Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 93 references

Searching for GEMS: Discovery and Characterization of Two Brown Dwarfs Around M Dwarfs

T0 review · 4 major / 4 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 Two transiting brown dwarfs around M dwarfs, plus first statistical sign of a short-period brown-dwarf desert.

desk verdict Two solid brown dwarf discoveries with a statistical dearth claim that is post-hoc and not yet robust. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.16554 v1 pith:O3CIT3RO submitted 2025-01-27 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.SR

Alexander Larsen , Tera N. Swaby , Henry A. Kobulnicky , Caleb I. Canas , Shubham Kanodia , Jessica Libby-Roberts , Andrew Monson , Arvind Gupta
show 12 more authors
William Cochran Suvrath Mahadevan Chad Bender Scott A. Diddams Samuel Halverson Andrea S.J. Lin Maxwell Moe Joe Ninan Paul Robertson Arpita Roy Christian Schwab Gudmunder Stefansson
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EPastro-ph.SR
keywords BrowndwarfsTransitphotometryRadialvelocityMSubstellarcompanionsdwarfdesertExoplanetcensus
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

This paper reports the discovery and characterization of two transiting brown dwarfs orbiting M dwarf stars, the small, low-mass stars that are the most common in the Galaxy. The authors combine space- and ground-based transit photometry with near-infrared radial velocities to measure masses of 68 and 40 Jupiter masses for the two companions, along with their radii, orbital periods, and eccentricities. They then assemble a literature sample of M-dwarf brown-dwarf systems and find, for the first time, that companions on short orbital periods (under 13 days) are systematically more massive than those at slightly wider separations, with a dearth of 13-to-40-Jupiter-mass companions. If the statistical result holds, it extends the previously known 'brown dwarf desert' of solar-type stars down to the most common stars in the Galaxy and constrains how substellar companions form and migrate.

What carries the argument

The argument rests on two pieces of machinery. First, a joint Bayesian fit (EXOFASTv2) of four transit light curves plus near-infrared radial velocities for each target, with stellar parameter priors from spectroscopy and spectral energy distributions, yields the companion masses, radii, eccentricities, and orbital geometries. Second, the population claim is carried by a Monte Carlo treatment of the comparison sample: for the two short-period and six long-period systems that have only minimum masses $M \sin i$, random orbital inclinations are drawn to synthesize 1,000 cumulative mass distributions, and Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Anderson-Darling tests quantify the difference between the short-period ($P < 13$ days) and longer-period ($13 < P < 2000$ days) subsets. The dividing mass ratio $q < 0.1$, equivalent to $M_{\rm BD} < 40$ Jupiter masses around these hosts, is the quantity the paper finds to be deficient at short periods.

What would settle it

A larger, bias-corrected census of M-dwarf brown-dwarf companions would settle it: if a sample with comparable completeness at periods under 13 days and between 13 and 2000 days finds a low-mass (13-to-40 Jupiter-mass) fraction among close companions that matches the wider sample (roughly 50 percent rather than 15 percent), the claimed dearth would disappear.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that TOI-5389Ab and TOI-5610b are two bona fide transiting brown dwarfs around early M dwarf hosts: TOI-5389Ab has mass $68.0^{+2.2}_{-2.2}$ Jupiter masses, period $10.40046 \pm 0.00002$ days, radius $0.824^{+0.033}_{-0.031}$ Jupiter radii, low eccentricity $0.096$, and a companion-to-host mass ratio $q = 0.150$ that places it near the hydrogen-burning limit; TOI-5610b has mass $40.4^{+1.0}_{-1.0}$ Jupiter masses, period $7.95346 \pm 0.00002$ days, radius $0.887^{+0.031}_{-0.031}$ Jupiter radii, and moderate eccentricity $0.354$. The paper further claims a first statistical result: comparing 25 M-dwarf/brown-dwarf systems with periods under 2000 days split at $P = 13$ days, only 2 of 13 short-period systems have companion masses in the 13-to-40 Jupiter-mass range, versus 6 of 12 longer-period systems, with two-sample tests giving $p = 0.03$ and $p = 0.02$. This is presented as tentative first evidence that M-dwarf primaries show the same brown-dwarf desert seen around solar-type stars, with close, low-mass-ratio ($q < 0.1$) brown-dwarf companions being rare.

