Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Re-analysis of 10 Hot-Jupiter Atmospheres with disequilibrium chemistry retrieval

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 ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Using a disequilibrium kinetic chemistry model in retrievals materially changes the inferred metallicities and C/O ratios of hot Jupiters, moving planets between formation reservoirs at nearly unchanged fit quality.

desk verdict First real-data demonstration that kinetic disequilibrium retrievals run on HST/WFC3 spectra, plus a robust prior-sensitivity warning; the stronger claim that disequilibrium chemistry significantly shifts retrieved metallicities and C/O ratios is not statistically supported. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.12806 v1 pith:5JO3UEPW submitted 2025-06-15 astro-ph.EP

Deborah Bardet , Quentin Changeat , Olivia Venot , Emilie Panek This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords hotJupiteratmospheresatmosphericretrievaldisequilibriumchemistryphotochemistrymetallicitycarbon-to-oxygenratioHSTWFC3spectroscopyBayesianmodelcomparison
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 tries to establish that the chemical model used in a retrieval changes what HST observations say about a hot Jupiter. Reanalyzing 10 eclipse and 4 transit spectra with the TauREx-FRECKLL coupled model, which replaces free or thermochemical-equilibrium abundances with a full kinetic disequilibrium network, the authors find that retrieved metallicities and C/O ratios shift substantially, sometimes moving a planet from subsolar to supersolar with nearly no change in Bayesian evidence. The consequence is that population-level conclusions about planet formation drawn from simple-chemistry retrievals are not robust until the chemistry assumption is tested. The paper also argues that adding TiO and VO helps only two planets, that transit and eclipse temperature profiles agree in deep layers but not upper layers, and that HST's narrow wavelength coverage leaves C/O difficult to constrain, motivating JWST-era disequilibrium retrievals.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is FRECKLL, a chemical-kinetics model of 108 H/He/C/O/N species (up to two carbon atoms), 1906 reactions and 55 photodissociations, integrated by the TauREx 3.1 plugin until steady state starting from thermochemical equilibrium, with a constant-with-altitude eddy diffusion coefficient Kzz as a free parameter. It converts the retrieval parameters, metallicity Z, C/O ratio, Kzz and the 5-point temperature profile, into physically consistent abundance profiles during the Bayesian fit, so the forward model includes vertical mixing and photochemistry instead of assuming equilibrium or constant-with-altitude abundances.

What would settle it

Take WASP-74 b, whose retrieved metallicity jumps from log(Z) = -2.1 (free chemistry) to log(Z) = +1.74 (FRECKLL) with nearly equal Bayesian evidence, and measure its atmospheric abundances independently, for example through high-resolution ground-based cross-correlation of CO and H2O lines; a direct abundance near solar would indicate that the disequilibrium retrieval's large shift is an artifact of the kinetic network.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that a disequilibrium chemical kinetic model in spectral retrieval materially alters the inferred atmospheric parameters of hot Jupiters, and that conclusions drawn from HST observations depend first on retrieval parameters, priors and the chemical model, and only secondarily on the data reduction. The paper demonstrates this with WASP-74 b: free-chemistry retrieval gives a subsolar metallicity of log(Z) = -2.1 and C/O = 0.7, while the FRECKLL disequilibrium retrieval gives a supersolar metallicity of log(Z) = +1.74 and C/O = 0.47, with Bayesian evidence essentially unchanged (202.8 versus 203.29). Such shifts reassign planets between formation reservoirs and make the choice of chemistry model part of the measurement.

