per…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: SED of TOI-6038 A, with red symbols represent￾ing the observed photometric measurements and horizontal bars indicating the effective width of the passbands. The blue points represent the model fluxes, and the residuals are displayed in the lower panel. 6900 6100 5300 4…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: GLS periodogram of RVs, residual RVs, window function, CCF FWHM, and bisector span, shown in panels 1–5 (top to bottom), respectively. The vertical pink line marks the most significant period (5.832±0.010 days) found in the RVs, which is consistent with the period foun…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: MIST evolutionary track for TOI-6038 A shown as a solid black line. The black point indicates the Teff and log g, while the red asterisk denotes the current age of TOI￾6038 A. We calculate the tidal circularization timescale (τcirc) for TOI-6038 A b to be 3.6±0.9 Gyr. …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: RVs of TOI-6038 A observed with PARAS-2 are plotted as black dots over time (left). Phase-folded RVs are shown on the right. The best-fit RV model from EXOFASTv2 is represented by the solid pink line, with the residual RVs displayed in the respective lower panels. 0 2 …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Mass-radius diagram of known transiting exo￾planets with masses and radii constraints better than 20%, and equilibrium temperatures (Teq) between 500 K and 2000 K. The sample is drawn from the TEPCat catalog (South￾worth 2011). The light pink region highlights the sub-…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: TOI-6038 A b in the period-radius diagram of close-in exoplanets with radii constrained to a precision better than 20%. The boundaries of the Neptunian desert, ridge, and savanna (Castro-Gonz´alez et al. 2024a) are indi￾cated with black dashed lines. The data were col…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Density-period diagram of super-Neptunes and sub-Saturns with masses and radii constrained to a precision better than 20%. Planets in the savanna show low densities, typically below 1 g cm−3 , while planets in the ridge show densities as high as 1.5 − 2.0 g cm−3 (Cast…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

114 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    C., & Laughlin, G

    Adams, F. C., & Laughlin, G. 2006, ApJ, 649, 1004, doi: 10.1086/506145

    doi:10.1086/506145 2006

  2. [2]

    2020, The Astronomical Journal, 159, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab4fee

    Agol, E., Luger, R., & Foreman-Mackey, D. 2020, The Astronomical Journal, 159, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab4fee

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab4fee 2020

  3. [3]

    1974, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19, 716

    Akaike, H. 1974, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19, 716

    1974

  4. [4]

    L., Chen, X., Ciardi, D., et al

    Akeson, R. L., Chen, X., Ciardi, D., et al. 2013, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 125, 989, doi: 10.1086/672273

    doi:10.1086/672273 2013

  5. [5]

    N., Johnson, J

    Albrecht, S., Winn, J. N., Johnson, J. A., et al. 2012, ApJ, 757, 18, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/18

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/757/1/18 2012

  6. [6]

    F., & Barcel´ o Forteza, S

    Aller, A., Lillo-Box, J., Jones, D., Miranda, L. F., & Barcel´ o Forteza, S. 2020, A&A, 635, A128, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937118

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201937118 2020

  7. [7]

    R., Storch, N

    Anderson, K. R., Storch, N. I., & Lai, D. 2016, 456, 3671, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2906

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2906 2016

  8. [8]

    2023, A&A, 674, A27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243462

    Andrae, R., Fouesneau, M., Sordo, R., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243462

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243462 2023

Show all 114 references
  1. [9]

    2023, A&A, 674, A120, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245237

    Attia, O., Bourrier, V., Delisle, J.-B., & Eggenberger, P. 2023, A&A, 674, A120, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245237

    2023 doi

  2. [10]

    2021, A&A, 647, A40, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039452

    Attia, O., Bourrier, V., Eggenberger, P., et al. 2021, A&A, 647, A40, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039452

    2021 doi

  3. [11]

    2024, A&A, 691, A12, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450934

    Baliwal, S., Sharma, R., Chakraborty, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A12, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450934

    2024 doi

  4. [12]

    1996, A&AS, 119, 373 Barrag´ an, O., Aigrain, S., Rajpaul, V

    Baranne, A., Queloz, D., Mayor, M., et al. 1996, A&AS, 119, 373 Barrag´ an, O., Aigrain, S., Rajpaul, V. M., & Zicher, N. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 509, 866, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2889

    1996 doi

  5. [14]

    H., & Laughlin, G

    Batygin, K., Bodenheimer, P. H., & Laughlin, G. P. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 829, 114, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/829/2/114 Beaug´ e, C., & Nesvorn´ y, D. 2012, 751, 119, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/751/2/119 Beaug´ e, C., & Nesvorn´ y, D. 2013, ApJ, 763, 12, doi: 10.1088/0004-6...

