Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

WASP-121b's transmission spectrum observed with JWST/NIRSpec G395H reveals thermal dissociation and SiO in the atmosphere

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read JWST/NIRSpec transmission spectroscopy of the ultrahot Jupiter WASP-121b yields a 5.2σ detection of silicon monoxide (SiO) in the planet's atmosphere, and the spectral shape indicates thermal dissociation of H2O and H2 on the permanent…

desk verdict A useful two-hemisphere retrieval and a plausible SiO detection, but the 5.2σ significance is framework-dependent and the dissociation evidence is about 2σ. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.02199 v1 pith:7VRQVZFA submitted 2025-06-02 astro-ph.EP

Cyril Gapp , Thomas M. Evans-Soma , Joanna K. Barstow , Joshua D. Lothringer , David K. Sing , Djemma Ruseva , Eva-Maria Ahrer , Jayesh M. Goyal
show 3 more authors
Duncan Christie Laura Kreidberg Nathan J. Mayne
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords ultrahotJupitertransmissionspectroscopyJWSTNIRSpecG395HsiliconmonoxidethermaldissociationexoplanetatmospheresBayesianretrievalWASP-121b
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 analyzes a JWST/NIRSpec G395H transmission spectrum of the ultrahot Jupiter WASP-121b, taken from a full phase-curve observation. The authors argue that the spectrum carries a clear signature of silicon monoxide (SiO), with a Bayesian detection significance of 5.2σ over a model without SiO, and that SiO's abundance is consistent with chemical equilibrium rather than disequilibrium chemistry. They also find evidence that water and molecular hydrogen are thermally dissociated on the planet's permanent dayside while recombining on the nightside, and they build a two-hemisphere atmospheric model within the NEMESIS retrieval framework to account for this asymmetry. That model prefers a higher H2O abundance on the nightside than on the dayside. If the detection holds, it makes SiO a confirmed refractory-bearing molecule in an exoplanet atmosphere and opens a path toward measuring silicon-to-volatile ratios that could constrain the planet's formation and migration history.

What carries the argument

The central object is a two-hemisphere radiative-transfer retrieval built into the NEMESIS framework: the atmospheric ray is split into dayside and nightside integrals with separate temperatures and chemistries, and H2O and H2 are allowed to dissociate above a knee pressure via the power-law profile X(P)=Xdeep(P/Pknee)^α. This model isolates the 4.0-4.3 µm excess as SiO opacity, and the Bayesian evidence comparison between SiO-inclusive and SiO-free retrievals produces the 5.2σ significance. The GCM spectra of Pluriel et al. (2020), which omit SiO, underpredict the same wavelength range, supporting the identification.

What would settle it

Re-run the NEMESIS retrieval on the same phase-curve spectrum with SO2, H2S, or an additional Si-bearing species added to the opacity set and compare Bayesian evidence; if an alternative absorber explains the 4.0-4.3 µm excess equally well, the SiO attribution is not unique. Observationally, a high-resolution spectrum resolving individual SiO band lines across 4.0-4.3 µm would confirm or rule out the molecule directly.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

WASP-121b's transmission spectrum between 2.7 and 5.2 µm shows an absorption excess at 4.0-4.3 µm that is best explained by SiO, the strongest opacity source in that window in the NEMESIS model. Comparing the Bayesian evidence of retrievals with and without SiO gives a 5.2σ significance on the phase-curve-derived spectrum and 2.4σ on the transit-only spectrum. The same retrievals favor an H2O abundance about six orders of magnitude lower on the dayside than on the nightside, consistent with thermal dissociation of H2O and H2 on the dayside. Retrievals enforcing chemical equilibrium with the ATMO and PETRA frameworks also produce observable SiO, so the molecule's presence does not require photochemistry or deep mixing.

