Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 157 references

Radial velocity homogeneous analysis of M dwarfs observed with HARPS I. Exoplanet detection and candidates

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A homogeneous re-analysis of 200 M dwarfs observed with HARPS recovers most known planets and turns up three new low-mass candidates.

desk verdict Useful homogeneous HARPS M-dwarf catalog, but the three new planet candidates are not yet robust to activity harmonics, and the abstract recovery rate contradicts the body. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.06513 v1 pith:2IY5BTLV submitted 2025-02-10 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.IMastro-ph.SR

L. Mignon X. Delfosse , X. Bonfils , N. Meunier , N. Astudillo-Defru , G. Gaisne , T. Forveille , F. Bouchy , G. Lo Curto
show 6 more authors
S. Udry D. Segransan N. Unger C. Lovis N. C. Santos M. Mayor
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EPastro-ph.IMastro-ph.SR
keywords MdwarfsradialvelocitiesexoplanetdetectionHARPSstellaractivityplanetoccurrencebrownperiodogramanalysis
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 sets out to determine, with a single uniform pipeline, what planetary and stellar signals are present in the radial velocities of 200 M dwarfs observed by HARPS from 2003 to 2019. If its analysis is correct, the sample contains at least three previously unknown low-mass planets (around GJ 300, GJ 654, and GJ 739), four new stellar or brown-dwarf companions, and a much better determined orbit for the massive planet GJ 9482 b. The value of such a census is that complete, homogeneously analysed samples are what planet-occurrence statistics and future ELT target selection depend on.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the multi-step detection pipeline. RVs are extracted by template matching, then each time series is tested for a dominant long-term pattern (constant, linear, quadratic, or sinusoidal) using reduced chi-squared and F-tests. After subtracting the chosen long-term model, a generalized Lomb-Scargle periodogram identifies the strongest remaining periodic signal, a bootstrap gives its false-alarm probability, and a Keplerian is fitted with a L-BFGS-B minimiser; the process is iterated on residuals until no significant peak remains. Candidate signals are then classified as rotation or planet by comparing their periods to published rotation periods and to periods found in the Ca II, Na D, and Hα chromospheric indices, and the massive companions are re-fitted with the orvara code to combine RV with Hipparcos-Gaia proper motion anomalies.

What would settle it

Re-observe GJ 300, GJ 654, and GJ 739 with additional HARPS (or NIRPS) data and check whether the candidate signals remain at the same period and phase while the chromospheric indices stay flat; a signal that persists after activity modelling, or is corroborated by transits, would confirm the planets, whereas one that shifts in period or amplitude with the activity would reveal a false positive.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a single, uniform pipeline applied to 200 M dwarfs observed with HARPS between 2003 and 2019 recovers most previously published planetary systems in the sample and uncovers three new low-mass planet candidates: a ~7.3 Earth-mass planet at 8.33 days around GJ 300, a ~5 Earth-mass planet at 15.35 days around GJ 654, and a ~39 Earth-mass planet at about 145 days around GJ 739. The same analysis revises the orbit of the massive planet GJ 9482 b to a period of 3659±4 days and minimum mass 4.58±0.09 Jupiter masses, and, by combining RVs with Hipparcos-Gaia astrometry, constrains the masses and inclinations of four new stellar or brown-dwarf companions around GJ 3307, GJ 4001, GJ 4254, and GJ 9588. Long-term variability is found in 28.5% of the time series; 35 of the remaining periodic signals are attributed to stellar rotation, leaving 22 unexplained signals that await follow-up.

Load-bearing premise

The pipeline removes stellar activity only by subtracting a Keplerian at a published or estimated rotation period or by matching RV periods to chromospheric-index periods; if activity produces a coherent signal at some other period, any of the 22 unexplained signals, including the three planet candidates, could be activity rather than a planet.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the three candidates hold up, they add to the small but growing list of Neptune-to-Earth-mass planets around mid-M dwarfs, directly feeding the occurrence-rate statistics planned in the companion paper.
  • The revised GJ 9482 b parameters turn a poorly constrained planet into a well-determined 4.58-Jupiter-mass companion on a 10-year orbit, a useful anchor for the long-period end of the M-dwarf planet mass function.
  • The four new companions around GJ 3307, GJ 4001, GJ 4254, and GJ 9588 show that the brown-dwarf-to-star boundary can be probed by combining archival RVs with astrometry; two of them should be resolvable by high-contrast imaging.
  • The recovery of known planets by an automatic pipeline with no per-star tuning validates the use of this sample for statistical studies, since the detection completeness can now be quantified.
  • The 22 unexplained signals constitute a prioritized list for future RV monitoring, with the planet candidates at the top.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The abstract's '97% of planetary systems' figure is not reproduced by the body's detailed accounting, which reports 31 of 40 systems recovered before exclusions and 88% after excluding five systems observed predominantly with other instruments; readers comparing the two should check which units (planets vs systems) and which exclusion criteria are being counted.
  • The three planet candidates are selected mainly by period mismatch with estimated rotation periods; a decisive confirmation should also model activity with a Gaussian process or measure rotation directly, which the paper leaves for future work.
  • Because the sample is built from pre-Gaia catalogues and is magnitude-limited, the occurrence-rate analysis announced for the companion paper will need careful incompleteness corrections before its rates can be compared with values from other surveys.
  • The four new companions at the brown-dwarf/very-low-mass-star boundary suggest such objects are not rare around M dwarfs; modelling the detection completeness of this sample could yield a mass-ratio distribution for these companions.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a homogeneous automated analysis of HARPS radial-velocity time series for 200 nearby M dwarfs, combining long-term trend characterization, GLS periodogram searches, iterative Keplerian fitting, and activity screening based on rotation periods and chromospheric-index periodicities. It reports long-term variability in 57 stars, four new stellar/substellar companions, a revised orbit for GJ 9482 b, recovery of a large fraction of previously published planetary systems, and three new low-mass planetary candidates around GJ 300, GJ 654, and GJ 739. The manuscript is explicitly a survey paper, with the new planets presented as candidates requiring further monitoring.