    2016 doi

  6. [15]

    J., et al

    Becker, A., Lorenzen, W., Fortney, J. J., et al. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 215, 21, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/215/2/21

    2014 doi

  7. [16]

    J., & Higgins, M

    Bell, K. J., & Higgins, M. E. 2022, TESS PRF: Display the TESS pixel response function, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2207.008 Ben ´ ıtez-Llambay, P., Masset, F., & Beaug´ e, C. 2011, A&A, 528, A2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015774

    2022 doi

  8. [17]

    Bensby, T., Feltzing, S., & Oey, M. S. 2014, A&A, 562, A71, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322631

    2014 doi

  9. [18]

    Boisse, I., Bonfils, X., & Santos, N. C. 2012, A&A, 545, A109, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219115

    2012 doi

  10. [19]

    C., Contreras, A

    Boley, A. C., Contreras, A. P. G., & Gladman, B. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 817, L17, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/817/2/L17

    2016 doi

  11. [20]

    J., Koch, D., Basri, G., et al

    Borucki, W. J., Koch, D., Basri, G., et al. 2010, Science, 327, 977, doi: 10.1126/science.1185402

    2010 doi

  12. [21]

    2018a, Nature, 553, 477, doi: 10.1038/nature24677

    Bourrier, V., Lovis, C., Beust, H., et al. 2018a, Nature, 553, 477, doi: 10.1038/nature24677

    doi

  13. [22]

    2018b, A&A, 620, A147, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833675

    Bourrier, V., Lecavelier des Etangs, A., Ehrenreich, D., et al. 2018b, A&A, 620, A147, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833675

    doi

  14. [23]

    2023, A&A, 669, A63, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245004

    Bourrier, V., Attia, O., Mallonn, M., et al. 2023, A&A, 669, A63, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245004

    2023 doi

  15. [24]

    A., Bakos, G

    Buchhave, L. A., Bakos, G. ´A., Hartman, J. D., et al. 2010, ApJ, 720, 1118, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/720/2/1118

    2010 doi

  16. [25]

    A., Latham, D., Johansen, A., et al

    Buchhave, L. A., Latham, D., Johansen, A., et al. 2012, Nature, 486, 375

    2012

  17. [26]

    A., Bizzarro, M., Latham, D

    Buchhave, L. A., Bizzarro, M., Latham, D. W., et al. 2014, Nature, 509, 593, doi: 10.1038/nature13254 16

    2014 doi

  18. [27]

    P., & Anderson, D

    Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. 2002, Model Selection and Multimodel Inference, 2nd edn. (New York: Springer-Verlag), doi: 10.1007/b97636

    2002 doi

  19. [28]

    P., Wright, J

    Butler, R. P., Wright, J. T., Marcy, G. W., et al. 2006, ApJ, 646, 505, doi: 10.1086/504701

    2006 doi

  20. [29]

    A., Tenenbaum, P., Twicken, J

    Caldwell, D. A., Tenenbaum, P., Twicken, J. D., et al. 2020, Research Notes of the AAS, 4, 201, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/abc9b3

    2020 doi

  21. [30]

    W., Quinn, S

    Carmichael, T. W., Quinn, S. N., Zhou, G., et al. 2021, The Astronomical Journal, 161, 97, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abd4e1 Castro-Gonz´ alez, A., Bourrier, V., Lillo-Box, J., et al. 2024a, A&A, 689, A250, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450957 Castro-Gonz´ alez, A., D ´ ıez Alonso, E....