Load-bearing premise

The statistical claim assumes the 25 known M-dwarf brown-dwarf systems are a fair, unbiased sample of what actually exists at these orbital periods and masses, even though they were found by different search methods.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The two new systems add well-characterized transiting brown dwarfs to the small census around M dwarfs, including one of the most extreme companion-to-host mass ratios known ($q = 0.150$).
  • If the statistical dearth is real, close-in M-dwarf brown-dwarf companions are predominantly massive, so the brown-dwarf desert observed around solar-type stars also operates around M dwarfs at short periods.
  • The observed mass and period distributions are consistent with formation by disk or core fragmentation followed by inward migration through a gaseous disk, during which companions accrete mass.
  • Both brown dwarfs should show shallow secondary eclipses in the near-infrared (roughly 500 and 200 parts per million in K band), giving an observational test of their temperatures and eccentric orbits.
  • The derived ages from brown-dwarf evolutionary models, about 8 Gyr for TOI-5389Ab and 1.5 Gyr for TOI-5610b, place these systems among the older known transiting brown dwarfs.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension is that uniform radial-velocity surveys of M dwarfs should find a deficit of 13-to-40-Jupiter-mass companions inside 13-day orbits while longer-period surveys do not; if the deficit persists in a larger sample, the transition mass below which close companions are rare may also shift with host mass.
  • The paper's reasoning that transit depth is nearly mass-independent for brown dwarfs implies that the observed preference for high masses is not a photometric selection effect; a direct test would be to compare detection rates of low- versus high-mass transiting brown dwarfs in a homogeneous sample from the same survey.
  • The predicted K-band secondary eclipses offer a concrete follow-up: a single well-sampled eclipse of TOI-5389Ab would independently confirm the brown-dwarf temperature and the fitted eccentricity, and would also probe the evolutionary models used for the age estimates.
  • TOI-5389A's wide white-dwarf companion could serve as an independent age anchor for the system, letting future work test whether the brown dwarf's evolutionary age agrees with the white-dwarf cooling age.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports the discovery and characterization of two transiting brown dwarfs around M dwarfs using TESS and ground-based photometry plus HPF near-infrared radial velocities: TOI-5389Ab (P = 10.40 days, M = 68.0 MJ, R ≈ 0.78–0.82 RJ) and TOI-5610b (P = 7.95 days, M = 40.4 MJ, R = 0.887 RJ). The large RV semi-amplitudes (K ≈ 6–11 km/s) make the companion masses secure. The paper also presents a statistical analysis of 25 M-dwarf/BD systems, claiming a dearth of 13–40 MJ companions at short orbital periods (P < 13 days) compared with slightly wider systems, interpreting this as a low-mass-star analogue of the brown-dwarf desert. The discovery and characterization are accompanied by stellar parameter estimates, gyrochronology and WD-based age constraints, Sonora model comparisons, and secondary-eclipse depth predictions.

Significance. If the population result holds, it would be the first evidence of a period-dependent mass distribution among M-dwarf brown-dwarf companions, with implications for formation and migration mechanisms. The two individual systems, especially TOI-5389Ab with its extreme mass ratio q = 0.150, are valuable additions to the small census of transiting brown dwarfs around M dwarfs, and the RV amplitudes are large enough that the companion masses are not in doubt. However, the statistical claim is currently supported only by a small and heterogeneous literature sample with a post-hoc period split, and the paper contains internal inconsistencies that need correction. The discovery content is solid, but the headline population claim is not yet demonstrated at the strength stated in the abstract.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 4.1, Figure 9] The period cutoff at P < 13 days is chosen post-hoc to split the 25-system sample into 13 short-period and 12 long-period systems, and both newly discovered BDs fall in the short-period bin. No sensitivity analysis is shown for the cutoff value or for the exclusion of TOI-5389Ab and TOI-5610b. The reported p-values (KS p = 0.03, AD p = 0.02) are not corrected for the multiple choices made in defining the two populations. Please provide a robustness test that varies the period cutoff (e.g., 8, 10, 15, 20 days) and repeats the test after removing the two new objects; if the dearth does not persist, the claim should be downgraded to a tentative trend rather than stated as a first-time discovery.
  2. [Section 4.1] The comparison sample mixes transiting, RV-only, and astrometric detections with very different selection functions. The Monte Carlo cos(i) correction for m sin i systems does not account for the period- and mass-dependent sensitivity of RV surveys, nor for the geometric and depth selection of transit surveys. The paper's own statement that the sample 'cannot be considered unbiased or complete' is in tension with the abstract's 'reveals for the first time'. Please either add a quantitative discussion of these selection effects or soften the abstract and conclusion wording to match the level of evidence actually presented.
  3. [Table 7 vs. abstract and Section 3.5] The radius of TOI-5389Ab is reported as 0.824+0.033-0.031 RJ in the abstract and in Section 3.5, but Table 7 gives 0.776+0.035-0.033 RJ. These values differ by about 0.05 RJ, which is larger than the quoted uncertainties. Reconcile the table with the text and abstract, and verify which value was used in the Sonora age estimate (Figure 10) and in the secondary-eclipse depth predictions (Section 4.3).
  4. [Table 7 vs. Tables 3 and 4] The reported systemic velocities are gamma = -11300 +/- 100 m/s for TOI-5389A and gamma = -43387 +/- 65 m/s for TOI-5610, while the measured barycentric RVs in Tables 3 and 4 are all positive (roughly +2 to +22 km/s and +37 to +50 km/s). A systemic velocity should lie near the mean of the measured RVs, so the sign appears to be reversed in the fit or in the table. Please check the sign convention in the EXOFASTv2 fit and correct Table 7 and Figures 5-6 accordingly. Even if K and the derived masses are unaffected, the quoted gamma values are physically implausible as stated.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 4.1] The word 'fragmentated' in the sentence 'Close companions originally fragmentated on large protostellar disk or molecular core scales' should be 'fragmented'.
  2. [Figures 5 and 6] The y-axis labels and captions do not explicitly state the units of the radial velocity (m/s or km/s); please add the units for clarity.
  3. [Section 3.5] The list of fitted parameters in the text omits the occultation depth in Johnson K band that appears in Table 7; consider including it for completeness.
  4. [Section 2.4] The abbreviation 'RV' is used without being defined at first use; please define 'radial velocity (RV)' explicitly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circularity in the derivations: the two BD parameters come from independent joint photometry+RV fits, and the population dearth claim is a tentative literature comparison with acknowledged systematics; only minor non-load-bearing self-citations are present.