Significance. If the candidate detections hold, the paper provides a valuable homogeneous catalog for M-dwarf occurrence-rate studies and identifies promising nearby targets for future characterization. Its strengths are the transparent and reproducible automated pipeline, the public release of the RV time series and long-term analysis tables, the careful treatment of the HARPS fiber-change offset, and an honest limitations section. The recovery-rate claim, however, is internally inconsistent with the body of the paper, and the activity discrimination for the strongest new planetary candidate does not yet withstand scrutiny; these issues need to be fixed before the survey results can be used as a reliable statistical foundation.

major comments (4)
  1. [6.2.1 and Table B.7] The claim that the 8.33 d signal for GJ 300 is not rotation-related ignores the harmonic structure of stellar activity signals. The activity-derived rotation period is 67.3 d, and 67.3/8 = 8.41 d, which is within 1% of the candidate period. Under the paper's own 10% period-matching criterion in Sect. 5.2.2, and given that active M dwarfs commonly produce RV signals at harmonics of the rotation period, the 8.33 d signal is a plausible activity harmonic. This is particularly concerning because the fit uses only 30 points from one season, requires e = 0.64 at an 8 d orbit (in tension with tidal circularization, as the authors themselves note), and an equally good two-planet 2:1 circular solution exists. Before presenting GJ 300 b as the strongest new candidate, the authors should test whether the 8.33 d period appears in the chromospheric activity indicators at the appropriate harmonic, or refit the data with a quasi-periodic activity model.
  2. [5.2.2, 6.2.7, and 6.2.9] The same harmonic concern applies to the other two new candidates. For GJ 654, the 15.35 d signal lies within about 3% of one quarter of the 63.1 d rotation period, and for GJ 739, the 138.7 d signal lies within about 7% of three times the 49.5 d rotation period. The manuscript applies its 10% matching criterion only to exact rotation periods, not to harmonics, but RV activity signals are known to appear at harmonics of the rotation period. The statement that these signals are unlikely to be rotation signatures is therefore not established by the evidence presented; a quantitative activity false-positive analysis or a GP-based comparison is needed before these can be presented as robust candidates.
  3. [7.4 versus Abstract] The abstract's claim of recovering 97% of previously published planetary systems is not supported by the body of the paper. Section 7.4 reports 31 of 40 systems (75%) and 51 of 78 planets (65.4%), rising to 88% after excluding five systems detected with additional instruments and to 94% after additionally excluding planets with periods below 1.6 d. The 97% figure in the abstract appears to use a different, undefined denominator. The authors should either state the denominator explicitly or correct the abstract, since the headline recovery rate materially overstates the homogeneous HARPS-only completeness.
  4. [7.3 and Section 6.2] The paper acknowledges in Sect. 7.3 that subtracting a Keplerian at the rotation period is not an optimal activity correction and may hinder the detection of weak Keplerian signals, but the candidate sections do not quantify how this limitation affects the three new candidates. Because all three candidates rest on period coincidences with rotation periods or their harmonics, the manuscript should provide a concrete estimate of the activity false-positive probability for these signals, for example by injecting and recovering activity-like signals or by comparing with a Gaussian-process model, before the candidates are used as headline results.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] There is a typo: 'perdiodic signals' should be 'periodic signals'.
  2. [6.2.1 and Appendix A.1.1] The number of points used for GJ 300 is inconsistent: Sect. 6.2.1 says 30 measurements, while the caption of Fig. A.2 says 28 nights; please reconcile this.
  3. [6.2.1] Several figure cross-references are unresolved, including 'Fig. ?? and Fig. ??' and 'presented in Fig. ??'; these should point to the actual appendix figures.
  4. [6.2.9 and Appendix A.1.7] The caption of Fig. A.8 says 'GJ 654' but the surrounding section and appendix entry are about GJ 739; this appears to be a typo.
  5. [6.1.2] The orvara-derived inclination and companion mass for GJ 4001 are quoted as 8.6 degrees and 362 M_J without uncertainties; error bars should be provided for these values.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circular derivation; the survey's activity cross-checks use independent observables, and the candidate signals are not constructed from the calibrated inputs.

full rationale

The paper is an empirical RV survey: its central claims are Keplerian fits to periodogram peaks in HARPS time series, compared against the NASA Exoplanet Archive. The three new planetary candidates (GJ300, GJ654, GJ739) are residual signals after iterative Keplerian subtraction; they are not quantities defined in terms of the activity calibrations used elsewhere. Rotation-period estimates come from the Astudillo-Defru et al. (2017a) log R'HK relation and from chromospheric-index periodograms, including Mignon et al. (2023); these are independent observables from the RV signals, and applying them to classify 35 signals as activity does not mathematically force the remaining 22 signals. No equation in the paper equates a predicted quantity to a fitted input, and no uniqueness claim is imported from prior work to forbid alternatives. The paper itself flags limitations (Sect. 7.3: the activity correction is not optimal), which is a correctness/robustness concern rather than circularity. One internal inconsistency exists: the abstract claims recovery of 97% of published planetary systems, while Sect. 7.4 states 31 of 40 systems (75%) were recovered; this is a consistency error, not a circular-reasoning step. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained and does not reduce to its own inputs; the few self-citations are independent evidence and do not raise the circularity score beyond minor.