    2021 doi

  22. [31]

    2018, in Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy VII, ed

    Chakraborty, A., Thapa, N., Kumar, K., et al. 2018, in Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy VII, ed. C. J. Evans, L. Simard, & H. Takami, Vol. 10702, International Society for Optics and Photonics (SPIE), 107026G, doi: 10.1117/12.2313055

    2018 doi

  23. [32]

    K., Prasad, N

    Chakraborty, A., Bharadwaj, K. K., Prasad, N. J. S. S. V., et al. 2024, The PRL 2.5m Telescope and its First Light Instruments: FOC & PARAS-2. https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.07715

    2024 arXiv

  24. [33]

    Chen, H., & Rogers, L. A. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 831, 180, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/831/2/180

    2016 doi

  25. [34]

    2016, ApJ, 823, 102, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102

    Choi, J., Dotter, A., Conroy, C., et al. 2016, ApJ, 823, 102, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102

    2016 doi

  26. [35]

    2017, A&A, 600, A30, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629705

    Claret, A. 2017, A&A, 600, A30, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629705

    2017 doi

  27. [36]

    2011, A&A, 529, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201116451

    Claret, A., & Bloemen, S. 2011, A&A, 529, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201116451

    2011 doi

  28. [37]

    Correia, A. C. M., Bourrier, V., & Delisle, J.-B. 2020, A&A, 635, A37, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936967

    2020 doi

  29. [38]

    Correia, A. C. M., Laskar, J., Farago, F., & Bou´ e, G. 2011, Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy, 111, 105, doi: 10.1007/s10569-011-9368-9

    2011 doi

  30. [39]

    W., & Butler, R

    Cumming, A., Marcy, G. W., & Butler, R. P. 1999, ApJ, 526, 890, doi: 10.1086/308020

    1999 doi

  31. [40]

    M., Skrutskie, M

    Cutri, R. M., Skrutskie, M. F., van Dyk, S., et al. 2003, VizieR Online Data Catalog, II/246

    2003

  32. [41]

    M., Wright, E

    Cutri, R. M., Wright, E. L., Conrow, T., et al. 2021, VizieR Online Data Catalog, II/328

    2021

  33. [42]

    2019, MNRAS, 489, 2555, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2216

    Damasso, M., Pinamonti, M., Scandariato, G., & Sozzetti, A. 2019, MNRAS, 489, 2555, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2216

    2019 doi

  34. [43]

    2023, A&A, 679, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347240

    Damasso, M., Rodrigues, J., Castro-Gonz´ alez, A., et al. 2023, A&A, 679, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347240

    2023 doi

  35. [44]

    I., & Johnson, J

    Dawson, R. I., & Johnson, J. A. 2018, 56, 175, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051853 de Leon, J. P., Livingston, J., Endl, M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 508, 195, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2305

    2018 doi

  36. [45]

    2016, ApJS, 222, 8, doi: 10.3847/0067-0049/222/1/8

    Dotter, A. 2016, ApJS, 222, 8, doi: 10.3847/0067-0049/222/1/8

    2016 doi

  37. [46]

    Dumusque, X., Boisse, I., & Santos, N. C. 2014, ApJ, 796, 132, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/796/2/132

    2014 doi

  38. [47]

    D., Rodriguez, J

    Eastman, J. D., Rodriguez, J. E., Agol, E., et al. 2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1907.09480. https://arxiv.org/abs/1907.09480

    2019 arXiv

  39. [48]

    J., et al

    Ehrenreich, D., Bourrier, V., Wheatley, P. J., et al. 2015, Nature, 522, 459, doi: 10.1038/nature14501 Fern´ andez, J. F., Wheatley, P. J., & King, G. W. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 522, 4251, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1257

    2015 doi

  40. [49]

    A., Anglada-Escude, G., Arriagada, P., et al

    Fischer, D. A., Anglada-Escude, G., Arriagada, P., et al. 2016, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 128, 066001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/128/964/066001

    2016 doi

  41. [50]

    Ford, E. B. 2006, ApJ, 642, 505, doi: 10.1086/500802

    2006 doi

  42. [51]

    B., & Rasio, F

    Ford, E. B., & Rasio, F. A. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 686, 621, doi: 10.1086/590926

    2008 doi

  43. [52]

    J., Dawson, R

    Fortney, J. J., Dawson, R. I., & Komacek, T. D. 2021, Journal of Geophysical Research (Planets), 126, e06629, doi: 10.1029/2020JE006629

    2021 doi

  44. [53]

    2009, A&A, 493, 645, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200810557 Gagn´ e, J., Mamajek, E

    Forveille, T., Bonfils, X., Delfosse, X., et al. 2009, A&A, 493, 645, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200810557 Gagn´ e, J., Mamajek, E. E., Malo, L., et al. 2018, ApJ, 856, 23, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaae09 Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A. G. A., Vallenari, A., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A1,...