Load-bearing premise

The detection assumes the only molecules with significant opacity in the 4.0-4.3 µm window are H2O, CO2, CO, SiH, SiO, and H-; if an unmodeled molecule such as SO2 or H2S absorbs there too, the 5.2σ significance could be overstated.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • SiO becomes a confirmed refractory molecule in an ultrahot Jupiter, and its presence is explained by equilibrium chemistry rather than photochemistry or vertical mixing.
  • The 4.0-4.3 µm absorption excess is accounted for by SiO, closing a gap left by GCM models that include only H2O and CO opacities.
  • Thermal dissociation of H2O and H2 on the dayside must be included when retrieving abundances, and a two-hemisphere model is needed to avoid biased carbon-to-oxygen ratios.
  • The phase-curve-based reduction with nightside emission correction yields more reliable transit depths than a transit-only cutout, with roughly 40 percent smaller uncertainties.
  • Constraining silicon-to-volatile ratios could help discriminate between possible migration histories, although three-dimensional dissociation effects currently prevent quantitative abundance-ratio constraints.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If SiO is confirmed in multiple ultrahot Jupiters, the 4.0-4.3 µm NIRSpec window may become a standard refractory probe; the same window could be used to search for SiO in cooler planets where it would instead condense into silicate clouds.
  • The dayside/nightside split model could be extended to morning/evening terminator asymmetries, and phase-curve data of other hot Jupiters could be analyzed the same way to test whether hemispheric H2O asymmetry is a general phenomenon.
  • The power-law dissociation parameterization suggests a direct test: compare retrieved α values to GCM-predicted dissociation profiles, which would validate the simplified treatment against fully three-dimensional models.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. This manuscript presents JWST/NIRSpec G395H transmission spectra of the ultrahot Jupiter WASP-121b, derived both from a transit-only analysis of the phase-curve data and from the phase-curve reduction of Evans-Soma et al. (2025). The authors use three retrieval frameworks (NEMESIS, ATMO, and PETRA), a new two-hemisphere NEMESIS model that allows different dayside and nightside temperatures and chemistries, and GCM postprocessed spectra from Pluriel et al. (2020). The central claims are: (1) thermal dissociation of H2O and H2 on the dayside shapes the transmission spectrum; (2) SiO is detected at 5.2σ in the NEMESIS retrieval on the phase-curve spectrum and is compatible with equilibrium chemistry; and (3) the nightside H2O abundance is higher than the dayside abundance, demonstrating the impact of hemispheric heterogeneity. The paper also explicitly states that quantitative molecular abundances and C/O cannot be robustly constrained because of three-dimensional dissociation effects.

Significance. If the SiO detection holds, it would be a valuable identification of a refractory species in an ultrahot Jupiter, with implications for Si-based elemental ratios and formation history. The manuscript has notable strengths: it compares three independent retrieval codes, provides machine-readable spectra, and is unusually transparent about degeneracies and non-detections, including the low significance of the dissociation evidence and the spread of C/O constraints. The new two-hemisphere NEMESIS parameterization is a useful contribution for modeling transmission spectra of strongly irradiated planets. However, the headline SiO significance is framework-dependent, and the paper's own PETRA results substantially weaken the 'conclusive' wording. The dissociation evidence is internally acknowledged to be only ~2σ, which is inconsistent with the abstract's phrasing. These issues are load-bearing for the paper's main claims and require revision.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4.4, §3.4, Tables 3 and 6] The claim of a 'conclusive detection significance of 5.2σ' for SiO is framework-dependent and is contradicted by the paper's own PETRA free-chemistry retrieval on the same phase-curve transmission spectrum, which yields ΔBIC = 2.0 (weak evidence). On the transit-only spectrum the ordering flips: NEMESIS gives 2.4σ while PETRA gives ΔBIC = 8.9. Because both frameworks include SiO and both fit the same 4.0–4.3 μm excess, this large spread indicates that the detection significance is dominated by model-specific choices (correlated-k opacity tables, H− continuum, cloud parameterization, P-T treatment) rather than by a robust spectroscopic signature. The robustness argument in §4.4, that detection significance should not change with model complexity because feature shapes are similar, is asserted without demonstration and is not supported by the NEMESIS/PETRA comparison. The authors should either reconcile these estimates (e.g., by running the same retrieval metric on both frameworks, or by identifying a specific modeling difference that explains the discrepancy) or present the SiO detection as having a significance in the range ~2.4–5.2σ depending on framework, not as 'conclusive' 5.2σ.
  2. [§4.1, Abstract] The abstract states that the paper finds 'evidence for the thermal dissociation of H2O and H2,' but the NEMESIS retrieval itself shows that the dayside/nightside H2O abundance differences are only 2.0σ and 1.9σ in the phase-curve and transit-only reductions, respectively, and that the H2O and H2 power-law indices (αH2O and αH2) are consistent with zero within 2σ. These limitations are stated in §4.1, so the body is more careful than the abstract and title. Additionally, the GCM comparison in §3.5 (Figure 15) includes a wavelength-independent offset fitted to the data, so the agreement is partly a fit rather than a prediction. The abstract and title should be recalibrated to say that the spectrum is consistent with thermal dissociation but does not provide a significant detection, or the statistical analysis should be strengthened.
  3. [§3.1, §4.4] The identification of SiO as the absorber responsible for the 4.0–4.3 μm excess rests on a fixed opacity set (H2O, CO2, CO, SiH, SiO, H−) plus collision-induced absorption. The robustness tests in §4.4 only zero out molecules that are already in the model; they do not test whether alternative absorbers with overlapping opacity in the G395H band, such as SO2, H2S, or other Si-bearing molecules, could explain the excess. Without such a test, the reported significances are upper bounds on the evidence for SiO specifically. Adding at least SO2 to the NEMESIS opacity set (and ideally H2S) in a retrieval comparison would directly address this concern. This is a necessary step before claiming that SiO is the identified absorber.
  4. [§2.2, §4.4] The primary SiO detection is based on the phase-curve transmission spectrum from Evans-Soma et al. (2025), which is described only by reference as a submitted companion paper. The transit-only reduction, which is fully described here, yields a much weaker NEMESIS significance (2.4σ) and, in PETRA, a stronger one (ΔBIC=8.9), so the reader cannot fully assess the systematics of the data product that drives the headline claim. The authors state that the phase-curve analysis is preferable, but the data table provided in this manuscript is the transit-only spectrum. To make the main result self-contained and verifiable, the phase-curve transmission spectrum and its error treatment should be included as a machine-readable table in this paper, or the claim should be explicitly framed as contingent on the companion paper's reduction.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§2.2] The text says '≈ −193 pmm' where the unit should be 'ppm' (parts per million); check the units in that sentence.
  2. [§4.1] The sentence 'recent Gemini-S/IGRINS observations of WASP-121b suggest a higher H2O abundance on the dayside than on the nightside' contradicts the introduction, which correctly summarizes Wardenier et al. (2024) as finding higher H2O on the nightside. Please correct this misstatement and the associated citation (Wardenier et al. 2024 vs. 2023).
  3. [§4.4] The description of ΔBIC = 2.0 as 'moderate' evidence is not consistent with standard BIC classification (generally ΔBIC≈2 is considered positive/weak, ΔBIC≈6 is strong, ΔBIC≈10 is very strong). Consider adopting conventional labels for consistency.
  4. [Table 3, Eq. 4] The prior on the parameter a is listed as U(0, 0.15), but the physical interpretation of a in Eq. (4) is not explained in the text; please define its role in the nightside heat-advection term more explicitly.
  5. [Figure 14] Two bars of the ATMO phase-curve C/O posterior exceed the y-axis; either extend the axis or note explicitly that the posterior is truncated, so the reader can assess the full distribution.
  6. [Abstract] The '5.2σ' claim in the abstract does not mention that it comes from the NEMESIS retrieval on the phase-curve spectrum only; adding this qualification would bring the abstract in line with the body of the paper.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: SiO detection is a model-comparison statistic, and dissociation claims are flagged as low-significance retrieval posteriors.