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

The central detections rest on fitted Keplerian and trend parameters plus empirical M dwarf relations. No new physical constants or forces are postulated; the only newly proposed entities are the three planet candidates, all explicitly unconfirmed.

free parameters (3)
  • Long-term trend coefficients per star = e.g., GJ864 slope -52.04 +/- 1.20 m/s/yr (Table B.2)
    Fitted to each RV series to remove linear or quadratic trends before periodogram search.
  • RV offset at May 2015 HARPS fibre change for 37 stars = e.g., GJ9482 -27.10 +/- 15.70 m/s in the sinusoidal model (Table B.3)
    Fitted step offset accounting for the instrument upgrade; required for stars observed before and after the change.
  • Keplerian parameters for candidate signals = e.g., GJ300 P=8.347 +/- 0.005 d, K=7.1 +/- 0.8 m/s, e=0.64 +/- 0.07; GJ739 P=145.3 +/- 0.8 d, m sin i=39 +/- 4 Earth…
    Fitted to residual periodogram peaks; these parameters define the proposed planet candidates and companion orbits.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Template matching RV extraction is unbiased and accurate when at least 10 spectra are available per star.
    Used in Section 3.1 to select the sample and produce the RV time series.
  • standard math GLS periodogram false alarm probabilities from 1000 bootstrap permutations correctly calibrate peak significance.
    Basis for the 1% detection threshold used in Section 5.1.1.
  • domain assumption The Delfosse et al. (2000) mass-luminosity relation gives accurate M dwarf masses.
    Used to convert host star properties into companion and planet masses.
  • domain assumption The empirical log R'_HK to rotation period relation of Astudillo-Defru et al. (2017a) is valid for classifying RV signals as rotation.
    Used in Section 5.2.2 to attribute 35 of 57 unidentified signals to stellar rotation.
  • domain assumption The HARPS fibre change offset can be modeled as a single additive constant per star.
    Used in Sections 3.2 and 4.4; incorrect offsets bias Keplerian fits, as shown by GJ9482 and GJ317.
invented entities (3)
  • GJ300 b (8.33-day planet candidate, about 7.3 Earth masses)
    purpose: Explain the 8.33-day RV periodicity in GJ300.
    Not confirmed; the high-eccentricity fit is inconsistent with tidal circularization, and the authors note an alternative 2:1 circular double-planet solution fits equally well.
  • GJ654 b (15.35-day planet candidate, about 5 Earth masses)
    purpose: Explain the 15.35-day signal after attributing the 50.5-day signal to rotation.
    Candidate proposed from four well-sampled seasons; requires additional measurements for confirmation.
  • GJ739 b (145.3-day planet candidate, about 39 Earth masses)
    purpose: Explain the 137.8 or 145.3-day RV signal in GJ739.
    Only 19 HARPS measurements exist; the authors explicitly state more data are needed to confirm.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Radial velocity homogeneous analysis of M dwarfs observed with HARPS I. Exoplanet detection and candidates." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2IY5BTLV

@misc{pith2026250206513,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Radial velocity homogeneous analysis of M dwarfs observed with HARPS I. Exoplanet detection and candidates},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2IY5BTLV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.06513}
}
read the original abstract

The census of planets around M dwarfs in the solar neighbourhood meets two challenges: detecting the best targets for the future characterisation of planets with ELTs, and studying the statistics of planet occurrence that are crucial to formation scenarios. The radial velocity (RV) method remains the most appropriate for such a census as it is sensitive to the widest ranges of masses and periods. HARPS, mounted on the 3.6 m telescope at La Silla Observatory (ESO, Chile), has been obtaining velocity measurements since 2003, and can therefore be used to analyse a very large and homogeneous dataset. We performed a homogeneous analysis of the RV time series of 200 M dwarfs observed with HARPS from 2003 to 2019 (gathering more than 15000 spectra), with the aim of understanding detectable signals such as stellar and planetary companions and activity signals. The RVs were computed with a template matching method before carrying out the time series analysis. First, we focused on the systematic analysis of the presence of a dominant long-term pattern in the RV time series (linear or quadratic trend and sine function). Then, we analysed higher-frequency perdiodic signals using periodograms of the residual time series and Keplerian function fitting. We found long-term variability in 57 RV time series (28.5%). This led to the revision of the parameters of the massive planet (GJ9482 b), as well as the detection of four substellar and stellar companions (around GJ3307, GJ4001, GJ4254, andGJ9588), for which we characterised inclinations and masses by combining RV and astrometry. The periodic analysis allowed us to recover 97% of the planetary systems already published in this sample, but also to propose three new planetary candidates orbiting GJ300 (7.3Me), GJ654(5Me), and GJ739 (39Me), which require additional measurements before they can be confirmed.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.06513 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Distance distribution of the sample. In green is the dis [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. G magnitude distribution of the sample. 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 Masses [M ] 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Number MEDIAN MEAN [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Mass distribution of the sample. 0.45 M⊙, whereas the stellar mass function of the solar neigh￾bourhood is known to increase monotonically (on a linear scale) up to the hydrogen burning limit (e.g [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (11 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Evolution of the CCF-FWHM for five different spectral subtypes. The red vertical line gives the date (BJD: Barycentric Julian Day) of the fibre change. The horizontal solid lines show the median of the FWHM of the CCF with the M2 mask before and after the fibre change.…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Distribution of observed nights. We use statistical tests to determine whether a long-term cor￾rection should be applied before searching for short-term peri￾odic signatures. 4.1. Correction of the secular acceleration Perspective or secular acceleration (van de Kamp 1…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Averaged internal error ⟨σi⟩: σi (green) and RV disper￾sion σe (orange) expressed in m/s vs G-band magnitude. 10) than the uncertainties previously used in Zechmeister et al. (2009) and Bonfils et al. (2013b), and derived from Van Leeuwen (2007). Consequently, the valu…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: P(Fvalue0) (orange) and P(χ 2 0 ) (green) as a function of the number of measurements for each star. The probabilities fall to zero after the threshold of 30 measurements (highlighted by the red vertical line). et al. (2009) and Bonfils et al. (2013b): P(χ 2 0 ) < 0.05…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Example of detection of dominant long-term signal: GJ 864 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: GJ 3307 RV phase-folding -1400 -1200 -1000 -800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 4400 4600 4800 5000 5200 5400 5600 5800 6000 6200 ΔRV [m/s] Date (BJD -2,450,000.0) [d] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: GJ 3307 RV time series and best fitting orbit model. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: GJ 4254 HARPS RV measurements and best fitting orbit [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: GJ 9482 HARPS 54 RV measurements and best fitting [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: GJ 9588 HARPS 28 RV measurements done before the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Distribution of time coverage of the RV time series for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_16.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