    2009 doi

  45. [54]

    S., Seager, S., & Mallen-Ornelas, G

    Gaudi, B. S., Seager, S., & Mallen-Ornelas, G. 2005, ApJ, 623, 472, doi: 10.1086/428478

    2005 doi

  46. [55]

    2017, AJ, 154, 192, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa8c04

    Giacalone, S., Matsakos, T., & K¨ onigl, A. 2017, AJ, 154, 192, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa8c04

    2017 doi

  47. [56]

    1979, ApJ, 233, 857, doi: 10.1086/157448 Gonz´ alez Hern´ andez, J

    Goldreich, P., & Tremaine, S. 1979, ApJ, 233, 857, doi: 10.1086/157448 Gonz´ alez Hern´ andez, J. I., Su´ arez Mascare˜ no, A., Silva, A. M., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A79, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451311 17

    1979 doi

  48. [57]

    D., & L´ epine, S

    Hartman, Z. D., & L´ epine, S. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 247, 66, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab79a6

    2020 doi

  49. [58]

    2014, Giant Planet Formation, Evolution, and Internal Structure (eprint: arXiv:1311.1142), 643–665, doi: 10.2458/azu uapress 9780816531240-ch028

    Helled, R., Bodenheimer, P., Podolak, M., et al. 2014, Giant Planet Formation, Evolution, and Internal Structure (eprint: arXiv:1311.1142), 643–665, doi: 10.2458/azu uapress 9780816531240-ch028

    2014 arXiv

  50. [59]

    X., Vanderburg, A., P´ al, A., et al

    Huang, C. X., Vanderburg, A., P´ al, A., et al. 2020a, Research Notes of the AAS, 4, 204, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/abca2e —. 2020b, Research Notes of the AAS, 4, 206, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/abca2d Hu´ elamo, N., Figueira, P., Bonfils, X., et al. 2008, A&A, 489, L9, doi: 10.1051/...

    doi

  51. [60]

    V., Sch¨ ofer, P., Lamert, A., et al

    Jeffers, S. V., Sch¨ ofer, P., Lamert, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 614, A76, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629599

    2018 doi

  52. [61]

    2016, in Software and Cyber infrastructure for Astronomy IV, doi: 10.1117/12.2233418

    Jenkins, J., Twicken, J., McCauliff, S., et al. 2016, in Software and Cyber infrastructure for Astronomy IV, doi: 10.1117/12.2233418

    2016 doi

  53. [62]

    M.-R., Bean, J

    Kempton, E. M.-R., Bean, J. L., Louie, D. R., et al. 2018, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 130, 114401, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aadf6f

    2018 doi

  54. [63]

    2007, Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy, 98, 67, doi: 10.1007/s10569-007-9069-6

    Kinoshita, H., & Nakai, H. 2007, Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy, 98, 67, doi: 10.1007/s10569-007-9069-6

    2007 doi

  55. [64]

    1962, The Astronomical Journal, 67, 591, doi: 10.1086/108790

    Kozai, Y. 1962, The Astronomical Journal, 67, 591, doi: 10.1086/108790

    1962 doi

  56. [65]

    Kurucz, R. L. 1992, in The Stellar Populations of Galaxies, ed. B. Barbuy & A. Renzini, Vol. 149, 225

    1992

  57. [66]

    J., & Chiang, E

    Lee, E. J., & Chiang, E. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 811, 41, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/811/1/41 —. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 817, 90, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/817/2/90

    2015 doi

  58. [67]

    Leggett, S. K. 1992, ApJS, 82, 351, doi: 10.1086/191720

    1992 doi

  59. [68]

    Lidov, M. L. 1962, Planetary and Space Science, 9, 719, doi: 10.1016/0032-0633(62)90129-0

    1962 doi

  60. [69]

    P., Su´ arez Mascare˜ no, A., et al

    Lillo-Box, J., Faria, J. P., Su´ arez Mascare˜ no, A., et al. 2021, A&A, 654, A60, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141714

    2021 doi

  61. [70]

    Lin, D. N. C., Bodenheimer, P., & Richardson, D. C. 1996, Nature, 380, 606, doi: 10.1038/380606a0

    1996 doi

  62. [71]

    A., Hern´ andez, J., et al

    Lindegren, Klioner, S. A., Hern´ andez, J., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039709

    2021 doi

  63. [72]

    J., & Lai, D

    Liu, B., Mu˜ noz, D. J., & Lai, D. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 447, 747, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2396