Load-bearing premise

The argument rests on FRECKLL's 108-species H/He/C/O/N kinetic network with up to two carbon atoms and a constant-with-altitude eddy diffusion coefficient being a faithful description of these ten atmospheres; if that network or the constant-Kzz treatment misrepresents the real chemistry, the metallicity and C/O shifts are model artifacts, not atmospheric properties.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim is right, metallicity and C/O inferred from HST are not stable observables: the same spectra can place a planet in opposite metallicity regimes depending on the chemistry assumption, so formation-reservoir assignments based on simple chemistry need revisiting.
  • The near-equal Bayesian evidence for the WASP-74 b solutions means fit quality alone cannot tell which chemical model is correct, so independent abundance constraints are required to break the degeneracy.
  • Temperature profiles from transit and eclipse retrievals become mutually consistent below roughly 10^4 Pa when a flexible 5-point thermal profile is used, but the upper atmosphere retains an approximately 1000 K bias, so 1D transit retrievals still misstate upper-level temperatures.
  • TiO and VO are not needed to fit most of the sample, but for WASP-77 A b the addition of TiO narrows the thermal constraints and changes the retrieved metallicity from supersolar to subsolar, so refractory opacities matter in specific cases.
  • JWST's broader spectral coverage is the natural next step because HST WFC3's narrow band cannot break the C/O degeneracies that the disequilibrium model exposes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An implicit consequence is that the bimodal metallicity posteriors, which the paper handles by splitting priors, may indicate missing model flexibility (such as morning-evening limb differences in transit) rather than two real atmospheric states.
  • A testable extension is to run the same pipeline on simulated JWST spectra with known input metallicity, C/O and Kzz, quantifying how much of the HST-era scatter is systematic model bias rather than astrophysical signal.
  • If the pattern holds, HST-era population metallicity distributions built from free-chemistry retrievals should be re-derived with a kinetic model before being used to constrain core-accretion and migration scenarios.
  • Independent dynamical constraints on Kzz from 3D circulation models would shrink the eddy-diffusion prior and test whether the retrieved disequilibrium chemistry states are physically plausible.
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 paper re-analyzes HST WFC3 eclipse and transit spectra of ten hot-Jupiter atmospheres using the TauREx 3.1 retrieval framework coupled with the FRECKLL disequilibrium chemistry model. The authors run a systematic set of retrievals (FRECKLL-only, FRECKLL+TiO, FRECKLL+VO, FRECKLL+TiO+VO), including tests with restricted metallicity priors for four bimodal cases, and compare the results with previous free-chemistry retrievals. They report that the disequilibrium chemistry assumption changes retrieved metallicities and C/O ratios substantially for several planets, that TiO/VO additions improve the fit for only two planets, that eclipse and transit temperature profiles are partly consistent at depth, and that retrieved parameters are highly sensitive to priors and data reduction. The paper concludes that HST-based conclusions depend on the retrieval model and priors, and that disequilibrium chemistry should be included in future JWST analyses.