full rationale

The central characterization claims are self-contained against the data: TOI-5389Ab and TOI-5610b masses, radii, and orbital parameters are obtained by jointly modeling the TESS and RBO transit light curves and HPF radial velocities with EXOFASTv2 (Section 3.5), using stellar priors from SED fits (Section 3.1). The Sonora-Bobcat temperatures are assigned after the fit from the fitted mass and radius (Section 4.2) and are then used only to predict secondary-eclipse depths (Section 4.3), so no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The claimed period-dependent dearth (Section 4.1) is a comparison of 25 literature systems, not a fit to the two new objects; the authors explicitly note that "this sample size is still small and combines different detection techniques, and so could have unknown systematics." The post-hoc P<13-day split and inclusion of the two new high-mass BDs in the short-period bin raise statistical robustness concerns, but those concerns are not circularity: the statistical conclusion is not equivalent to an input by construction. Self-citations to the GEMS survey (Kanodia et al. 2024) and to HPF analysis pipelines are contextual or software references and are not load-bearing premises used to force any result.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The main load-bearing inputs are existing stellar and BD evolutionary models and a heterogeneous literature sample; the paper's central discovery rests on standard transit plus RV modeling, while the population claim rests on model completeness assumptions that the authors explicitly flag as tentative.

free parameters (3)
  • Period cutoff for short-period subset = P < 13 days
    Chosen by hand to split the 25-system M-dwarf/BD sample into 13 short-period and 12 long-period systems; the cutoff is not derived from theory and includes the two new objects.
  • Companion mass window for dearth claim = 13-40 MJ (q < 0.1)
    Chosen to define 'low-mass' brown dwarfs; the 40 MJ upper boundary matches q<0.1 only for a 0.4 Msun host, not for all hosts in the sample.
  • Sonora model ages for secondary eclipse temperature = 8 Gyr (TOI-5389Ab), 1.5 Gyr (TOI-5610b)
    Selected as nearest model isochrones to the fitted masses and radii; used to estimate BD temperatures and predict secondary eclipse depths.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Stellar evolutionary models (MIST/NextGen) accurately convert photometry, parallax, and spectroscopic Teff/logg/[Fe/H] into stellar mass and radius.
    Section 3.1: stellar M and R from EXOFASTv2 SED fit with MIST and NextGen models; if these models are biased for early M dwarfs, companion masses and q values shift.
  • domain assumption Sonora Bobcat brown dwarf models provide reliable radius-mass-age relations.
    Section 4.2: ages and temperatures for the BDs are read off Sonora Bobcat isochrones; used for secondary eclipse predictions and age estimates.
  • domain assumption The literature comparison sample of M-dwarf/BD systems is sufficiently complete and unbiased for the CDF comparison.
    Section 4.1: the sample mixes transiting and non-transiting detections from multiple surveys; the paper itself warns of 'unknown systematics'.
  • domain assumption Non-transiting systems with only m sin i have random orbital orientations (cos i uniform).
    Section 4.1: Monte Carlo draws of cos i from U[0,1] are used to simulate true mass distributions; this is standard but unverifiable for individual systems.
  • domain assumption The RV variations are caused by the transiting companion in a single-Keplerian orbit.
    Section 3.5: joint EXOFASTv2 fit assumes one companion; NESSI and Gaia RUWE rule out close stellar companions, but a non-transiting second companion could in principle contaminate the RV.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Searching for GEMS: Discovery and Characterization of Two Brown Dwarfs Around M Dwarfs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/O3CIT3RO