    2015 doi

  64. [73]

    H., Crossfield, I

    Livingston, J. H., Crossfield, I. J. M., Petigura, E. A., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 277, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aae778

    2018 doi

  65. [74]

    D., & Fortney, J

    Lopez, E. D., & Fortney, J. J. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 792, 1, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/792/1/1

    2014 doi

  66. [75]

    S., Kjeldsen, H., Albrecht, S., et al

    Lundkvist, M. S., Kjeldsen, H., Albrecht, S., et al. 2016, Nature Communications, 7, 11201, doi: 10.1038/ncomms11201

    2016 doi

  67. [76]

    J., & Barman, T

    Madhusudhan, N., Knutson, H., Fortney, J. J., & Barman, T. 2014, Exoplanetary Atmospheres (University of Arizona Press), doi: 10.2458/azu uapress 9780816531240-ch032

    2014 doi

  68. [77]

    2002, ApJL, 580, L171, doi: 10.1086/345520

    Mandel, K., & Agol, E. 2002, ApJL, 580, L171, doi: 10.1086/345520

    2002 doi

  69. [78]

    2016, ApJL, 820, L8, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/820/1/L8

    Matsakos, T., & K¨ onigl, A. 2016, ApJL, 820, L8, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/820/1/L8

    2016 doi

  70. [79]

    2016, A&A, 589, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201528065

    Mazeh, T., Holczer, T., & Faigler, S. 2016, A&A, 589, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201528065

    2016 doi

  71. [80]

    McLaughlin, D. B. 1924, ApJ, 60, 22, doi: 10.1086/142826

    1924 doi

  72. [81]

    2015, International Journal of Astrobiology, 14, 201–232, doi: 10.1017/S1473550414000263

    Alibert, Y. 2015, International Journal of Astrobiology, 14, 201–232, doi: 10.1017/S1473550414000263

    2015 doi

  73. [82]

    2011, A&A, 526, A111, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913521

    Mordasini, C., Mayor, M., Udry, S., et al. 2011, A&A, 526, A111, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913521

    2011 doi

  74. [83]

    2016, 54, 441, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023315

    Naoz, S. 2016, 54, 441, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023315

    2016 doi

  75. [84]

    2011, 473, 187, doi: 10.1038/nature10076

    Teyssandier, J. 2011, 473, 187, doi: 10.1038/nature10076

    2011 doi

  76. [85]

    F., Bouchy, F., & Helled, R

    Otegi, J. F., Bouchy, F., & Helled, R. 2020, A&A, 634, A43, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936482

    2020 doi

  77. [86]

    E., & Lai, D

    Owen, J. E., & Lai, D. 2018, MNRAS, 479, 5012, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1760

    2018 doi

  78. [87]

    G., Collins, K

    Paegert, M., Stassun, K. G., Collins, K. A., et al. 2021, TESS Input Catalog versions 8.1 and 8.2: Phantoms in the 8.0 Catalog and How to Handle Them. https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.04778

    2021 arXiv

  79. [88]

    A., Howard, A

    Petigura, E. A., Howard, A. W., Lopez, E. D., et al. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 818, 36, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/818/1/36

    2016 doi

  80. [89]

    A., Sinukoff, E., Lopez, E

    Petigura, E. A., Sinukoff, E., Lopez, E. D., et al. 2017, The Astronomical Journal, 153, 142, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa5ea5

    2017 doi

  81. [90]

    2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 805, 75, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/805/1/75

    Petrovich, C. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 805, 75, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/805/1/75

    2015 doi

  82. [91]

    B., Hubickyj, O., Bodenheimer, P., et al

    Pollack, J. B., Hubickyj, O., Bodenheimer, P., et al. 1996, Icarus, 124, 62, doi: https://doi.org/10.1006/icar.1996.0190

    1996

  83. [92]

    W., Sivan, J

    Queloz, D., Henry, G. W., Sivan, J. P., et al. 2001, A&A, 379, 279, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20011308

    2001 doi

  84. [93]

    Rossiter, R. A. 1924, ApJ, 60, 15, doi: 10.1086/142825

    1924 doi

  85. [94]

    C., Mortier, A., Faria, J

    Santos, N. C., Mortier, A., Faria, J. P., et al. 2014, A&A, 566, A35, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423808

    2014 doi

  86. [95]