full rationale

The central 5.2σ SiO claim is not circular. It is obtained by comparing Bayesian evidences of NEMESIS retrievals with and without SiO (§3.1, §4.4) and cross-checked with PETRA ΔBIC; it is a model-comparison statistic, not a fitted parameter renamed as a detection. The same 4.0–4.3 µm excess is fit by multiple independent retrieval codes with different opacity sources (Barton et al. 2013; Kurucz 1994), so no equation reduces to itself. The thermal-dissociation conclusion is weaker: the day/night H2O and H2 profiles are free parameters (Eq. 3), and the abstract's "evidence" is essentially the retrieved posterior. However, the paper itself reports that the power-law indices are consistent with zero within 2σ and the day/night H2O difference is only ~2σ, framing the GCM comparison as supporting context. This is an overstatement/robustness issue, not a definitional circularity. Self-citations (Evans-Soma et al. 2025; Mikal-Evans et al. 2022, 2023) are data-provenance and prior-observation references; the JWST data are public, and no argument imports an unverified uniqueness theorem or ansatz by citation. The NEMESIS-vs-PETRA discrepancy in SiO significance (5.2σ vs ΔBIC=2.0) is a framework-dependence concern for the correctness of the detection, not a circular reduction.

Assumptions & free parameters 10 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The retrieval fits roughly 20 parameters including molecular abundances, knee pressures, power-law indices, clouds, and P-T profile coefficients. The fixed H2 deep abundance (0.8547) and the assumption that CO, SiO, and SiH are hemispherically uniform are modeling choices. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (10)
  • SiO mole fraction (log10) = -3.48 +0.27/-0.37 (phase-curve); -3.51 +0.39/-0.47 (transit-only)
    Central to the SiO detection claim; retrieved from the transmission spectrum.
  • H2O deep dayside mole fraction (log10) = -8.44 +2.29/-2.21 (phase-curve)
    Dayside H2O abundance; the low value is interpreted as evidence for thermal dissociation.
  • H2O nightside mole fraction (log10) = -3.13 +1.33/-1.32 (phase-curve)
    Nightside H2O abundance; the dayside/nightside difference is about 2 sigma.
  • H2O knee pressure (log10 bar) = -3.05 +1.34/-1.76 (phase-curve)
    Parameterizes the pressure at which H2O dissociation begins on the dayside.
  • H2O power-law index alpha = 1.45 +0.91/-0.89 (phase-curve)
    Describes the rate of H2O abundance decrease with altitude; consistent with zero within 2 sigma.
  • H2 knee pressure (log10 bar) = -3.86 +1.53/-1.26 (phase-curve)
    Parameterizes the pressure at which H2 dissociation begins on the dayside.
  • H2 power-law index alpha = 0.97 +0.61/-0.61 (phase-curve)
    Describes the rate of H2 abundance decrease with altitude; consistent with zero within 2 sigma.
  • CO mole fraction (log10) = -1.08 +0.05/-0.08 (phase-curve)
    CO opacity dominates at wavelengths longer than 4.3 microns in the NEMESIS model.
  • Cloud top pressure (log10 bar) = -2.62 +2.16/-2.12 (phase-curve)
    Gray cloud parameter that affects the overall continuum level.
  • H- mole fraction (log10) = -9.09 +2.38/-2.44 (phase-curve)
    H- continuum absorption is included on the dayside only.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Opacity tables for H2O, CO2, CO, SiH, SiO, and H- are accurate in the G395H band.
    Section 3.1 lists the adopted opacity sources; the SiO detection depends on the fidelity of the SiO line list (Barton et al. 2013).
  • domain assumption The two-hemisphere split, with CO, SiO, and SiH held constant across hemispheres, is sufficient to model the terminator.
    Section 3.1 describes the model; the assumption is not tested by freeing these species per hemisphere.
  • domain assumption H2 dissociates fully to atomic hydrogen, and the electron abundance equals the H- abundance.
    Section 3.1: 'we assumed that all dissociated H2 is converted to atomic hydrogen' and 'The free electron volume mixing ratio was fixed to be equal to that of H-'.
  • domain assumption The nightside pressure-temperature profile has no thermal inversion.
    Section 3.1: the nightside P-T profile sets beta=0; the paper justifies this with HST phase-curve evidence.
  • domain assumption Stellar limb darkening from the 3D Stagger grid with Gaussian priors is correct.
    Used in the light curve fits (Section 2.1) and the catwoman comparison (Section 2.3).
  • domain assumption The terminator is symmetric; there is no significant morning-evening asymmetry.
    Section 2.3 tests this with catwoman and finds batman slightly favored; the assumption is adopted for the main retrievals.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of WASP-121b's transmission spectrum observed with JWST/NIRSpec G395H reveals thermal dissociation and SiO in the atmosphere." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7VRQVZFA

@misc{pith2026250602199,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: WASP-121b's transmission spectrum observed with JWST/NIRSpec G395H reveals thermal dissociation and SiO in the atmosphere},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7VRQVZFA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.02199}
}
abstract