@misc{pith2026250116554,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Searching for GEMS: Discovery and Characterization of Two Brown Dwarfs Around M Dwarfs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/O3CIT3RO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.16554}
}
abstract

Brown dwarfs bridge the gap between stars and planets, providing valuable insight into both planetary and stellar formation mechanisms. Yet the census of transiting brown dwarf companions, in particular around M dwarf stars, remains incomplete. We report the discovery of two transiting brown dwarfs around low-mass hosts using a combination of space- and ground-based photometry along with near-infrared radial velocities. We characterize TOI-5389Ab ($68.0^{+2.2}_{-2.2} \ \mj$) and TOI-5610b ($40.4^{+1.0}_{-1.0} \ \mj$), two moderately massive brown dwarfs orbiting early M dwarf hosts ($\teff = 3569 \pm 59 \ K$ and $3618 \pm 59 \ K$, respectively). For TOI-5389Ab, the best fitting parameters are period $P=10.40046 \pm 0.00002$ days, radius $R_{\rm BD}=0.824^{+0.033}_{-0.031}$~\rj, and low eccentricity $e=0.0962^{+0.0027}_{-0.0046}$. In particular, this constitutes one of the most extreme substellar-stellar companion-to-host mass ratios of $q=0.150$. For TOI-5610b, the best fitting parameters are period $P=7.95346 \pm 0.00002$ days, radius $R_{\rm BD}=0.887^{+0.031}_{-0.031}$ \rj, and moderate eccentricity $e=0.354^{+0.011}_{-0.012}$. Both targets are expected to have shallow but potentially observable secondary transits: $\lesssim 500$ ppm in Johnson K band for both. A statistical analysis of M-dwarf/BD systems reveals for the first time that those at short orbital periods ($P < 13$ days) exhibit a dearth of $13 \mj < M_{\rm BD} < 40 \mj$ companions ($q$ $<$ 0.1) compared to those at slightly wider separations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.16554 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Observed transits for TOI-5389Ab. From first to last: TESS Sector 22 (2020 March) and its phase folded counterpart, TESS Sector 48 (2022 February) and its phase folded counterpart, RBO I-band 2023 February 28, and RBO I-band 2024 February 06 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Observed transits for TOI-5610b. From first to last: TESS Sector 21 (2020 February) and its phase folded counterpart, TESS Sector 48 (2022 February) and its phase folded counterpart, RBO I-band 2024 January 02, and RBO I-band 2024 February 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. NESSI contrast curves for TOI-5389A. NESSI rules out nearby sources down to ∆r ′ = 4.05 mag and ∆z ′ = 3.84 mag within 0. ′′2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: NESSI contrast curves for TOI-5610. NESSI rules out nearby sources down to ∆r ′ = 4.16 mag and ∆z ′ = 3.83 mag within 0. ′′2. 2.4. The Habitable-zone Planet Finder Spectra The Habitable-zone Planet Finder (HPF; Mahadevan et al. 2012, 2014) is a high-resolution, near in…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Phased barycentric radial velocity curve and best￾fit model for TOI-5389A. Residuals are plotted below. Sys￾temic velocity γ is subtracted. Errorbars are plotted but are too small to see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Phased barycentric radial velocity curve and best￾fit model for TOI-5610. Residuals are plotted below. Sys￾temic velocity γ is subtracted. Errorbars are plotted but are too small to see. 3.1. Stellar Parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Host mass versus companion mass for known transiting BDs. Black triangles denote transiting systems while gray dots denote non-transiting. The red dot denotes TOI-5389Ab and the blue × denotes TOI-5610b. The dashed lines mark the upper and lower mass limits for BDs at …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison plot of mass ratio versus semi￾major axis. Black triangles denote transiting systems while gray dots denote non-transiting. The red dot denotes TOI￾5389Ab and the blue × denotes TOI-5610b. The histogram on the right shows the distribution in log q, transitin…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Cumulative distribution function for M￾dwarf/BD systems divided into two populations via period [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The Sonora-Bobcat models on a plot of companion radius versus mass. The red lines represent isochrones of 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, 1, 3, and 10 Gyr (from light to dark), all at solar metallicity ([Fe/H] = 0.0). The blue line shows the nearest model to TOI-5610b which is 1.5 Gyr…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

