Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 119 references

Three Hot Jupiters transiting K-dwarfs with a significant heavy element mass

T0 review · 2 major / 4 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 This paper confirms three hot Jupiters transiting mid-K dwarf stars and infers that each contains a large heavy element mass, between 84 and 114 Earth masses.

desk verdict Three well-confirmed hot Jupiters around mid-K dwarfs, but the heavy-element masses rest entirely on one interior-model grid and need a robustness check before the headline is safe. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.04923 v1 pith:VBN25T5N submitted 2025-06-05 astro-ph.EP

Y.G.C. Frensch , F. Bouchy , G. Lo Curto , S. Ulmer-Moll , S.G. Sousa , N.C. Santos , K.G. Stassun , C.N. Watkins
show 45 more authors
H. Chakraborty K. Barkaoui M. Battley W. Ceva K.A. Collins T. Daylan P. Evans J.P. Faria C. Farret Jentink E. Fontanet E. Fridén G. Furesz M. Gillon N. Grieves C. Hellier E. Jehin J.M. Jenkins L.K.W. Kwok D.W. Latham B. Lavie N. Law A.W. Mann F. Murgas E. Palle L. Parc F. Pepe A. Popowicz F.J. Pozuelos D.J. Radford H.M. Relles A. Revol G. Ricker S. Seager M. Shinde M. Steiner I.A. Strakhov T.-G. Tan S. Tavella M. Timmermans B. Tofflemire S. Udry R. Vanderspek V. Vaulato J.N. Winn C. Ziegler
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords hotJupitersKdwarfsheavyelementmassinteriormodelsTESSradialvelocityexoplanetconfirmationplanetarydemographics
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 confirmation and characterization of three hot Jupiters transiting mid-K dwarf stars, an orbital-and-mass regime that planetary population synthesis models predict should be nearly empty. Combining TESS photometry with ground-based imaging and CORALIE radial velocities, the authors measure orbital periods of 1.82-3.12 days and planetary masses of 0.6-3.0 Jupiter masses. The central result is that the inferred interior heavy element masses, 88, 114, and 84 Earth masses (the abstract lists the first as 90), are significantly higher than most reported heavy element masses for hot Jupiters around K dwarfs. If correct, these systems show that low-mass stars can produce gas giants with substantial solid inventories, challenging the formation models that predicted their absence.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is the joint-fit modeling of transit photometry and radial velocities using the Juliet code with dynesty nested sampling, which produces the mass and radius from which heavy element content is derived. The heavy element masses come from the published grid of interior models used by the authors, which combines an H/He envelope with the SCvH equation of state, models heavy elements as water that is homogeneously mixed, assumes no central core, and uses an internal luminosity prior; the paper also compares these results to non-inflated models from Fortney et al. (2007) and inflated models from Baraffe et al. (2008). The key physical quantity that carries the argument is the degeneracy between heavy element content and heating efficiency: adding heavy elements shrinks the model radius while adding heating inflates it.

What would settle it

Recompute the three planets' heavy element masses using the more recent Chabrier & Debras (2021) hydrogen-helium equation of state while keeping all other assumptions fixed; if the inferred masses fall below roughly 30-40 Earth masses, the claim that these planets carry a 'significant' heavy element content relative to other K-dwarf hot Jupiters would be refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that TOI-2969 b, TOI-2989 b, and TOI-5300 b are genuine transiting hot Jupiters, not false positives or stellar companions, and that their bulk properties require large internal heavy element reservoirs. Using a joint fit of satellite and ground-based photometry with radial velocities, the authors derive planetary masses of 1.16±0.04, 3.0±0.2, and 0.6±0.1 Jupiter masses and radii of 1.10±0.08, 1.12±0.05, and 0.88±0.08 Jupiter radii. Through the grid of interior models adopted in their analysis, they infer heavy element masses of 88±30, 114±30, and 84±21 Earth masses (the abstract lists the first as 90±30) and conclude that these values are significantly higher than most reported heavy elements for K-dwarf hot Jupiters. They further note that none of the three planets shows radius inflation despite equilibrium temperatures of 1001-1186 K.