WASP-121b has been established as a benchmark ultrahot Jupiter, serving as a laboratory for the atmospheric chemistry and dynamics of strongly irradiated extrasolar gas giants. Here, we present and analyze WASP-121b's transmission spectrum observed with NIRSpec G395H on board the James Webb Space Telescope and find evidence for the thermal dissociation of H$_2$O and H$_2$ on the planet's permanent dayside. Additionally, we detect SiO at a statistical significance of $5.2\sigma$ which is compatible with chemical equilibrium in the atmosphere. Constraining the abundance of SiO and abundance ratios between silicon and volatile atoms in WASP-121b's atmosphere could help discriminate between possible migration histories of the planet. The three-dimensional nature of thermal dissociation on WASP-121b's dayside and of recombination on its nightside, however, poses a challenge to constraining molecular abundances and elemental abundance ratios from the transmission spectrum. To account for this, we implemented an atmospheric model in the NEMESIS framework that splits the planet's atmosphere into dayside and nightside. A retrieval applying our atmospheric model to WASP-121b's transmission spectrum favors a higher H$_2$O abundance on the nightside than on the dayside, demonstrating the impact of hemispheric heterogeneity when attempting to constrain WASP-121b's bulk H$_2$O inventory.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.02199 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Results of the simultaneous MCMC on the white transit-only light curves of the NRS1 (left panels) and NRS2 (right panels) detectors. The shaded blue regions indicate the times of ingress and egress calculated according to Winn (2010). Top panels: the black circles show the data and the orange lines show the model light curves applying the ML set of parameters. The faint yellow lines show models calculated using 100 … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Posterior probabilities for the fit parameters of the simultaneous fit to both detectors’ white light curves. For a description of each parameter, see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. MCMC results for the fits to the spectrophotometric transit-only light curves at R ∼ 600. For the fit parameters, we indicate the medians and 1σ intervals of the white light curve fit’s posteriors (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (12 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Allan deviation plots for the spectrophotometric transit-only light curves at both spectral resolutions. The transparent black lines show the root mean square (rms) residuals between the data and the models as a function of the number of bins and the red lines show the…
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Selection of the spectrophotometric transit-only light curves at a spectral resolution of R ∼ 600 and respec￾tive models. The selected spectrophotometric light curves are the 10th, 20th, 30th, 40th, 50th, 60th, 70th, 80th, and 90th percentile light curves in χ 2 ν. Upp…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: WASP-121 b’s transmission spectra from the transit-only analysis and the phase-curve analysis (Evans-Soma et al. 2025) at two different spectral resolutions. Upper panels: the blue diamonds and red circles show the transit-only and phase￾curve transmission spectra, res…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Fits to the white light curves using batman and catwoman models. ties due to a strong negative correlation in the posterior (see also, e.g., Espinoza et al. 2024). Additional tests were performed by setting the transit midtime as a free parameter. However, this increas…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison of the transmission spectra for the batman and catwoman models.Top panel: trailing and leading limb depths compared to the depths found from the batman model fitting. Middle panel: differences between the trailing and leading limb depths. The red line shows …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Schematic showing an example path for the NEMESIS dayside-and-nightside radiative transfer calculation. The dayside portion of the atmosphere is represented by shades of red and the nightside by shades of blue. The in￾tensity of the color indicates the atmospheric dens…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Phase-curve (left panel) and transit-only (right panel) transmission spectra at R ∼ 600 along with the median model spectra of the applied retrievals. The 1σ intervals of the model spectra are illustrated using shaded regions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Results from the retrieval frameworks applied to WASP-121 b’s transmission spectrum obtained from the phase￾curve analysis. The temperature and abundance profiles inferred from the different retrievals are depicted using lines with shaded regions indicating the extent…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Contributions of the different molecular absorbers to the NEMESIS model spectrum. Top panel: the black circles represent the transmission spectrum derived from the phase-curve analysis. The dotted magenta line shows the ML model and the solid blue, dashed orange, and …
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Posteriors for WASP-121 b’s C/O inferred from the retrievals enforcing equilibrium chemistry. The solid ver￾tical lines depict the posteriors’ medians and the dashed ver￾tical lines show the edges of the 1σ intervals. Two bars of the posteriors of the ATMO retrieval o…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: WASP-121 b’s transmission spectrum obtained from the phase-curve analysis at a spectral resolution of R ∼ 600 and the GCM transmission spectra presented by Pluriel et al. (2020). Upper panel: the gray circles show the original data and the black circles show the data …