157 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archiveprefix author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution eprint journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all := #1 ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in " " * FUNCTION format....

  3. [3]

    & Foreman-Mackey , D

    Aigrain , S. & Foreman-Mackey , D. 2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2209.08940

    arXiv 2022

  4. [4]

    M., Astudillo-Defru , N., Bonfils , X., et al

    Almenara , J. M., Astudillo-Defru , N., Bonfils , X., et al. 2015, A & A, 581, L7

    2015

  5. [5]

    J., Bauer , F

    Amado , P. J., Bauer , F. F., Rodr \' guez L \'o pez , C., et al. 2021, A & A, 650, A188

    2021

  6. [6]

    J., Barnes, J., et al

    Anglada-Escud \'e , G., Amado, P. J., Barnes, J., et al. 2016, Nature, 536, 437

    2016

  7. [7]

    2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 443, L89

    Anglada-Escud \'e , G., Arriagada, P., Tuomi, M., et al. 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 443, L89

    2014

  8. [8]

    2013, , 556, A126

    Anglada-Escud \'e , G., Tuomi , M., Gerlach , E., et al. 2013, , 556, A126

    2013

Show all 157 references
  1. [9]

    J., et al

    Artigau , \'E ., Cadieux , C., Cook , N. J., et al. 2022, , 164, 84

    2022

  2. [10]

    2021, , 162, 144

    Artigau , \'E ., H \'e brard , G., Cadieux , C., et al. 2021, , 162, 144

    2021

  3. [11]

    2015, A & A, 575, A119

    Astudillo-Defru, N., Bonfils, X., Delfosse, X., et al. 2015, A & A, 575, A119

    2015

  4. [12]

    X., et al

    Astudillo-Defru , N., Cloutier , R., Wang , S. X., et al. 2020, , 636, A58

    2020

  5. [13]

    2017 a , A & A, 600, A13

    Astudillo-Defru, N., Delfosse, X., Bonfils, X., et al. 2017 a , A & A, 600, A13

    2017

  6. [14]

    F., Bonfils, X., et al

    Astudillo-Defru, N., Diaz, R. F., Bonfils, X., et al. 2017 b , A & A, 605, L11

    2017

  7. [15]

    2017 c , A & A, 602, A88

    Astudillo-Defru, N., Forveille, T., Bonfils, X., et al. 2017 c , A & A, 602, A88

    2017

  8. [16]

    Bailer-Jones , C. A. L., Rybizki , J., Fouesneau , M., Mantelet , G., & Andrae , R. 2018, , 156, 58

    2018

  9. [17]

    P., Tinney, C

    Bailey, J., Butler, R. P., Tinney, C. G., et al. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 690, 743

    2008

  10. [18]

    Baluev , R. V. 2008, , 385, 1279

    2008

  11. [19]

    2014, , 126, 1134

    Beichman , C., Benneke , B., Knutson , H., et al. 2014, , 126, 1134

    2014

  12. [20]

    K., Irwin , J., Charbonneau , D., et al

    Berta-Thompson , Z. K., Irwin , J., Charbonneau , D., et al. 2015, , 527, 204

    2015

  13. [21]

    Bidelman , W. P. 1985, , 59, 197

    1985

  14. [22]

    A., Grandjean , A., Messina , S., et al

    Biller , B. A., Grandjean , A., Messina , S., et al. 2022, , 658, A145

    2022

  15. [23]

    2018 a , A & A, 618, A142

    Bonfils, X., Almenara, J.-M., Cloutier, R., et al. 2018 a , A & A, 618, A142

    2018

  16. [24]

    2018 b , A & A, 613, A25

    Bonfils, X., Astudillo-Defru, N., D \' az, R., et al. 2018 b , A & A, 613, A25

    2018

  17. [25]