Load-bearing premise

The heavy element masses are inferred from interior models that assume a specific hydrogen-helium equation of state (SCvH), model the heavy elements as water mixed homogeneously, and omit a central core; the paper itself notes that newer equations of state generally predict smaller radii and lower heavy element masses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • These three systems add precisely characterized data points to the sparse census of hot Jupiters around mid-K dwarfs, sharpening the measured occurrence rate in a regime where population synthesis models predict very few systems.
  • Inferred heavy element masses of 84-114 Earth masses imply these planets formed with or accreted a substantial solid component, a constraint that formation models must reproduce.
  • The lack of radius inflation under strong insolation, at least for TOI-2989 b and TOI-5300 b, favors models without efficient interior heating beyond stellar irradiation.
  • TOI-2969 b, with an emission spectroscopy metric of 149 and a scale height of 205 km, is a promising target for emission spectroscopy that could probe its atmospheric composition.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the high heavy element masses survive under newer equations of state, they would suggest that disk solids around low-mass stars can be gathered efficiently, possibly through pebble accretion, to form tens-of-Earth-mass cores before gas accretion.
  • The host stars' metallicities straddle zero (0.08, -0.04, -0.17 dex), so if the planets are truly enriched, stellar metallicity alone may not set the planetary heavy element budget; expanding the sample could test that.
  • Emission spectroscopy of TOI-2969 b, measuring atmospheric metallicity or C/O ratio, would provide an independent, observable check on the interior-model heavy element masses.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports the confirmation and characterization of three hot Jupiters transiting mid-K dwarfs: TOI-2969 b (P=1.82 d, M=1.16 M_Jup, R=1.10 R_Jup), TOI-2989 b (P=3.12 d, M=3.0 M_Jup, R=1.12 R_Jup), and TOI-5300 b (P=2.26 d, M=0.6 M_Jup, R=0.88 R_Jup). The analysis combines TESS photometry, ground-based follow-up light curves, speckle interferometry, and CORALIE radial velocities in a joint Juliet/dynesty fit. The authors then use the Sarkis et al. (2021) interior-model grid to infer heavy element masses of 88±30, 114±30, and 84±21 M_Earth, and claim these are significantly higher than most reported heavy element masses for K-dwarf hot Jupiters.

Significance. If confirmed, these three objects add to the sparse sample of gas giants around mid-K dwarfs and provide some of the first heavy-element mass estimates in this regime. The orbital and planetary parameters appear reliable: the transits are confirmed by multiple ground-based light curves, speckle imaging rules out close stellar companions, and the RV semi-amplitudes are detected with high significance. However, the headline claim of 'significant heavy element mass' rests on a single interior-model family, and the comparison to literature is not quantitative. The paper is transparent about these limitations, but the central claim would be much stronger with a systematic error estimate.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 6.1] The heavy element masses (88±30, 114±30, 84±21 M⊕) are derived entirely from the Sarkis et al. (2021) model grid, which assumes the SCvH H/He equation of state and no central core. The authors acknowledge in the final paragraph of Section 6.1 that the more recent Chabrier & Debras (2021) EoS 'usually lead to smaller planetary radii and a lower amount of heavy elements', but they do not quantify this shift for their specific targets. The quoted uncertainties therefore reflect only statistical/model-prior scatter, not EoS systematics. Because the title and abstract make the large heavy-element mass the central result, the paper should either (i) recompute the heavy-element masses with the newer EoS or a simple scaling relation (e.g., following Müller et al. 2020), (ii) provide a quantitative estimate of how much the masses would decrease, or (iii) explicitly reframe the claim as conditional on the SCvH EoS. Without one of these, the headline is not robust.
  2. [Section 6.1] The statement that these heavy element masses are 'significantly higher than most reported heavy elements for K-dwarf Hot Jupiters' is not supported by any quantitative comparison. The references cited (Hartman et al. 2009, 2011; Grunblatt et al. 2017; Torres et al. 2008; Hacker et al. 2024; Delamer et al. 2024; Hellier et al. 2010) are not accompanied by a distribution, a table, or a statistical test. If this claim is a key conclusion, the authors should show where their three planets fall relative to the literature sample, ideally using the same interior-model grid for consistency. Otherwise 'significantly higher' is an unsupported superlative.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 4.4.1] The discussion of TOI-2969's rotation period is confusing: a 26.8-day period is seen in G_BP and G_RP, while a 16-day and a 19-day signal appear in the G band and in all three bands when including the window function; please clarify which period is adopted and why.
  2. [Section 5] No Gaussian Process model is used, but for TOI-2989 the WASP and Gaia data show a 30-day rotation signal; a brief justification of why activity is negligible for the RV fit would be useful.
  3. [Section 5.3] For TOI-5300 b, the RV semi-amplitude is 121±22 m/s and the residual RMS is 68 m/s, while the fitted jitter is consistent with zero; the discrepancy between residual RMS and jitter could indicate a slight model mismatch and should be commented on.
  4. [Table 5] Equilibrium temperatures are listed assuming a Bond albedo of zero; the authors might note that the planets would be cooler for non-zero albedo, although this does not affect the classification.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the planet confirmation and orbital characterization are derived from independent photometric and RV data, and the heavy-element masses are explicitly labeled model-dependent inferences from an external grid rather than predictions forced by construction.