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Mitigating Charge Migration in JWST NIRISS Reveals That KELT-7 b is a Metal-enriched Ultra-hot Jupiter Orbiting a Young Metal-rich Star

    astro-ph.EP 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Correcting NIRISS charge migration reveals KELT-7 b as a metal-enriched (~92x solar) ultra-hot Jupiter with H2O, CO2 and TiO but no H- or clouds, orbiting a young metal-rich star.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

93 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    S., Baraffe, I., Tremblin, P., et al

    Amundsen, D. S., Baraffe, I., Tremblin, P., et al. 2014, A&A, 564, A59, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201323169

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201323169 2014

  2. [2]

    J., & Scott, P

    Asplund, M., Grevesse, N., Sauval, A. J., & Scott, P. 2009, ARA&A, 47, 481, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f...

    arXiv 2009

  3. [3]

    J., Tennyson, J., Harris, G

    Barber, R. J., Tennyson, J., Harris, G. J., & Tolchenov, R. N. 2006, MNRAS, 368, 1087, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10184.x

    arXiv 2006

  4. [4]

    S., Hauschildt, P

    Barman, T. S., Hauschildt, P. H., & Allard, F. 2001, ApJ, 556, 885, doi: 10.1086/321610

    doi:10.1086/321610 2001

  5. [5]

    J., Yurchenko, S

    Barton, E. J., Yurchenko, S. N., & Tennyson, J. 2013, MNRAS, 434, 1469, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1105

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1105 2013

  6. [6]

    J., & Cowan, N

    Bell, T. J., & Cowan, N. B. 2018, ApJL, 857, L20, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aabcc8

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aabcc8 2018

  7. [7]

    T., & Guilliat, A

    Beltz, H., Rauscher, E., Roman, M. T., & Guilliat, A. 2021, AJ, 163, 35 25

    2021

  8. [8]

    1998, Collision-induced Absorption in the Infrared: A Data Base for Modelling Planetary and Stellar Atmospheres, Technical Report, Copenhagen Univ

    Borysow, A. 1998, Collision-induced Absorption in the Infrared: A Data Base for Modelling Planetary and Stellar Atmospheres, Technical Report, Copenhagen Univ. Denmark Physics and Astrophysics

    1998

Show all 93 references
  1. [9]

    2002, A&A, 390, 779, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020555

    Borysow, A. 2002, A&A, 390, 779, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020555

    2002 doi

  2. [10]

    1989, ApJ, 341, 549, doi: 10.1086/167515

    Borysow, A., & Frommhold, L. 1989, ApJ, 341, 549, doi: 10.1086/167515

    1989 doi

  3. [11]

    1990, ApJL, 348, L41, doi: 10.1086/185626

    Borysow, A., & Frommhold, L. 1990, ApJL, 348, L41, doi: 10.1086/185626

    1990 doi

  4. [12]

    1989, ApJ, 336, 495, doi: 10.1086/167027

    Borysow, A., Frommhold, L., & Moraldi, M. 1989, ApJ, 336, 495, doi: 10.1086/167027

    1989 doi

  5. [13]

    G., & Fu, Y

    Borysow, A., Jorgensen, U. G., & Fu, Y. 2001, JQSRT, 68, 235, doi: 10.1016/S0022-4073(00)00023-6

    2001 doi

  6. [14]

    G., & Zheng, C

    Borysow, A., Jorgensen, U. G., & Zheng, C. 1997, A&A, 324, 185

    1997

  7. [15]