    L., Correia, A., et al

    Bonfils, X., Curto, G. L., Correia, A., et al. 2013 a , A & A, 556, A110

    2013

  18. [26]

    2011, The M-dwarf sample, 1111

    Bonfils, X., Delfosse, X., Udry, S., et al. 2011, The M-dwarf sample, 1111

    2011

  19. [27]

    2013 b , A & A, 549, A109

    Bonfils, X., Delfosse, X., Udry, S., et al. 2013 b , A & A, 549, A109

    2013

  20. [28]

    2005, A & A, 443, L15

    Bonfils, X., Forveille, T., Delfosse, X., et al. 2005, A & A, 443, L15

    2005

  21. [29]

    2007, A & A, 474, 293

    Bonfils, X., Mayor, M., Delfosse, X., et al. 2007, A & A, 474, 293

    2007

  22. [30]

    2017, The Messenger, 169, 21

    Bouchy , F., Doyon , R., Artigau , \'E ., et al. 2017, The Messenger, 169, 21

    2017

  23. [31]

    2001, A & A, 374, 733

    Bouchy , F., Pepe , F., & Queloz , D. 2001, A & A, 374, 733

    2001

  24. [32]

    Brandt , T. D. 2021, , 254, 42

    2021

  25. [33]

    D., Dupuy , T

    Brandt , T. D., Dupuy , T. J., Li , Y., et al. 2021, , 162, 186

    2021

  26. [34]

    2021, , 656, A72

    Burn , R., Schlecker , M., Mordasini , C., et al. 2021, , 656, A72

    2021

  27. [35]

    P., Johnson, J

    Butler, R. P., Johnson, J. A., Marcy, G. W., et al. 2006, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 118, 1685

    2006

  28. [36]

    H., Lu, P., Nocedal, J., & Zhu, C

    Byrd, R. H., Lu, P., Nocedal, J., & Zhu, C. 1995, SIAM Journal on scientific computing, 16, 1190

    1995

  29. [37]

    A., Winn, J

    Carter, J. A., Winn, J. N., Holman, M. J., et al. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 730, 82

    2011

  30. [38]

    2001, , 554, 1274

    Chabrier , G. 2001, , 554, 1274

    2001

  31. [39]

    K., Irwin , J., et al

    Charbonneau , D., Berta , Z. K., Irwin , J., et al. 2009, , 462, 891

    2009

  32. [40]

    2019, , 629, A27

    Coffinet , A., Lovis , C., Dumusque , X., & Pepe , F. 2019, , 629, A27

    2019

  33. [41]

    Collaboration, G. et al. 2018, VizieR Online Data Catalog, 1345

    2018

  34. [42]

    A., Jao, W.-C., et al

    Costa, E., M \'e ndez, R. A., Jao, W.-C., et al. 2005, The Astronomical Journal, 130, 337

    2005

  35. [43]

    P., Marcy, G

    Cumming, A., Butler, R. P., Marcy, G. W., et al. 2008, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 120, 531

    2008

  36. [44]

    W., & Butler , R

    Cumming , A., Marcy , G. W., & Butler , R. P. 1999, , 526, 890

    1999

  37. [45]

    M., Skrutskie , M

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

    2003

  38. [46]

    2013, , 553, A8

    Delfosse , X., Bonfils , X., Forveille , T., et al. 2013, , 553, A8

    2013

  39. [47]

    L., et al

    Delfosse , X., Forveille , T., Beuzit , J. L., et al. 1999, , 344, 897

    1999

  40. [48]

    1998 a , , 338, L67

    Delfosse , X., Forveille , T., Mayor , M., et al. 1998 a , , 338, L67

    1998

  41. [49]

    1998 b , , 331, 581

    Delfosse , X., Forveille , T., Perrier , C., & Mayor , M. 1998 b , , 331, 581

    1998

  42. [50]

    2000, , 364, 217

    Delfosse , X., Forveille , T., S \'e gransan , D., et al. 2000, , 364, 217

    2000

  43. [51]

    B., Hara , N., & S \'e gransan , D

    Delisle , J. B., Hara , N., & S \'e gransan , D. 2020, , 635, A83

    2020

  44. [52]

    B., S \'e gransan , D., Buchschacher , N., & Alesina , F

    Delisle , J. B., S \'e gransan , D., Buchschacher , N., & Alesina , F. 2016, , 590, A134

    2016

  45. [53]

    F., Delfosse , X., Hobson , M

    D \' az , R. F., Delfosse , X., Hobson , M. J., et al. 2019, , 625, A17

    2019

  46. [54]

    A., Montes , D., et al

    D \' ez Alonso , E., Caballero , J. A., Montes , D., et al. 2019 a , , 621, A126

    2019

  47. [55]

    A., Montes , D., et al

    D \' ez Alonso , E., Caballero , J. A., Montes , D., et al. 2019 b , A & A, 621, A126

    2019

  48. [56]

    A., Irwin, J

    Dittmann, J. A., Irwin, J. M., Charbonneau, D., et al. 2017, Nature, 544, 333

    2017

  49. [57]

    2014, in Search for Life Beyond the Solar System

    Doyon , R., Lafreni \`e re , D., Albert , L., et al. 2014, in Search for Life Beyond the Solar System. Exoplanets, Biosignatures & Instruments, ed. D. Apai & P. Gabor , 3.6

    2014

  50. [58]