full rationale

The paper's central confirmations (orbital periods, radii, masses) follow from joint Juliet fits to TESS, ground-based photometry, and CORALIE RVs, with no parameter fitted to a subset and then renamed as a prediction. The headline heavy-element masses are not observables nor fitted parameters; they are outputs of the externally published Sarkis et al. (2021) interior-model grid, whose assumptions (SCvH EoS, no core, water-like heavy elements) are stated in the text. The paper explicitly flags that the newer Chabrier & Debras (2021) EoS tends to give smaller radii and lower heavy-element masses, which is a model-dependence caveat, not a circular reduction: the masses are not equal to their inputs by construction. The brief Baraffe et al. (2008) radii comparison is presented as a consistency check using fractions derived later in the same section, not as an independent prediction, and it is not the basis of the reported masses. The only self-citations (e.g., Ulmer-Moll et al. 2022 for the M_Z = Z M_p conversion, and the Parc et al. 2024 catalog used in the comparison figure) are methodological or catalog references and are not load-bearing for the main claim. No uniqueness theorem, ansatz, or definitional equivalence is imported from the authors' prior work. Therefore the derivation chain is self-contained, with the usual caveat that interior-composition inferences inherit the assumptions of the chosen model family.

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

The paper introduces no new physical entities. The main free parameters are the dilution factor for TOI-2969 and the interior model parameters for the heavy element inference. The axioms are standard assumptions for exoplanet confirmation and interior modeling.

free parameters (3)
  • Dilution factor for TOI-2969 = 0.79 to 0.91 per light curve
    A dilution factor is fitted for the ground-based photometry and QLP light curves of TOI-2969 to account for contamination by the nearby 3.4 arcsecond companion. This is a free parameter in the joint fit, though it is constrained by the known companion brightness.
  • Planet interior heavy element fraction Z = 0.24 +/- 0.08, 0.12 +/- 0.03, 0.44 +/- 0.08
    The heavy element fraction is fitted using the Sarkis et al. (2021) interior model grid, with a uniform prior on internal luminosity. The choice of prior affects the derived luminosity and heating efficiency, though the authors state the heavy element fractions are compatible at 1 sigma with a log-uniform prior.
  • Internal luminosity (heating efficiency) = Not explicitly quoted
    A uniform prior is placed on the internal luminosity in the interior model fitting, which controls the amount of radius inflation. The paper notes the prior choice impacts the derived luminosity and heating efficiency.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The Sarkis et al. (2021) interior models, using the SCvH equation of state for H/He, no central core, and heavy elements modeled as water, are accurate enough to infer heavy element masses.
    The heavy element mass claim rests on these models. The paper notes that more recent equations of state, such as Chabrier and Debras (2021), typically lead to smaller radii and lower heavy element masses, which would weaken the headline claim.
  • domain assumption The CORALIE RV variations are caused by the transiting planet and not by stellar activity or an unseen companion.
    The paper checks for correlations with activity indicators and uses different spectral masks, but stellar activity can still mimic or contaminate RV signals. The large RV amplitudes (121 to 503 m/s) make this less likely, but it is still an assumption.
  • domain assumption The transiting objects are confirmed planets and not brown dwarfs or blended eclipsing binaries.
    This is supported by the measured masses and radii, the RV phase alignment with transits, and the ground-based imaging. However, the paper notes contamination in TOI-2969 and a possible stellar companion, though it argues the companion is unrelated.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Three Hot Jupiters transiting K-dwarfs with a significant heavy element mass." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VBN25T5N

@misc{pith2026250604923,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Three Hot Jupiters transiting K-dwarfs with a significant heavy element mass},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VBN25T5N}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.04923}
}
abstract