    2020, A&A, 635, A205, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936640

    Bourrier, V., Ehrenreich, D., Lendl, M., et al. 2020, A&A, 635, A205, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936640

    2020 doi

  8. [16]

    2014, A&A, 564, A125, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322971

    Buchner, J., Georgakakis, A., Nandra, K., et al. 2014, A&A, 564, A125, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322971

    2014 doi

  9. [17]

    2008, ApJ, 678, 1436, doi: 10.1086/533518

    Burrows, A., Budaj, J., & Hubeny, I. 2008, ApJ, 678, 1436, doi: 10.1086/533518

    2008 doi

  10. [18]

    2011, SoPh, 268, 255, doi: 10.1007/s11207-010-9541-4

    Bonifacio, P. 2011, SoPh, 268, 255, doi: 10.1007/s11207-010-9541-4

    2011 doi

  11. [19]

    2019, A&A, 623, A161, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834384

    Caldas, A., Leconte, J., Selsis, F., et al. 2019, A&A, 623, A161, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834384

    2019 doi

  12. [20]

    L., Rocchetto, M., Yurchenko, S

    Chubb, K. L., Rocchetto, M., Yurchenko, S. N., et al. 2021, A&A, 646, A21, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038350

    2021 doi

  13. [21]

    M., et al

    Delrez, L., Santerne, A., Almenara, J. M., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 458, 4025, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw522

    2016 doi

  14. [22]

    2016, A&A, 594, A69, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201628799

    Drummond, B., Tremblin, P., Baraffe, I., et al. 2016, A&A, 594, A69, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201628799

    2016 doi

  15. [23]

    2021, AJ, 162, 165, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac134d

    Espinoza, N., & Jones, K. 2021, AJ, 162, 165, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac134d

    2021 doi

  16. [24]

    E., Kirk, J., et al

    Espinoza, N., Steinrueck, M. E., Kirk, J., et al. 2024, Nature, 632, 1017, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07768-4

    2024 doi

  17. [25]

    M., Sing, D

    Evans, T. M., Sing, D. K., Kataria, T., et al. 2017, Nature, 548, 58, doi: 10.1038/nature23266

    2017 doi

  18. [26]

    M., Sing, D

    Evans, T. M., Sing, D. K., Goyal, J. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 283, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aaebff

    2018 doi

  19. [27]

    M., Sing, D

    Evans-Soma, T. M., Sing, D. K., Barstow, J. K., et al. 2025, NatAs, submitted

    2025

  20. [28]

    2024, A&A, 685, A125, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348880

    Falco, A., Leconte, J., Mechineau, A., & Pluriel, W. 2024, A&A, 685, A125, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348880

    2024 doi

  21. [29]

    Feroz, F., & Hobson, M. P. 2008, MNRAS, 384, 449, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12353.x

    2008

  22. [30]

    P., & Bridges, M

    Feroz, F., Hobson, M. P., & Bridges, M. 2009, MNRAS, 398, 1601, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14548.x

    2009

  23. [31]

    P., Cameron, E., & Pettitt, A

    Feroz, F., Hobson, M. P., Cameron, E., & Pettitt, A. N. 2019, OJAp, 2, 10, doi: 10.21105/astro.1306.2144

    2019 arXiv

  24. [32]

    2016, JOSS, 1, 24, doi: 10.21105/joss.00024

    Foreman-Mackey, D. 2016, JOSS, 1, 24, doi: 10.21105/joss.00024

    2016 doi

  25. [33]

    W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306, doi: 10.1086/670067

    2013 doi

  26. [34]

    J., Lodders, K., Marley, M

    Fortney, J. J., Lodders, K., Marley, M. S., & Freedman, R. S. 2008, ApJ, 678, 1419, doi: 10.1086/528370

    2008 doi

  27. [35]

    1994, ApJS, 95, 535, doi: 10.1086/192110

    Goorvitch, D. 1994, ApJS, 95, 535, doi: 10.1086/192110

    1994 doi

  28. [36]

    Gordon, S., & McBride, B. J. 1994, NASA Reference Publication, 1311

    1994

  29. [37]

    M., Mayne, N., Sing, D

    Goyal, J. M., Mayne, N., Sing, D. K., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 5158, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3015

    2018 doi

  30. [38]

    Grant, D., & Wakeford, H. R. 2022, Exo-TiC/ExoTiC-LD: ExoTiC-LD v3.0.0, v3.0.0, Zenodo, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7437681

    2022 doi

  31. [39]

    Grant, D., & Wakeford, H. R. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 5114, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3632

    2023 doi

  32. [40]

    2010, A&A, 520, A27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913396

    Guillot, T. 2010, A&A, 520, A27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913396

    2010 doi

  33. [41]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    2020 doi

  34. [42]

    H., Allard, F., & Baron, E

    Hauschildt, P. H., Allard, F., & Baron, E. 1999, ApJ, 512, 377, doi: 10.1086/306745

    1999 doi

  35. [43]