    V., Rodr \' guez , E., et al

    Dreizler , S., Jeffers , S. V., Rodr \' guez , E., et al. 2020, , 493, 536

    2020

  51. [59]

    Dressing , C. D. & Charbonneau , D. 2013, , 767, 95

    2013

  52. [60]

    Dressing , C. D. & Charbonneau , D. 2015, , 807, 45

    2015

  53. [61]

    2002, VizieR Online Data Catalog, 2237

    Ducati, J. 2002, VizieR Online Data Catalog, 2237

    2002

  54. [62]

    P., Shectman, S

    Feng, F., Butler, R. P., Shectman, S. A., et al. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 246, 11

    2020

  55. [63]

    T., Zacharias, N., & Jao, W.-C

    Finch, C. T., Zacharias, N., & Jao, W.-C. 2018, The Astronomical Journal, 155, 176

    2018

  56. [64]

    L., et al

    Forveille, T., Bonfils, X., Curto, G. L., et al. 2011, A & A, 526, A141

    2011

  57. [65]

    2009, A & A, 493, 645

    Forveille, T., Bonfils, X., Delfosse, X., et al. 2009, A & A, 493, 645

    2009

  58. [66]

    F., et al

    Fouqu \'e , P., Martioli , E., Donati , J. F., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2302.03377

    2023 arXiv

  59. [67]

    2018, , 475, 1960

    Fouqu \'e , P., Moutou , C., Malo , L., et al. 2018, , 475, 1960

    2018

  60. [68]

    2020, VizieR Online Data Catalog, I/350

    Gaia Collaboration . 2020, VizieR Online Data Catalog, I/350

    2020

  61. [69]

    Gaia Collaboration , Brown , A. G. A., Vallenari , A., et al. 2021 a , , 650, C3

    2021

  62. [70]

    L., Sarro , L

    Gaia Collaboration , Smart , R. L., Sarro , L. M., et al. 2021 b , , 649, A6

    2021

  63. [71]

    2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 443, 2561

    Gaidos, E., Mann, A., L \'e pine, S., et al. 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 443, 2561

    2014

  64. [72]

    2020, in Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, Vol

    Gillon , M., Meadows , V., Agol , E., et al. 2020, in Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, Vol. 52, 0208

    2020

  65. [73]

    & Jahrei , H

    Gliese , W. & Jahrei , H. 1991, Preliminary Version of the Third Catalogue of Nearby Stars , On: The Astronomical Data Center CD-ROM: Selected Astronomical Catalogs

    1991

  66. [74]

    C., Unger , N., Delisle , J.-B., D \' az , R

    Hara , N. C., Unger , N., Delisle , J.-B., D \' az , R. F., & S \'e gransan , D. 2022, , 663, A14

    2022

  67. [75]

    Hawley , S. L. & Pettersen , B. R. 1991, , 378, 725

    1991

  68. [76]

    D., Collier Cameron , A., Queloz , D., et al

    Haywood , R. D., Collier Cameron , A., Queloz , D., et al. 2014, , 443, 2517

    2014

  69. [77]

    2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 461, 1465

    H \'e brard, \'E ., Donati, J.-F., Delfosse, X., et al. 2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 461, 1465

    2016

  70. [78]

    J., Jao , W.-C., Winters , J

    Henry , T. J., Jao , W.-C., Winters , J. G., et al. 2018, , 155, 265

    2018

  71. [79]

    J., Kirkpatrick, J

    Henry, T. J., Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Simons, D. A. 1994, The Astronomical Journal, 108, 1437

    1994

  72. [80]

    C., et al

    Hojjatpanah , S., Figueira , P., Santos , N. C., et al. 2019, , 629, A80

    2019

  73. [81]

    W., Johnson, J

    Howard, A. W., Johnson, J. A., Marcy, G. W., et al. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 721, 1467

    2010

  74. [82]

    A., Butler, R

    Johnson, J. A., Butler, R. P., Marcy, G. W., et al. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 670, 833

    2007

  75. [83]

    2018, A & A, 618, A115

    Kaminski, A., Trifonov, T., Caballero, J., et al. 2018, A & A, 618, A115

    2018

  76. [84]

    2019, , 623, A72

    Kervella , P., Arenou , F., Mignard , F., & Th \'e venin , F. 2019, , 623, A72

    2019

  77. [85]

    & Stepien, K

    Kiraga, M. & Stepien, K. 2007, arXiv preprint arXiv:0707.2577

    2007 arXiv

  78. [86]

    2010, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 403, 1949

    Koen, C., Kilkenny, D., Van Wyk, F., & Marang, F. 2010, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 403, 1949

    2010

  79. [87]

    K., Ramirez , R., Kasting , J

    Kopparapu , R. K., Ramirez , R., Kasting , J. F., et al. 2013, , 765, 131

    2013

  80. [88]

    2003, A & A, 403, 1077

    Kuerster, M., Endl, M., Rouesnel, F., et al. 2003, A & A, 403, 1077

    2003

  81. [89]

    Landolt, A. U. 1992, The Astronomical Journal, 104, 340

    1992

  82. [90]

    & Shara , M

    L \'e pine , S. & Shara , M. M. 2005, , 129, 1483

    2005

  83. [91]

    2020 a , , 642, A121

    Lillo-Box , J., Figueira , P., Leleu , A., et al. 2020 a , , 642, A121

    2020

  84. [92]

    A., Santerne , A., et al

    Lillo-Box , J., Lopez , T. A., Santerne , A., et al. 2020 b , , 640, A48

    2020

  85. [93]