Significance. If the robust parts of the analysis hold, the paper is a useful first demonstration of full kinetic disequilibrium retrievals on a sample of real HST spectra, with transparent reporting of broad posteriors and a public release of retrieval outputs. The strongest and most defensible result is the demonstration that retrieved parameters—especially metallicity—depend strongly on the chemistry model and priors, as shown by the WASP-43 b prior-restriction tests (Figures 5-8). However, the headline claim that disequilibrium chemistry 'significantly altered' retrieved metallicities and C/O ratios is not statistically supported by the evidence differences, and the abstract's comparison against 'equilibrium models' is not what the paper actually does. The value of the study is therefore primarily cautionary rather than a new measurement of hot-Jupiter compositions.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Section 3] The abstract states that the disequilibrium approach 'significantly altered retrieved metallicity and C/O ratios compared to equilibrium models', but the comparisons in Section 3 are made against the free-chemistry retrievals of Changeat et al. (2022), not equilibrium models. More importantly, the evidence differences do not support 'significantly altered': for WASP-74 b, the flagship example, the Bayesian evidence changes from 202.8 (free) to 203.29 (FRECKLL-only), a difference of only 0.5, far below the paper's own threshold of Δln(E)>5 for model preference, and the FRECKLL-only posterior log(Z)=1.74 (+0.98/-3.29) is nearly unconstrained across the prior. The paper should be revised to frame the robust conclusion as model/prior dependence rather than a measured chemical shift.
  2. [Section 2.2 and Appendix C] For the four planets with bimodal metallicity distributions (HAT-P-2 b, HD 189733 b, WASP-19 b, WASP-74 b), the metallicity prior is split post hoc into two sub-ranges and separate retrievals are run with independent evidences. This procedure does not produce a valid posterior probability for the two modes because the prior over the two sub-ranges is not specified, and the comparison of evidences between the log(Z)>0 and log(Z)<0 runs does not account for the different prior volumes. The reported 'preferred' metallicities, such as WASP-74 b's log(Z)=1.74, are therefore not robust inferences; the authors should either use a mixture prior within a single nested-sampling run or clearly present the full-prior posterior without claiming a preferred mode.
  3. [Section 3 and Table C.2] The text states that both TrES-3 b and WASP-77 A b benefit from TiO addition with Δln(E)>5, but Table C.2 gives Δln(E)=117.12-111.21=5.91 for TrES-3 b and Δln(E)=199.5-195.31=4.19 for WASP-77 A b. The WASP-77 A b improvement is below the paper's stated threshold, yet the paper uses the FRECKLL-TiO result as the nominal fit and discusses it as a detected improvement. This internal inconsistency should be corrected, and the threshold policy for selecting best models should be applied consistently.
  4. [Section 3 and Appendix D] The claimed consistency between eclipse and transit temperature profiles in deeper atmospheric layers rests on a small number of planets and is contradicted by the strong model dependence of the transit retrievals themselves. For HD 209458 b and WASP-43 b, the isothermal and 5-point temperature profile runs give diametrically opposite C/O ratio outcomes, and for HD 209458 b the metallicity changes from log(Z)=+1.54 (5-point) to -1.66 (isothermal) (Table D.1). These are not reconciled by the FRECKLL model, so the conclusion that disequilibrium chemistry reconciles eclipse and transit views should be strongly qualified or removed.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'compared to equilibrium models' is inaccurate because the paper's comparisons are against free-chemistry retrievals from Changeat et al. (2022); this should be corrected to 'compared to free-chemistry models' or 'compared to other chemistry assumptions'.
  2. [Section 3, paragraph on WASP-77 A b] The sentence 'resulting of a ln(E) > 199' is ungrammatical; it should read 'resulting in ln(E) > 199', and the exact evidence difference should be reported rather than the rounded value.
  3. [Figure captions C.1-C.9 and Figure 1 caption] The notation for the restricted-metallicity runs is inconsistent: the text uses 'FRECKLL, log(Z)<0' while Figure 1's caption uses 'FRECKLL-log(Z)<0'; please unify the notation throughout.
  4. [Table C.2] Table C.2 is extremely wide and difficult to read; splitting it into per-planet tables or using a landscape layout would improve readability.
  5. [Section 2.3 and Section 4] The sample is explicitly preselected to be valid for the FRECKLL C0-C2 network (no thermal inversion, no TiO/VO signatures, Teq<2500 K), so the population-level statements in Section 4 should carry an explicit caveat that the conclusions do not extend to hot Jupiters outside this regime.
  6. [Appendix A, Table A.1] The column headers in Table A.1 use inconsistent labels ('FRECKLL' vs 'FRECKLL TiO' without dashes); the table should match the notation used in the main text.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the study is an empirical retrieval comparison whose conclusions rest on real HST data and externally developed forward models, not on definitions or fitted parameters relabeled as predictions.

full rationale

The paper's core result is an empirical comparison of Bayesian retrievals: the same HST/WFC3 spectra are inverted under different chemistry assumptions (free chemistry from Changeat et al. 2022 and Edwards et al. 2023 versus the FRECKLL kinetic model), and the retrieved metallicities, C/O ratios, and thermal profiles are compared. No fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction, and no quantity used as an input is also presented as an output. The FRECKLL network (Venot et al. 2020a) and the TauREx-FRECKLL plugin (Al-Refaie et al. 2024) come from prior work and are not fitted to the data analyzed here; self-citations are present but not load-bearing for the central demonstration, which is the model dependence of the retrieved parameters. The sample is deliberately chosen to match the FRECKLL chemical regime based on earlier retrievals, but this is an explicit sample-selection criterion, not a circular derivation. The skeptical concern that the WASP-74 b metallicity shift has near-equal Bayesian evidence (Delta ln E approximately 0.5, below the paper's own threshold of 5) is a legitimate criticism of the strength of the claim, but it concerns statistical robustness and over-interpretation, not circular reasoning. Similarly, the discrepancy between the abstract's wording ('compared to equilibrium models') and the body's actual comparison to free-chemistry runs is an accuracy/consistency issue, not a self-referential argument. Accordingly, no circular step can be quoted and exhibited, and the honest finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. Its added complexity comes from the kinetic network and Kzz parameter; all free parameters are standard retrieval parameters, though the bimodal prior split is a study-specific modeling choice.