    J., Seidel, J

    Hoeijmakers, H. J., Seidel, J. V., Pino, L., et al. 2020, A&A, 641, A123, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038365

    2020 doi

  36. [44]

    J., Kitzmann, D., Morris, B

    Hoeijmakers, H. J., Kitzmann, D., Morris, B. M., et al. 2024, A&A, 685, A139, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244968

    2024 doi

  37. [45]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, CSE, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    2007 doi

  38. [46]

    Irwin, P. G. J., Teanby, N. A., de Kok, R., et al. 2008, JQSRT, 109, 1136, doi: 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2007.11.006

    2008 doi

  39. [47]

    Y., Pluriel, W., Bocchieri, A., et al

    Jaziri, A. Y., Pluriel, W., Bocchieri, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A25, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347379

    2024 doi

  40. [48]

    John, T. L. 1988, A&A, 193, 189

    1988

  41. [49]

    2022, JOSS, 7, 2382, doi: 10.21105/joss.02382

    Jones, K., & Espinoza, N. 2022, JOSS, 7, 2382, doi: 10.21105/joss.02382

    2022 doi

  42. [50]

    M., & Tinetti, G

    Kipping, D. M., & Tinetti, G. 2010, MNRAS, 407, 2589, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17094.x

    2010

  43. [51]

    B., et al

    Kitzmann, D., Heng, K., Rimmer, P. B., et al. 2018, ApJ, 863, 183

    2018

  44. [52]

    2015, PASP, 127, 1161, doi: 10.1086/683602

    Kreidberg, L. 2015, PASP, 127, 1161, doi: 10.1086/683602

    2015 doi

  45. [53]

    Kurucz, R. L. 1994, in IAU Colloq. 146: Molecules in the Stellar Environment, ed. U. G. Jorgensen, Vol. 428, 282, doi: 10.1007/3-540-57747-5 51

    1994 doi

  46. [54]

    A., & Oinas, V

    Lacis, A. A., & Oinas, V. 1991, J. Geophys. Res., 96, 9027, doi: 10.1029/90JD01945

    1991 doi

  47. [55]

    M., Fletcher, L

    Lee, J. M., Fletcher, L. N., & Irwin, P. G. J. 2012, MNRAS, 420, 170, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20013.x 26

    2012

  48. [56]

    K., Wakeford, H

    Lewis, N. K., Wakeford, H. R., MacDonald, R. J., et al. 2020, ApJL, 902, L19, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abb77f

    2020 doi

  49. [57]

    E., Rothman, L

    Li, G., Gordon, I. E., Rothman, L. S., et al. 2015, ApJS, 216, 15, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/216/1/15

    2015 doi

  50. [58]

    R., Zhang, X., Vasisht, G., et al

    Line, M. R., Zhang, X., Vasisht, G., et al. 2012, ApJ, 749, 93, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/749/1/93

    2012 doi

  51. [59]

    R., Wolf, A

    Line, M. R., Wolf, A. S., Zhang, X., et al. 2013, ApJ, 775, 137, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/775/2/137

    2013 doi

  52. [60]

    D., Barman, T., & Koskinen, T

    Lothringer, J. D., Barman, T., & Koskinen, T. 2018, ApJ, 866, 27, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aadd9e

    2018 doi

  53. [61]

    D., & Barman, T

    Lothringer, J. D., & Barman, T. S. 2020, AJ, 159, 289, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab8d33

    2020 doi

  54. [62]

    D., Fu, G., Sing, D

    Lothringer, J. D., Fu, G., Sing, D. K., & Barman, T. S. 2020, ApJL, 898, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aba265

    2020 doi

  55. [63]

    D., Rustamkulov, Z., Sing, D

    Lothringer, J. D., Rustamkulov, Z., Sing, D. K., et al. 2021, ApJ, 914, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abf8a9

    2021 doi

  56. [64]

    D., Sing, D

    Lothringer, J. D., Sing, D. K., Rustamkulov, Z., et al. 2022, Nature, 604, 49, doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-04453-2

    2022 doi

  57. [65]

    2015, A&A, 573, A90, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423804

    Magic, Z., Chiavassa, A., Collet, R., & Asplund, M. 2015, A&A, 573, A90, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423804

    2015 doi

  58. [66]

    McBride, B. J. 1993, National Aeronautics and Space

    1993

  59. [67]

    2010, Data Structures for Statistical Computing in Python, doi: 10.25080/Majora-92bf1922-00a

    McKinney, W. 2010, Data Structures for Statistical Computing in Python, doi: 10.25080/Majora-92bf1922-00a

    2010 doi

  60. [68]

    K., Kataria, T., et al

    Mikal-Evans, T., Sing, D. K., Kataria, T., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 496, 1638, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1628

    2020 doi

  61. [69]

    K., Goyal, J

    Mikal-Evans, T., Sing, D. K., Goyal, J. M., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 488, 2222

    2019

  62. [70]