    2013, , 551, A59

    Lo Curto , G., Mayor , M., Benz , W., et al. 2013, , 551, A59

    2013

  86. [94]

    2015, The Messenger, 162, 9

    Lo Curto , G., Pepe , F., Avila , G., et al. 2015, The Messenger, 162, 9

    2015

  87. [95]

    Lomb, N. R. 1976, Astrophysics and space science, 39, 447

    1976

  88. [96]

    2008, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Lovis , C., Mayor , M., Pepe , F., Queloz , D., & Udry , S. 2008, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 398, Extreme Solar Systems, ed. D. Fischer , F. A. Rasio , S. E. Thorsett , & A. Wolszczan , 455

    2008

  89. [97]

    & Pepe , F

    Lovis , C. & Pepe , F. 2007, , 468, 1115

    2007

  90. [98]

    2021, , 162, 61

    Lubin , J., Robertson , P., Stefansson , G., et al. 2021, , 162, 61

    2021

  91. [99]

    2018, , 620, A171

    Luque , R., Nowak , G., Pall \'e , E., et al. 2018, , 620, A171

    2018

  92. [100]

    2019, A & A, 628, A39

    Luque, R., Pall \'e , E., Kossakowski, D., et al. 2019, A & A, 628, A39

    2019

  93. [101]

    C., Henry, T

    Lurie, J. C., Henry, T. J., Jao, W.-C., et al. 2014, The Astronomical Journal, 148, 91

    2014

  94. [102]

    2020, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Marconi , A., Abreu , M., Adibekyan , V., et al. 2020, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 11447, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, 1144726

    2020

  95. [103]

    W., Butler, R

    Marcy, G. W., Butler, R. P., Fischer, D., et al. 2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 556, 296

    2001

  96. [104]

    2003, The Messenger, 114, 20

    Mayor , M., Pepe , F., Queloz , D., et al. 2003, The Messenger, 114, 20

    2003

  97. [105]

    A., Astudillo-Defru, N., et al

    Ment, K., Dittmann, J. A., Astudillo-Defru, N., et al. 2019, The Astronomical Journal, 157, 32

    2019

  98. [106]

    2023, , 675, A168

    Mignon , L., Meunier , N., Delfosse , X., et al. 2023, , 675, A168

    2023

  99. [107]

    2008, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 390, 567

    Morin, J., Donati, J.-F., Petit, P., et al. 2008, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 390, 567

    2008

  100. [108]

    L., et al

    Moutou, C., Mayor, M., Curto, G. L., et al. 2011, A & A, 527, A63

    2011

  101. [109]

    R., Irwin , J., Charbonneau , D., Berta-Thompson , Z

    Newton , E. R., Irwin , J., Charbonneau , D., Berta-Thompson , Z. K., & Dittmann , J. A. 2016, , 821, L19

    2016

  102. [110]

    2002, , 388, 632

    Pepe , F., Mayor , M., Galland , F., et al. 2002, , 388, 632

    2002

  103. [111]

    2022, , 664, A65

    Pinamonti , M., Sozzetti , A., Maldonado , J., et al. 2022, , 664, A65

    2022

  104. [112]

    W., Sivan , J

    Queloz , D., Henry , G. W., Sivan , J. P., et al. 2001, , 379, 279

    2001

  105. [113]

    A., Reece , S., & Roberts , S

    Rajpaul , V., Aigrain , S., Osborne , M. A., Reece , S., & Roberts , S. 2015, , 452, 2269

    2015

  106. [114]

    N., Hawley , S

    Reid , I. N., Hawley , S. L., & Gizis , J. E. 1995, , 110, 1838

    1995

  107. [115]

    2009, , 692, 538

    Reiners , A., Basri , G., & Browning , M. 2009, , 692, 538

    2009

  108. [116]

    2021, , 650, A201

    Reyl \'e , C., Jardine , K., Fouqu \'e , P., et al. 2021, , 650, A201

    2021

  109. [117]

    E., & Harvin , J

    Riaz , B., Gizis , J. E., & Harvin , J. 2006, , 132, 866

    2006

  110. [118]

    2018, , 563, 365

    Ribas , I., Tuomi , M., Reiners , A., et al. 2018, , 563, 365

    2018

  111. [119]

    R., Finch , C

    Riedel , A. R., Finch , C. T., Henry , T. J., et al. 2014, , 147, 85

    2014

  112. [120]

    J., Lissauer , J

    Rivera , E. J., Lissauer , J. J., Butler , R. P., et al. 2005, , 634, 625

    2005

  113. [121]

    & Mahadevan , S

    Robertson , P. & Mahadevan , S. 2014, , 793, L24

    2014

  114. [122]

    2014, Science, 345, 440

    Robertson , P., Mahadevan , S., Endl , M., & Roy , A. 2014, Science, 345, 440

    2014

  115. [123]

    J., Fulton , B

    Rosenthal , L. J., Fulton , B. J., Hirsch , L. A., et al. 2021, , 255, 8

    2021

  116. [124]

    2021, , 653, A114

    Sabotta , S., Schlecker , M., Chaturvedi , P., et al. 2021, , 653, A114

    2021

  117. [125]

    2016, A & A, 595, A77

    Sahlmann, J., Lazorenko, P., S \'e gransan, D., et al. 2016, A & A, 595, A77

    2016

  118. [126]

    Scargle, J. D. 1982, The Astrophysical Journal, 263, 835

    1982

  119. [127]