Albeit at a lower frequency than around hotter stars, short-period gas giants around low-mass stars ($T_\mathrm{eff} < 4965$ K) do exist, despite predictions from planetary population synthesis models that such systems should be exceedingly rare. By combining data from TESS and ground-based follow-up observations, we seek to confirm and characterize giant planets transiting K dwarfs, particularly mid/late K dwarfs. Photometric data were obtained from the TESS mission, supplemented by ground-based imaging- and photometric observations, as well as high-resolution spectroscopic data from the CORALIE spectrograph. Radial velocity (RV) measurements were analyzed to confirm the presence of companions. We report the confirmation and characterization of three giants transiting mid-K dwarfs. Within the TOI-2969 system, a giant planet of $1.16\pm 0.04\,M_\mathrm{Jup}$ and a radius of $1.10 \pm 0.08\,R_\mathrm{Jup}$ revolves around its K3V host in 1.82 days. The system of TOI-2989 contains a $3.0 \pm 0.2\,M_\mathrm{Jup}$ giant with a radius of $1.12 \pm 0.05\,R_\mathrm{Jup}$, which orbits its K4V host in 3.12 days. The K4V TOI-5300 hosts a giant of $0.6 \pm 0.1\,M_\mathrm{Jup}$ with a radius of $0.88 \pm 0.08\,R_\mathrm{Jup}$ and an orbital period of 2.3 days. The equilibrium temperatures of the companions range from 1001 to 1186 K, classifying them as Hot Jupiters. However, they do not present radius inflation. The estimated heavy element masses in their interior, inferred from the mass, radius, and evolutionary models, are $90 \pm 30\,M_\oplus$, $114 \pm 30\,M_\oplus$, and $84 \pm 21\,M_\oplus$, respectively. The heavy element masses are significantly higher than most reported heavy elements for K-dwarf Hot Jupiters. These mass characterizations contribute to the poorly explored population of massive companions around low-mass stars.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.04923 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. HR diagram of all Gaia DR3 nearby stars with a parallax π ≥ 10 mas, with the colours indicating log(g). The three stars presented in this work are overplotted and visible on the main sequence. The observation strategy of the program continuously evolves. Initially, we commence with two measurements for spectroscopic vetting. These initial observations serve to elim￾inate eclipsing binaries, identifiable by significa… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The phase-folded Gaia photometric data. Coloured points indicate the Gaia different wave bands. The black points are the TESS binned data, with a binning of 1/1000 of the period. The errors of the Gaia data have been corrected as suggested in (Evans et al. 2023) by adding an error in quadrature as a func￾tion of the magnitude. The long-period signals above 0.01% FAP have been subtracted and the errors are scaled by … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Overlay of TOI-2969’s orbital solution with CORALIE [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: TOI-5300’s orbital solution superimposed on CORALIE [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: TOI-2989’s orbital solution alongside its CORALIE RV [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The phase-folded TESS light curve of TOI-2989. The Juliet fit is shown as a black line, while TESS data is dis￾played in light blue in the bottom panel. The upper panels fea￾ture ground-based follow-up photometric observations from El Sauce and TRAPPIST-South. Markers …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The phase-folded TESS light curve of TOI-2969. The Juliet fit is shown as a black line, while TESS data is dis￾played in light blue in the bottom panel. The upper panels feature ground-based follow-up photometric observations from LCO￾SAAO, LCO-CTIO, TRAPPIST-South, El…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The phase-folded TESS light curve for TOI-5300. The Juliet model fit is depicted as a black line, with the TESS data shown in light blue in the lower panel. The upper panels include ground-based photometric observations from LCO-CTIO, LCO￾HAL, TRAPPIST-South, and Brier…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Overview of the presented companions (red encircled) compared to known planets from the PlanetS catalog (extended from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_9.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

119 extracted references · 69 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2011, , 526, A63

    Alibert, Y., Mordasini, C., & Benz, W. 2011, , 526, A63

    2011

  2. [2]

    F., & Barceló Forteza, S

    Aller, A., Lillo-Box, J., Jones, D., Miranda, L. F., & Barceló Forteza, S. 2020, , 635, A128

    2020

  3. [3]

    2008, , 482, 315

    Baraffe, I., Chabrier, G., & Barman, T. 2008, , 482, 315

    2008

  4. [4]

    2013, , 549, A109

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

    2013

  5. [5]