93 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 370, 2765, doi: 10.1098/rsta.2011.0269

    Allard, F., Homeier, D., & Freytag, B. 2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 370, 2765, doi: 10.1098/rsta.2011.0269

    arXiv 2012

  2. [2]

    M., Rosenfeld, K

    Andrews, S. M., Rosenfeld, K. A., Kraus, A. L., & Wilner, D. J. 2013, ApJ, 771, 129, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/771/2/129

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/771/2/129 2013

  3. [3]

    Bate, M. R. 2009, MNRAS, 392, 590, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14106.x

    arXiv 2009

  4. [4]

    R., Bonnell, I

    Bate, M. R., Bonnell, I. A., & Bromm, V. 2002a, MNRAS, 332, L65, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05539.x —. 2002b, MNRAS, 336, 705, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05775.x B´ edard, A., Bergeron, P., Brassard, P., & Fontaine, G. 2020, ApJ, 901, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abafbe

    arXiv 2002

  5. [5]

    C., Kulkarni, S

    Bellm, E. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018002, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe

    doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe 2019

  6. [6]

    2020, MNRAS, 496, 1922, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1522

    Belokurov, V., Penoyre, Z., Oh, S., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 496, 1922, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1522

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1522 2020

  7. [7]

    Y., Krushinsky, V

    Benni, P., Burdanov, A. Y., Krushinsky, V. V., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 505, 4956, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1567

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1567 2021

  8. [8]

    Blouin, S., Dufour, P., & Allard, N. F. 2018, ApJ, 863, 184, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aad4a9

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aad4a9 2018

Show all 93 references
  1. [9]

    2013, A&A, 549, A109, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014704

    Bonfils, X., Delfosse, X., Udry, S., et al. 2013, A&A, 549, A109, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014704

    2013 doi

  2. [10]

    Boss, A. P. 1997, Science, 276, 1836, doi: 10.1126/science.276.5320.1836 —. 2006, ApJ, 643, 501, doi: 10.1086/501522

    1997

  3. [11]

    S., von Braun, K., van Belle, G., et al

    Boyajian, T. S., von Braun, K., van Belle, G., et al. 2012, ApJ, 757, 112, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/757/2/112

    2012 doi

  4. [12]

    M., Bayliss, D., & Van Eylen, V

    Bryant, E. M., Bayliss, D., & Van Eylen, V. 2023, MNRAS, 521, 3663, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad626

    2023 doi

  5. [13]

    B., Lunine, J

    Burrows, A., Hubbard, W. B., Lunine, J. I., & Liebert, J. 2001, Reviews of Modern Physics, 73, 719, doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.73.719 Ca˜ nas, C. I., Mahadevan, S., Bender, C. F., et al. 2022, AJ, 163, 89, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac415f

    2001 doi

  6. [14]

    2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed

    Chabrier, G., Johansen, A., Janson, M., & Rafikov, R. 2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed. H. Beuther, R. S

    2014

  7. [15]

    Klessen, C. P. Dullemond, & T. Henning, 619–642, doi: 10.2458/azu uapress 9780816531240-ch027

    doi

  8. [16]

    C., Magnier, E

    Chambers, K. C., Magnier, E. A., Metcalfe, N., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1612.05560, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1612.05560

    2016 doi arXiv

  9. [17]

    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

  10. [18]

    A., Kielkopf, J

    Collins, K. A., Kielkopf, J. F., Stassun, K. G., & Hessman, F. V. 2017, AJ, 153, 77, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/153/2/77

    2017 doi

  11. [19]

    2015, A&A, 584, A13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526763

    Csizmadia, S., Hatzes, A., Gandolfi, D., et al. 2015, A&A, 584, A13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526763

    2015 doi

  12. [20]

    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

  13. [21]

    D., & Charbonneau, D

    Dressing, C. D., & Charbonneau, D. 2015, ApJ, 807, 45, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/807/1/45

    2015 doi

  14. [22]

    Eastman, J., Siverd, R., & Gaudi, B. S. 2010, PASP, 122, 935, doi: 10.1086/655938

    2010 doi

  15. [23]

    D., Rodriguez, J

    Eastman, J. D., Rodriguez, J. E., Agol, E., et al. 2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1907.09480, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1907.09480

    2019 doi arXiv

  16. [24]

    El-Badry, K., Rix, H.-W., & Heintz, T. M. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 2269, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab323

    2021 doi

  17. [25]

    G., & Guinan, E

    Engle, S. G., & Guinan, E. F. 2018, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 2, 34, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/aab1f8 Fouqu´ e, P., Moutou, C., Malo, L., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 1960, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3246 Gaia Collaboration, Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J. H. J., et ...