    2011, , 743, 109

    Schneider , A., Melis , C., Song , I., & Zuckerman , B. 2011, , 743, 109

    2011

  120. [128]

    2011, A & A, 535, A54

    Segransan, D., Mayor, M., Udry, S., et al. 2011, A & A, 535, A54

    2011

  121. [129]

    2006, , 644, 1183

    Simon , M., Bender , C., & Prato , L. 2006, , 644, 1183

    2006

  122. [130]

    L., et al

    Snellen , I., de Kok , R., Birkby , J. L., et al. 2015, , 576, A59

    2015

  123. [131]

    M., Bryden, G., et al

    Stauffer, J., Tanner, A. M., Bryden, G., et al. 2010, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 122, 885

    2010

  124. [132]

    Stephenson , C. B. 1986, , 92, 139

    1986

  125. [133]

    I., Rebolo , R., et al

    Su \'a rez Mascare \ n o , A., Gonz \'a lez Hern \'a ndez , J. I., Rebolo , R., et al. 2017 a , , 597, A108

    2017

  126. [134]

    Su \'a rez Mascare \ n o , A., Rebolo , R., & Gonz \'a lez Hern \'a ndez , J. I. 2016, , 595, A12

    2016

  127. [135]

    I., & Esposito , M

    Su \'a rez Mascare \ n o , A., Rebolo , R., Gonz \'a lez Hern \'a ndez , J. I., & Esposito , M. 2015, , 452, 2745

    2015

  128. [136]

    I., & Esposito , M

    Su \'a rez Mascare \ n o , A., Rebolo , R., Gonz \'a lez Hern \'a ndez , J. I., & Esposito , M. 2017 b , , 468, 4772

    2017

  129. [137]

    I., Rodr \' guez-L \'o pez , C., et al

    Toledo-Padr \'o n , B., Gonz \'a lez Hern \'a ndez , J. I., Rodr \' guez-L \'o pez , C., et al. 2019, , 488, 5145

    2019

  130. [138]

    I., et al

    Toledo-Padr \'o n , B., Su \'a rez Mascare \ n o , A., Gonz \'a lez Hern \'a ndez , J. I., et al. 2021, , 648, A20

    2021

  131. [139]

    2010, The Astronomy and Astrophysics Review, 18, 67

    Torres, G., Andersen, J., & Gim \'e nez, A. 2010, The Astronomy and Astrophysics Review, 18, 67

    2010

  132. [140]

    2020, , 636, A74

    Trifonov , T., Tal-Or , L., Zechmeister , M., et al. 2020, , 636, A74

    2020

  133. [141]

    R., Barnes, J

    Tuomi, M., Jones, H. R., Barnes, J. R., Anglada-Escud \'e , G., & Jenkins, J. S. 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 441, 1545

    2014

  134. [142]

    2007, A & A, 469, L43

    Udry, S., Bonfils, X., Delfosse, X., et al. 2007, A & A, 469, L43

    2007

  135. [143]

    1977, Vistas in Astronomy, 21, 289

    van de Kamp , P. 1977, Vistas in Astronomy, 21, 289

    1977

  136. [144]

    2021, , 507, 2154

    Van Eylen , V., Astudillo-Defru , N., Bonfils , X., et al. 2021, , 507, 2154

    2021

  137. [145]

    2007, A & A, 474, 653

    Van Leeuwen, F. 2007, A & A, 474, 653

    2007

  138. [146]

    J., Boss, A

    Weinberger, A. J., Boss, A. P., Keiser, S. A., et al. 2016, The Astronomical Journal, 152, 24

    2016

  139. [147]

    G., Charbonneau , D., Henry , T

    Winters , J. G., Charbonneau , D., Henry , T. J., et al. 2021, , 161, 63

    2021

  140. [148]

    G., Henry, T

    Winters, J. G., Henry, T. J., Jao, W.-C., et al. 2010, The Astronomical Journal, 141, 21

    2010

  141. [149]

    G., Henry, T

    Winters, J. G., Henry, T. J., Lurie, J. C., et al. 2014, The Astronomical Journal, 149, 5

    2014

  142. [150]

    G., Medina , A

    Winters , J. G., Medina , A. A., Irwin , J. M., et al. 2019, , 158, 152

    2019

  143. [151]

    G., Sevrinsky, R

    Winters, J. G., Sevrinsky, R. A., Jao, W.-C., et al. 2016, The Astronomical Journal, 153, 14

    2016

  144. [152]

    A., Tuomi, M., Butler, R., et al

    Wittenmyer, R. A., Tuomi, M., Butler, R., et al. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 791, 114

    2014

  145. [153]

    2016, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 817, L20

    Wright, D., Wittenmyer, R., Tinney, C., Bentley, J., & Zhao, J. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 817, L20

    2016

  146. [154]

    2013, The Astronomical Journal, 145, 44

    Zacharias, N., Finch, C., Girard, T., et al. 2013, The Astronomical Journal, 145, 44

    2013

  147. [155]

    & K \"u rster, M

    Zechmeister, M. & K \"u rster, M. 2009, A & A, 496, 577

    2009

  148. [156]

    2009, A & A, 505, 859

    Zechmeister, M., K \"u rster, M., & Endl, M. 2009, A & A, 505, 859

    2009

  149. [157]

    H., Lu, P., & Nocedal, J

    Zhu, C., Byrd, R. H., Lu, P., & Nocedal, J. 1997, ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software (TOMS), 23, 550

    1997

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.