    2024, , 689, A52

    Borsato, L., Degen, D., Leleu, A., et al. 2024, , 689, A52

    2024

  6. [6]

    Boss, A. P. 1997, Science, 276, 1836

    1997

  7. [7]

    L., Knutson, H

    Bryan, M. L., Knutson, H. A., Howard, A. W., et al. 2016, , 821, 89

    2016

  8. [8]

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

    Bryant, E. M., Bayliss, D., & Van Eylen, V. 2023, , 521, 3663

    2023

Show all 119 references
  1. [9]

    2021, , 656, A72

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

    2021

  2. [10]

    A., Tenenbaum, P., Twicken, J

    Caldwell, D. A., Tenenbaum, P., Twicken, J. D., et al. 2020, Research Notes of the AAS, 4, 201

    2020

  3. [11]

    & Debras, F

    Chabrier, G. & Debras, F. 2021, , 917, 4

    2021

  4. [12]

    M., West, R

    Collier Cameron, A., Wilson, D. M., West, R. G., et al. 2007, , 380, 1230

    2007

  5. [13]

    2019, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts , Vol

    Collins, K. 2019, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts , Vol. 233, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts \#233, 140.05

    2019

  6. [14]

    2020, , 633, A76

    Cretignier, M., Dumusque, X., Allart, R., Pepe, F., & Lovis, C. 2020, , 633, A76

    2020

  7. [15]

    I., et al

    Delamer, M., Kanodia, S., Cañas, C. I., et al. 2024, \, Letters, 962, L22

    2024

  8. [16]

    1997, ESA Special Publication, 1200

    ESA . 1997, ESA Special Publication, 1200

    1997

  9. [17]

    & Jordán, A

    Espinoza, N. & Jordán, A. 2015, , 450, 1879

    2015

  10. [18]

    2019, , 490, 2262

    Espinoza, N., Kossakowski, D., & Brahm, R. 2019, , 490, 2262

    2019

  11. [19]

    W., Eyer, L., Busso, G., et al

    Evans, D. W., Eyer, L., Busso, G., et al. 2023, , 674, A4

    2023

  12. [20]

    2023, , 674, A13

    Eyer, L., Audard, M., Holl, B., et al. 2023, , 674, A13

    2023

  13. [21]

    Fischer, D. A. & Valenti, J. 2005, , 622, 1102

    2005

  14. [22]

    2016, The Journal of Open Source Software, 1, 24

    Foreman-Mackey, D. 2016, The Journal of Open Source Software, 1, 24

    2016

  15. [23]

    J., Dawson, R

    Fortney, J. J., Dawson, R. I., & Komacek, T. D. 2021, : Planets, 126, e2020JE006629

    2021

  16. [24]

    J., Marley, M

    Fortney, J. J., Marley, M. S., & Barnes, J. W. 2007, , 659, 1661

    2007

  17. [25]

    J., Saumon, D., Marley, M

    Fortney, J. J., Saumon, D., Marley, M. S., Lodders, K., & Freedman, R. S. 2006, , 642, 495

    2006

  18. [26]

    Gaia Collaboration , Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023, , 674, A1

    2023

  19. [27]

    X., Wang, S., et al

    Gan, T., Wang, S. X., Wang, S., et al. 2023, , 165, 17

    2023

  20. [28]

    J., Timmermans, M., Pozuelos, F

    Garcia, L. J., Timmermans, M., Pozuelos, F. J., et al. 2022, , 509, 4817

    2022

  21. [29]

    2011, in European Physical Journal Web of Conferences, Vol

    Gillon , M., Jehin , E., Magain , P., et al. 2011, in European Physical Journal Web of Conferences, Vol. 11, European Physical Journal Web of Conferences, 06002

    2011

  22. [30]

    J., et al

    Grieves , N., Bouchy , F., Armstrong , D. J., et al. 2025, , 693, A144

    2025

  23. [31]

    K., Huber, D., Gaidos, E., et al

    Grunblatt, S. K., Huber, D., Gaidos, E., et al. 2017, , 154, 254

    2017

  24. [32]

    M., Seager, S., Huang, C

    Guerrero, N. M., Seager, S., Huang, C. X., et al. 2021, , 254, 39

    2021

  25. [33]

    C., Pont, F., et al

    Guillot, T., Santos, N. C., Pont, F., et al. 2006, , 453, L21

    2006

  26. [34]