    K., Barstow, J

    Mikal-Evans, T., Sing, D. K., Barstow, J. K., et al. 2022, NatAs, 6, 471, doi: 10.1038/s41550-021-01592-w

    2022 doi

  63. [71]

    K., Dong, J., et al

    Mikal-Evans, T., Sing, D. K., Dong, J., et al. 2023, ApJL, 943, L17, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acb049

    2023 doi

  64. [72]

    2021, AJ, 161, 174, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abe048

    Morello, G., Zingales, T., Martin-Lagarde, M., Gastaud, R., & Lagage, P.-O. 2021, AJ, 161, 174, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abe048

    2021 doi

  65. [73]

    M., Beatty, T

    Murphy, M. M., Beatty, T. G., Schlawin, E., et al. 2024, NatAs, 8, 1562, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02367-9

    2024 doi

  66. [74]

    B., & Ingargiola, A

    Newville, M., Stensitzki, T., Allen, D. B., & Ingargiola, A. 2015, LMFIT: Non-Linear Least-Square Minimization and Curve-Fitting for Python, 0.8.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.11813

    2015 doi

  67. [75]

    R., Bean, J

    Parmentier, V., Line, M. R., Bean, J. L., et al. 2018, A&A, 617, A110, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833059

    2018 doi

  68. [76]

    2020, A&A, 636, A66, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037678

    Pluriel, W., Zingales, T., Leconte, J., & Parmentier, V. 2020, A&A, 636, A66, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037678

    2020 doi

  69. [77]

    L., Kyuberis, A

    Polyansky, O. L., Kyuberis, A. A., Zobov, N. F., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 2597, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1877

    2018 doi

  70. [78]

    E., Rothman, L

    Richard, C., Gordon, I. E., Rothman, L. S., et al. 2012, JQSRT, 113, 1276, doi: 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2011.11.004

    2012 doi

  71. [79]

    2010, JQSRT, 111, 2139, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jqsrt.2010.05.001

    Rothman, L., Gordon, I., Barber, R., et al. 2010, JQSRT, 111, 2139, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jqsrt.2010.05.001

    2010 doi

  72. [80]

    K., Liu, R., & Wang, A

    Rustamkulov, Z., Sing, D. K., Liu, R., & Wang, A. 2022, ApJL, 928, L7, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac5b6f

    2022 doi

  73. [81]

    K., Mukherjee, S., et al

    Rustamkulov, Z., Sing, D. K., Mukherjee, S., et al. 2023, Nature, 614, 659, doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05677-y

    2023 doi

  74. [82]

    K., Rustamkulov, Z., Thorngren, D

    Sing, D. K., Rustamkulov, Z., Thorngren, D. P., et al. 2024, Nature, 630, 831, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07395-z

    2024 doi

  75. [83]

    2004, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, Vol

    Skilling, J. 2004, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, Vol. 735, Bayesian Inference and Maximum Entropy Methods in Science and Engineering: 24th International Workshop on Bayesian Inference and Maximum Entropy Methods in Science and Engineering, ed. R. Fischer,...

    2004 doi

  76. [84]

    Speagle, J. S. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 3132, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa278 Ter Braak, C. J. F. 2006, Statistics and Computing, 16, 239, doi: 10.1007/s11222-006-8769-1 ter Braak, C. J. F., & Vrugt, J. A. 2008, Statistics and Computing, 18, 435, doi: 10.1007/s11222-008-9104-9

    2020 doi

  77. [85]

    S., Chabrier, G., et al

    Tremblin, P., Amundsen, D. S., Chabrier, G., et al. 2016, ApJL, 817, L19, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/817/2/L19

    2016 doi

  78. [86]

    S., Mourier, P., et al

    Tremblin, P., Amundsen, D. S., Mourier, P., et al. 2015, ApJL, 804, L17, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/804/1/L17

    2015 doi

  79. [87]

    J., et al

    Tremblin, P., Chabrier, G., Mayne, N. J., et al. 2017, ApJ, 841, 30, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6e57

    2017 doi

  80. [88]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, NatMe, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    2020 doi

  81. [89]

    P., Parmentier, V., Line, M

    Wardenier, J. P., Parmentier, V., Line, M. R., & Lee, E. K. H. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 4942, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2586

    2023 doi

  82. [90]

    P., Parmentier, V., Line, M

    Wardenier, J. P., Parmentier, V., Line, M. R., et al. 2024, PASP, 136, 084403, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ad5c9f

    2024 doi

  83. [91]

    Winn, J. N. 2010, in Exoplanets, ed. S. Seager (University of Arizona Press, Tucson, AZ, USA), 55–77, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1001.2010

    2010 doi arXiv

  84. [92]

    2020, MNRAS, 496, 5282, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1874

    Tennyson, J. 2020, MNRAS, 496, 5282, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1874

    2020 doi

  85. [93]

    N., Sinden, F., Lodi, L., et al

    Yurchenko, S. N., Sinden, F., Lodi, L., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 5324, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2738

    2018 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.