    2018 doi

  18. [26]

    X., Wang, S., et al

    Gan, T., Wang, S. X., Wang, S., et al. 2023, AJ, 165, 17, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac9b12

    2023 doi

  19. [27]

    2020, MNRAS, 491, 5216, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3364

    Giacobbe, P., Benedetto, M., Damasso, M., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 5216, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3364

    2020 doi

  20. [28]

    Grether, D., & Lineweaver, C. H. 2006, ApJ, 640, 1051, doi: 10.1086/500161

    2006 doi

  21. [29]

    2017, MNRAS, 467, 4264, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx334

    Grieves, N., Ge, J., Thomas, N., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 467, 4264, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx334

    2017 doi

  22. [30]

    2021, A&A, 652, A127, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141145

    Grieves, N., Bouchy, F., Lendl, M., et al. 2021, A&A, 652, A127, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141145

    2021 doi

  23. [31]

    Han, T., & Brandt, T. D. 2023, AJ, 165, 71, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acaaa7

    2023 doi

  24. [32]

    K., Cushing, M

    Hardegree-Ullman, K. K., Cushing, M. C., Muirhead, P. S., & Christiansen, J. L. 2019, AJ, 158, 75, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab21d2

    2019 doi

  25. [33]

    J., Hey, D., et al

    Hart, K., Shappee, B. J., Hey, D., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2304.03791, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2304.03791

    2023 doi arXiv

  26. [34]

    A., Casewell, S

    Henderson, B. A., Casewell, S. L., Goad, M. R., et al. 2024, NGTS-28Ab: A short period transiting brown dwarf. https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.09943

    2024 arXiv

  27. [35]

    A., Casewell, S

    Henderson, B. A., Casewell, S. L., Goad, M. R., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 318, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae508

    2024 doi

  28. [36]

    J., Jao, W.-C., Subasavage, J

    Henry, T. J., Jao, W.-C., Subasavage, J. P., et al. 2006, AJ, 132, 2360, doi: 10.1086/508233

    2006 doi

  29. [37]

    J., Lee, H., MacQueen, P

    Hill, G. J., Lee, H., MacQueen, P. J., et al. 2021, AJ, 162, 298, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac2c02

    2021 doi

  30. [38]

    B., & Bergeron, P

    Holberg, J. B., & Bergeron, P. 2006, AJ, 132, 1221, doi: 10.1086/505938 16

    2006 doi

  31. [39]

    2009, A&A, 501, 941, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200811191

    Holmberg, J., Nordstr¨ om, B., & Andersen, J. 2009, A&A, 501, 941, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200811191

    2009 doi

  32. [40]

    Ciardi, D. R. 2011, AJ, 142, 19, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/142/1/19

    2011 doi

  33. [41]

    C., Ford, E

    Hsu, D. C., Ford, E. B., & Terrien, R. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 2249, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2391

    2020 doi

  34. [42]

    O., Wende-von Berg, S., Dreizler, S., et al

    Husser, T. O., Wende-von Berg, S., Dreizler, S., et al. 2013, A&A, 553, A6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219058

    2013 doi

  35. [43]

    Hwang, H.-C., & Zakamska, N. L. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 2271, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa400

    2020 doi

  36. [44]

    M., Twicken, J

    Jenkins, J. M., Twicken, J. D., McCauliff, S., et al. 2016, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9913, Software and Cyberinfrastructure for Astronomy IV, ed. G. Chiozzi & J. C. Guzman, 99133E, doi: 10.1117/12.2233418

    2016 doi

  37. [45]

    A., Aller, K

    Johnson, J. A., Aller, K. M., Howard, A. W., & Crepp, J. R. 2010, PASP, 122, 905, doi: 10.1086/655775

    2010 doi

  38. [46]

    2018, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 2, 4, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/aaa4b7

    Kanodia, S., & Wright, J. 2018, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 2, 4, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/aaa4b7

    2018 doi

  39. [47]

    W., et al

    Kanodia, S., Mahadevan, S., Ramsey, L. W., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 10702, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy VII, ed. C. J

    2018

  40. [48]

    Simard, & H

    Evans, L. Simard, & H. Takami, 107026Q, doi: 10.1117/12.2313491

    doi

  41. [49]