    F., Armstrong, D

    Hacker, A., Díaz, R. F., Armstrong, D. J., et al. 2024, , 532, 1612

    2024

  27. [35]

    D., Bakos, G

    Hartman, J. D., Bakos, G. \'A ., Sato, B., et al. 2011, , 726, 52

    2011

  28. [36]

    D., Bakos, G

    Hartman, J. D., Bakos, G. \'A ., Torres, G., et al. 2009, , 706, 785

    2009

  29. [37]

    D., Jordán, A., Bayliss, D., et al

    Hartman, J. D., Jordán, A., Bayliss, D., et al. 2020, , 159, 173

    2020

  30. [38]

    R., Collier Cameron, A., et al

    Hellier, C., Anderson, D. R., Collier Cameron, A., et al. 2010, , 723, L60

    2010

  31. [39]

    X., Quinn, S

    Huang, C. X., Quinn, S. N., Vanderburg, A., et al. 2020 a , \, Letters, 892, L7

    2020

  32. [40]

    X., Vanderburg, A., Pál, A., et al

    Huang, C. X., Vanderburg, A., Pál, A., et al. 2020 b , Research Notes of the AAS, 4, 206

    2020

  33. [41]

    2013, , 553, A6

    Husser, T.-O., Wende-von Berg, S., Dreizler, S., et al. 2013, , 553, A6

    2013

  34. [42]

    1981, , 99, 126

    Hut, P. 1981, , 99, 126

    1981

  35. [43]

    & Lin, D

    Ida, S. & Lin, D. N. C. 2004, , 616, 567

    2004

  36. [44]

    & Lin, D

    Ida, S. & Lin, D. N. C. 2005, , 626, 1045

    2005

  37. [45]

    2011, The Messenger, 145, 2

    Jehin, E., Gillon, M., Queloz, D., et al. 2011, The Messenger, 145, 2

    2011

  38. [46]

    Jenkins, J. M. 2002, , 575, 493

    2002

  39. [47]

    M., Chandrasekaran , H., McCauliff , S

    Jenkins , J. M., Chandrasekaran , H., McCauliff , S. D., et al. 2010, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 7740, Software and Cyberinfrastructure for Astronomy, ed. N. M. Radziwill & A. Bridger , 77400D

    2010

  40. [48]

    M., Tenenbaum , P., Seader , S., et al

    Jenkins , J. M., Tenenbaum , P., Seader , S., et al. 2020, Kepler Data Processing Handbook: Transiting Planet Search , Kepler Science Document KSCI-19081-003, id. 9. Edited by Jon M. Jenkins

    2020

  41. [49]

    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

    2016

  42. [50]

    2013, Tapir: A web interface for transit/eclipse observability , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1306.007

    Jensen , E. 2013, Tapir: A web interface for transit/eclipse observability , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1306.007

    2013

  43. [51]

    D., Bayliss, D., et al

    Jordán, A., Hartman, J. D., Bayliss, D., et al. 2022, , 163, 125

    2022

  44. [52]

    I., et al

    Kanodia, S., Libby-Roberts, J., Cañas, C. I., et al. 2022, , 164, 81

    2022

  45. [53]

    M.-R., Bean, J

    Kempton, E. M.-R., Bean, J. L., Louie, D. R., et al. 2018, , 130, 114401

    2018

  46. [54]

    Kipping, D. M. 2013 a , , 435, 2152

    2013

  47. [55]

    Kipping, D. M. 2013 b , : Letters, 434, L51

    2013

  48. [56]

    Kipping, D. M. 2014, , 440, 2164

    2014

  49. [57]

    2002, , 391, 369

    Kovács, G., Zucker, S., & Mazeh, T. 2002, , 391, 369

    2002

  50. [58]

    & Daylan, T

    Kunimoto, M. & Daylan, T. 2021, in Posters from the TESS Science Conference II ( TSC2 ), 62

    2021

  51. [59]

    Kurucz , R. L. 1993, SYNTHE spectrum synthesis programs and line data

    1993

  52. [60]

    Laughlin, G., Bodenheimer, P., & Adams, F. C. 2004, , 612, L73

    2004

  53. [61]

    Lightkurve Collaboration , Cardoso, J. V. d. M., Hedges, C., et al. 2018, Astrophysics Source Code Library, ascl:1812.013