    F., & Finkbeiner, D

    Schlafly, E. F., & Finkbeiner, D. P. 2011, ApJ, 737, 103, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/737/2/103 18 Sch¨ onrich, R., Binney, J., & Dehnen, W. 2010, MNRAS, 403, 1829, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16253.x

    2011

  87. [96]

    C., Stumpe, M

    Smith, J. C., Stumpe, M. C., Van Cleve, J. E., et al. 2012, PASP, 124, 1000, doi: 10.1086/667697

    2012 doi

  88. [97]

    2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 417, 2166, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19399.x

    Southworth, J. 2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 417, 2166, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19399.x

    2011

  89. [98]

    G., & Torres, G

    Stassun, K. G., & Torres, G. 2016, ApJL, 831, L6, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/831/1/L6

    2016 doi

  90. [99]

    G., Oelkers, R

    Stassun, K. G., Oelkers, R. J., Pepper, J., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 102, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aad050

    2018 doi

  91. [100]

    I., Anderson, K

    Storch, N. I., Anderson, K. R., & Lai, D. 2014, Science, 345, 1317, doi: 10.1126/science.1254358

    2014 doi

  92. [101]

    I., & Lai, D

    Storch, N. I., & Lai, D. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 448, 1821, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv119

    2015 doi

  93. [102]

    M., et al

    Sulis, S., Lendl, M., Cegla, H. M., et al. 2023, A&A, 670, A24, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244223 Szab´ o, G. M., & Kiss, L. L. 2011, ApJL, 727, L44, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/727/2/L44

    2023 doi

  94. [103]

    Teyssandier, J., Naoz, S., Lizarraga, I., & Rasio, F. A. 2013, 779, 166, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/779/2/166

    2013 doi

  95. [104]

    E., Coughlin, J

    Thompson, S. E., Coughlin, J. L., Hoffman, K., et al. 2018, ApJS, 235, 38, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aab4f9

    2018 doi

  96. [105]

    2018, PASP, 130, 035002, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aaa7d9

    Tokovinin, A. 2018, PASP, 130, 035002, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aaa7d9

    2018 doi

  97. [106]

    N., & Holman, M

    Torres, G., Winn, J. N., & Holman, M. J. 2008, ApJ, 677, 1324, doi: 10.1086/529429

    2008 doi

  98. [107]

    Triaud, A. H. M. J. 2018, in Handbook of Exoplanets, ed. H. J. Deeg & J. A. Belmonte, 2, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-55333-7 2

    2018 doi

  99. [108]

    Udry, S., Mayor, M., & Santos, N. C. 2003, A&A, 407, 369, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030843

    2003 doi

  100. [109]

    A., Greklek-McKeon, M., et al

    Vissapragada, S., Knutson, H. A., Greklek-McKeon, M., et al. 2022, AJ, 164, 234, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac92f2 von Zeipel, H. 1910, doi: 10.1002/asna.19091832202

    2022 doi

  101. [110]

    2011, 735, 109, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/735/2/109

    Wu, Y., & Lithwick, Y. 2011, 735, 109, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/735/2/109

    2011 doi

  102. [111]

    2003, The Astrophysical Journal, 589, 605, doi: 10.1086/374598

    Wu, Y., & Murray, N. 2003, The Astrophysical Journal, 589, 605, doi: 10.1086/374598

    2003 doi

  103. [112]

    W., & Ramsahai, J

    Wu, Y., Murray, N. W., & Ramsahai, J. M. 2007, 670, 820, doi: 10.1086/521996

    2007 doi

  104. [113]

    2009, A&A, 496, 577, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200811296

    Zechmeister, M., & K¨ urster, M. 2009, A&A, 496, 577, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200811296

    2009 doi

  105. [114]

    B., Hyung, E., et al

    Zeng, L., Jacobsen, S. B., Hyung, E., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 923, 247, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3137

    2021 doi

  106. [115]

    2020, AJ, 159, 19, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab55e9 ˇSubjak, J., Endl, M., Chaturvedi, P., et al

    Ziegler, C., Tokovinin, A., Brice˜ no, C., et al. 2020, AJ, 159, 19, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab55e9 ˇSubjak, J., Endl, M., Chaturvedi, P., et al. 2022, A&A, 662, A107, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142883 19 APPENDIX A. ADDITIONAL TABLE 20 T able 4.Radial velocity measurements of T...

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.