    I., Mahadevan, S., et al

    Kanodia, S., Ca˜ nas, C. I., Mahadevan, S., et al. 2024, AJ, 167, 161, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad27cb

    2024 doi

  42. [50]

    H., Ellis, T

    Kasper, D. H., Ellis, T. G., Yeigh, R. R., et al. 2016, PASP, 128, 105005, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/128/968/105005

    2016 doi

  43. [51]

    2021, A&A, 645, A7, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039168

    Kiefer, F., H´ ebrard, G., Lecavelier des Etangs, A., et al. 2021, A&A, 645, A7, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039168

    2021 doi

  44. [52]

    D., Faherty, J

    Kiman, R., Brandt, T. D., Faherty, J. K., & Popinchalk, M. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2406.00229, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2406.00229

    2024 doi

  45. [53]

    F., Blanc, G

    Kollmeier, J., Anderson, S. F., Blanc, G. A., et al. 2019, in Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, Vol. 51, 274

    2019

  46. [54]

    M., & Saumon, D

    Kowalski, P. M., & Saumon, D. 2006, ApJL, 651, L137, doi: 10.1086/509723

    2006 doi

  47. [55]

    2022, ApJS, 259, 33, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac5688 Lecavelier des Etangs, A., & Lissauer, J

    Kunimoto, M., Daylan, T., Guerrero, N., et al. 2022, ApJS, 259, 33, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac5688 Lecavelier des Etangs, A., & Lissauer, J. J. 2022, NewAR, 94, 101641, doi: 10.1016/j.newar.2022.101641

    2022

  48. [56]

    2012, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Mahadevan, S., Ramsey, L., Bender, C., et al. 2012, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 8446, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy IV, ed. I. S

    2012

  49. [57]

    McLean, S. K. Ramsay, & H. Takami, 84461S, doi: 10.1117/12.926102

    doi

  50. [58]

    W., Terrien, R., et al

    Mahadevan, S., Ramsey, L. W., Terrien, R., et al. 2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9147, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy V, ed. S. K

    2014

  51. [59]

    Ramsay, I. S. McLean, & H. Takami, 91471G, doi: 10.1117/12.2056417

    doi

  52. [60]

    2017, A&A, 602, A38, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201630120

    Maldonado, J., & Villaver, E. 2017, A&A, 602, A38, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201630120

    2017 doi

  53. [61]

    S., Saumon, D., Visscher, C., et al

    Marley, M. S., Saumon, D., Visscher, C., et al. 2021, ApJ, 920, 85, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac141d

    2021 doi

  54. [62]

    J., Laher, R

    Masci, F. J., Laher, R. R., Rusholme, B., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018003, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aae8ac

    2019 doi

  55. [63]

    1980, Progress of Theoretical Physics, 64, 544, doi: 10.1143/PTP.64.544

    Mizuno, H. 1980, Progress of Theoretical Physics, 64, 544, doi: 10.1143/PTP.64.544

    1980 doi

  56. [64]

    Moe, M., & Kratter, K. M. 2018, ApJ, 854, 44, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa6d2

    2018 doi

  57. [65]

    D., Pascucci, I., & Apai, D

    Mulders, G. D., Pascucci, I., & Apai, D. 2015, ApJ, 814, 130, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/814/2/130

    2015 doi

  58. [66]

    J., Moe, M., Kurtz, D

    Murphy, S. J., Moe, M., Kurtz, D. W., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 4322, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3049

    2018 doi

  59. [67]

    L., De Rosa, R

    Nielsen, E. L., De Rosa, R. J., Macintosh, B., et al. 2019, AJ, 158, 13, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab16e9

    2019 doi

  60. [68]

    P., Bender, C

    Ninan, J. P., Bender, C. F., Mahadevan, S., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 10709, High Energy, Optical, and Infrared Detectors for Astronomy VIII, ed. A. D. Holland & J. Beletic, 107092U, doi: 10.1117/12.2312787

    2018 doi

  61. [69]

    2024, AJ, 167, 109, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad1a18

    Page, E., Pepper, J., Wright, D., et al. 2024, AJ, 167, 109, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad1a18

    2024 doi

  62. [70]

    J., et al

    Pascucci, I., Testi, L., Herczeg, G. J., et al. 2016, ApJ, 831, 125, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/831/2/125

    2016 doi

  63. [71]

    M., Bello-Garc ´ ıa, A., Ordieres-Mer´ e, J., et al

    Passegger, V. M., Bello-Garc ´ ıa, A., Ordieres-Mer´ e, J., et al. 2022, A&A, 658, A194, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141920