    2018

  54. [62]

    V., El-Badry, K., Hodžić, V

    Martin, D. V., El-Badry, K., Hodžić, V. K., et al. 2021, , 507, 4132

    2021

  55. [63]

    Maxted, P. F. L., Anderson, D. R., Collier Cameron, A., et al. 2011, , 123, 547

    2011

  56. [64]

    2011, ArXiv e-prints, arXiv:1109.2497

    Mayor , M., Marmier , M., Lovis , C., et al. 2011, ArXiv e-prints, arXiv:1109.2497

    2011 arXiv

  57. [65]

    2017, , 600, A10

    Mollière, P., van Boekel, R., Bouwman, J., et al. 2017, , 600, A10

    2017

  58. [66]

    2015, , 813, 47

    Mollière, P., van Boekel, R., Dullemond, C., Henning, T., & Mordasini, C. 2015, , 813, 47

    2015

  59. [67]

    2012 a , , 541, A97

    Mordasini, C., Alibert, Y., Benz, W., Klahr, H., & Henning, T. 2012 a , , 541, A97

    2012

  60. [68]

    2012 b , , 547, A111

    Mordasini, C., Alibert, Y., Klahr, H., & Henning, T. 2012 b , , 547, A111

    2012

  61. [69]

    2020, , 903, 147

    Müller, S., Ben-Yami, M., & Helled, R. 2020, , 903, 147

    2020

  62. [70]

    Nissen , P. E. 2004, in Origin and Evolution of the Elements, ed. A. McWilliam & M. Rauch , 154

    2004

  63. [71]

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

    Otegi, J. F., Bouchy, F., & Helled, R. 2020, , 634, A43

    2020

  64. [72]

    G., Collins , K

    Paegert , M., Stassun , K. G., Collins , K. A., et al. 2021, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2108.04778

    2021 arXiv

  65. [73]

    2024, , 688, A59

    Parc, L., Bouchy, F., Venturini, J., Dorn, C., & Helled, R. 2024, , 688, A59

    2024

  66. [74]

    K., Winters, J

    Pass, E. K., Winters, J. G., Charbonneau, D., et al. 2023, , 166, 11

    2023

  67. [75]

    Pecaut, M. J. & Mamajek, E. E. 2013, , 208, 9

    2013

  68. [76]

    2022, , 664, A65

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

    2022

  69. [77]

    2006, , 118, 1407

    Pollacco, D., Skillen, I., Cameron, A., et al. 2006, , 118, 1407

    2006

  70. [78]

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

    Pollack, J. B., Hubickyj, O., Bodenheimer, P., et al. 1996, Icarus, 124, 62

    1996

  71. [79]

    2016, , 152, 41

    Prša, A., Harmanec, P., Torres, G., et al. 2016, , 152, 41

    2016

  72. [80]

    2001, The Messenger, 105, 1

    Queloz, D., Mayor, M., Udry, S., et al. 2001, The Messenger, 105, 1

    2001

  73. [81]

    2023, , 670, A139

    Ribas, I., Reiners, A., Zechmeister, M., et al. 2023, , 670, A139

    2023

  74. [82]

    R., Winn, J

    Ricker, G. R., Winn, J. N., Vanderspek, R., et al. 2014, JATIS, 1, 014003

    2014

  75. [83]

    W., et al

    Riello, M., De Angeli, F., Evans, D. W., et al. 2021, , 649, A3

    2021

  76. [84]

    S., Lysenko, P

    Safonov, B. S., Lysenko, P. A., & Dodin, A. V. 2017, Astronomy Letters, 43, 344

    2017

  77. [85]

    C., Israelian, G., & Mayor, M

    Santos, N. C., Israelian, G., & Mayor, M. 2004, , 415, 1153

    2004

  78. [86]

    C., Mayor, M., Naef, D., et al

    Santos, N. C., Mayor, M., Naef, D., et al. 2002, , 392, 215

    2002

  79. [87]

    C., Sousa, S

    Santos, N. C., Sousa, S. G., Mortier, A., et al. 2013, , 556, A150

    2013

  80. [88]

    D., & Mollière, P

    Sarkis, P., Mordasini, C., Henning, T., Marleau, G. D., & Mollière, P. 2021, , 645, A79

    2021

  81. [89]

    Saumon, D., Chabrier, G., & van Horn, H. M. 1995, , 99, 713

    1995

  82. [90]

    J., Finkbeiner, D

    Schlegel, D. J., Finkbeiner, D. P., & Davis, M. 1998, , 500, 525

    1998

  83. [91]

    & Mallen‐Ornelas, G

    Seager, S. & Mallen‐Ornelas, G. 2003, , 585, 1038

    2003

  84. [92]

    2018, , 616, A76

    Sestovic, M., Demory, B.-O., & Queloz, D. 2018, , 616, A76

    2018

  85. [93]

    C., Stumpe, M

    Smith, J. C., Stumpe, M. C., Van Cleve, J. E., et al. 2012, , 124, 1000

    2012

  86. [94]

    Sneden, C. A. 1973, PhD Thesis , University of Texas, Austin

    1973

  87. [95]

    Sousa , S. G. 2014, in Determination of Atmospheric Parameters of B, ed. E. Niemczura , B. Smalley , & W. Pych , 297--310

    2014

  88. [96]

    G., Adibekyan, V., Delgado-Mena, E., et al

    Sousa, S. G., Adibekyan, V., Delgado-Mena, E., et al. 2021, , 656, A53

    2021

  89. [97]

    G., Santos, N

    Sousa, S. G., Santos, N. C., Adibekyan, V., Delgado-Mena, E., & Israelian, G. 2015, , 577, A67

    2015

  90. [98]

    G., Santos, N

    Sousa, S. G., Santos, N. C., Israelian, G., Mayor, M., & Monteiro, M. J. P. F. G. 2007, , 469, 783

    2007

  91. [99]

    Speagle, J. S. 2020, , 493, 3132

    2020

  92. [100]

    G., Collins, K

    Stassun, K. G., Collins, K. A., & Gaudi, B. S. 2017, , 153, 136

    2017

  93. [101]

    G., Corsaro, E., Pepper, J

    Stassun, K. G., Corsaro, E., Pepper, J. A., & Gaudi, B. S. 2018, , 155, 22

    2018

  94. [102]

    G., Oelkers, R

    Stassun, K. G., Oelkers, R. J., Paegert, M., et al. 2019, , 158, 138

    2019

  95. [103]

    Stassun, K. G. & Torres, G. 2016, , 152, 180

    2016

  96. [104]

    Stassun, K. G. & Torres, G. 2021, \, Letters, 907, L33

    2021

  97. [105]

    C., Smith, J

    Stumpe, M. C., Smith, J. C., Catanzarite, J. H., et al. 2014, , 126, 100

    2014

  98. [106]

    C., Smith, J

    Stumpe, M. C., Smith, J. C., Van Cleve, J. E., et al. 2012, , 124, 985

    2012

  99. [107]

    W., Matsumura, S., & Rasio, F

    Thommes, E. W., Matsumura, S., & Rasio, F. A. 2008, Science, 321, 814

    2008

  100. [108]

    Thompson, C. V. 1990, Annual Review of Materials Research, 20, 245

    1990

  101. [109]

    2018, , 130, 035002

    Tokovinin, A. 2018, , 130, 035002

    2018

  102. [110]

    2010, The \, Review, 18, 67

    Torres, G., Andersen, J., & Giménez, A. 2010, The \, Review, 18, 67

    2010

  103. [111]

    N., & Holman, M

    Torres, G., Winn, J. N., & Holman, M. J. 2008, , 677, 1324

    2008

  104. [112]

    G., Adibekyan, V

    Tsantaki, M., Sousa, S. G., Adibekyan, V. Z., et al. 2013, , 555, A150

    2013

  105. [113]

    D., Catanzarite, J

    Twicken, J. D., Catanzarite, J. H., Clarke, B. D., et al. 2018, , 130, 064502

    2018

  106. [114]

    2022, , 666, A46

    Ulmer-Moll, S., Lendl, M., Gill, S., et al. 2022, , 666, A46

    2022

  107. [115]

    I., Jenkins, J

    Vines, J. I., Jenkins, J. S., Acton, J. S., et al. 2019, , 489, 4125

    2019

  108. [116]

    Vorobyov, E. I. & Basu, S. 2008, , 676, L139

    2008

  109. [117]

    T., Marcy, G

    Wright, J. T., Marcy, G. W., Howard, A. W., et al. 2012, , 753, 160

    2012

  110. [118]

    , " * 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.sent...

  111. [119]

    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 gl...

Pith tools

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