    2022 doi

  64. [72]

    Koposov, S. E. 2020, MNRAS, 495, 321, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1148

    2020 doi

  65. [73]

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

    Pollack, J. B., Hubickyj, O., Bodenheimer, P., et al. 1996, Icarus, 124, 62, doi: 10.1006/icar.1996.0190 Prˇ sa, A., Conroy, K. E., Horvat, M., et al. 2016, ApJS, 227, 29, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/227/2/29 17

    1996

  66. [74]

    W., Adams, M

    Ramsey, L. W., Adams, M. T., Barnes, T. G., et al. 1998, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 3352, Advanced Technology Optical/IR Telescopes VI, ed. L. M. Stepp, 34–42, doi: 10.1117/12.319287 Reyl´ e, C., Jardine, K., Fouqu´ e, ...

    1998 doi

  67. [75]

    Ricker, G. R. 2015, in AAS/Division for Extreme Solar Systems Abstracts, Vol. 47, AAS/Division for Extreme Solar Systems Abstracts, 503.01

    2015

  68. [76]

    1999, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Rucinski, S. 1999, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 185, IAU Colloq. 170: Precise Stellar Radial Velocities, ed. J. B. Hearnshaw & C. D. Scarfe, 82, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9807327

    1999 doi arXiv

  69. [77]

    2011, A&A, 525, A95, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015427

    Sahlmann, J., S´ egransan, D., Queloz, D., et al. 2011, A&A, 525, A95, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015427

    2011 doi

  70. [78]

    2016, A&A, 587, A64, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527329

    Santerne, A., Moutou, C., Tsantaki, M., et al. 2016, A&A, 587, A64, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527329

    2016 doi

  71. [79]

    C., Adibekyan, V., Figueira, P., et al

    Santos, N. C., Adibekyan, V., Figueira, P., et al. 2017, A&A, 603, A30, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730761

    2017 doi

  72. [80]

    Schlaufman, K. C. 2018, ApJ, 853, 37, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa961c

    2018 doi

  73. [81]

    P., Schlaufman, K

    Schmidt, S. P., Schlaufman, K. C., Ding, K., et al. 2023, AJ, 166, 225, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad0135 Sch¨ onrich, R., Binney, J., & Dehnen, W. 2010, MNRAS, 403, 1829, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16253.x

    2023

  74. [82]

    J., Howell, S

    Scott, N. J., Howell, S. B., Horch, E. P., & Everett, M. E. 2018, PASP, 130, 054502, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aab484

    2018 doi

  75. [83]

    J., Prieto, J

    Shappee, B. J., Prieto, J. L., Grupe, D., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, 48, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/48

    2014 doi

  76. [84]

    2014, ApJ, 793, 51, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/793/1/51

    Sharma, S., Bland-Hawthorn, J., Binney, J., et al. 2014, ApJ, 793, 51, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/793/1/51

    2014 doi

  77. [85]

    F., Cutri, R

    Skrutskie, M. F., Cutri, R. M., Stiening, R., et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 1163, doi: 10.1086/498708

    2006 doi

  78. [86]

    2016, ApJ, 833, 175, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/833/2/175

    Stefansson, G., Hearty, F., Robertson, P., et al. 2016, ApJ, 833, 175, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/833/2/175

    2016 doi

  79. [87]

    2020, The Astronomical Journal, 159, 100, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab5f15

    Stefansson, G., Ca˜ n as, C., Wisniewski, J., et al. 2020, The Astronomical Journal, 159, 100, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab5f15

    2020 doi

  80. [88]

    T., Haswell, C

    Stevenson, A. T., Haswell, C. A., Barnes, J. R., & Barstow, J. K. 2023, MNRAS, 526, 5155, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3041

    2023 doi

  81. [89]

    2020, MNRAS, 491, 5158, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3299

    Tokovinin, A., & Moe, M. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 5158, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3299

    2020 doi

  82. [90]

    E., Bergeron, P., & Gianninas, A

    Tremblay, P. E., Bergeron, P., & Gianninas, A. 2011, ApJ, 730, 128, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/730/2/128

    2011 doi

  83. [91]

    Wagner, K., Apai, D., & Kratter, K. M. 2019, ApJ, 877, 46, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1904

    2019 doi

  84. [92]

    L., Eisenhardt, P

    Wright, E. L., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Mainzer, A. K., et al. 2010, AJ, 140, 1868, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868

    2010 doi

  85. [93]

    T., & Eastman, J

    Wright, J. T., & Eastman, J. D. 2014, PASP, 126, 838, doi: 10.1086/678541

    2014 doi

Pith tools

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