free parameters (8)
  • Metallicity (Z, log scale) = Planet-dependent, e.g., log(Z)=1.73 (HAT-P-2b), -1.05 (HD 189733b) from Table C.2
    Controls abundances of all elements heavier than He in the FRECKLL/TauREx model; retrieved from eclipse/transit spectra with log-uniform prior 1e-2 to 1e3 solar.
  • C/O ratio = Planet-dependent, e.g., 0.52 (HAT-P-2b), 0.54 (HD 189733b) from Table C.2
    Sets carbon abundance relative to oxygen; weakly constrained by HST data as the paper notes.
  • Kzz (eddy diffusion coefficient) = Not tabulated in text; prior log 1e6 to 1e14 cm2/s
    Controls vertical mixing and quenching in FRECKLL; constant with altitude in this study.
  • Planet radius R_planet (transit retrievals) = e.g., 1.197 R_J for HD 189733b (Table D.1)
    Radius at 10 bar reference pressure; free parameter in transmission retrievals.
  • Temperature points (5-point or isothermal) = Each with uniform prior 500-3900 K
    Discretized T-P profile; the number of points is chosen by hand and tested for sensitivity in Appendix A.
  • TiO abundance (when included) = e.g., log VMR -6.65 for WASP-77 A b (Table A.1)
    Constant-with-altitude VMR for TiO when added to FRECKLL runs; free parameter.
  • VO abundance (when included) = e.g., log VMR -8.93 for WASP-77 A b (Table C.2)
    Constant-with-altitude VMR for VO; free parameter in FRECKLL-VO runs.
  • Metallicity prior sub-ranges for bimodal cases = [1e-2:1e1] and [1e1:1e3] solar
    Post-hoc split of the metallicity prior for HAT-P-2b, HD 189733b, WASP-19b, WASP-74b to resolve bimodality; a hand-chosen modeling choice.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption The Venot et al. (2020a) kinetic network (108 species, 1906 reactions, 55 photodissociations, C0-C2, H/He/C/O/N only) is a sufficient description of disequilibrium chemistry for these planets.
    Invoked in Section 2.2; if incorrect, the retrieved chemical parameters are model artifacts.
  • domain assumption Kzz is constant with altitude for each atmosphere.
    Section 2.2 states Kzz is given as a constant value.
  • domain assumption The kinetic integration initial state is thermochemical equilibrium composition.
    Section 2.2: FRECKLL initializes at thermochemical equilibrium.
  • domain assumption Host star UV spectra can be approximated by the closest F/G/K template or a scaled solar spectrum (Appendix B).
    Photodissociation rates depend on this; affects chemical abundances.
  • domain assumption A plane-parallel 1D atmosphere with 80 levels from 10^1 to 10^-3 bar and 20 layers per decade adequately represents the observable atmosphere.
    Standard TauREx setup; Section 2.2.
  • domain assumption The 5-point heuristic T-P profile with fixed pressure nodes (or isothermal profile) is a sufficient temperature parametrization.
    Sensitivity tested in Appendix A; results depend on this choice.
  • domain assumption The molecular opacity line lists (Exomol, HITEMP, HITRAN) are accurate in the WFC3 G141 band.
    Section 2.3; taken from prior literature.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Re-analysis of 10 Hot-Jupiter Atmospheres with disequilibrium chemistry retrieval." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5JO3UEPW

@misc{pith2026250612806,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Re-analysis of 10 Hot-Jupiter Atmospheres with disequilibrium chemistry retrieval},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5JO3UEPW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.12806}
}
read the original abstract

Constraining the chemical structure of exoplanetary atmospheres is pivotal for interpreting spectroscopic data and understanding planetary evolution. Traditional retrieval methods often assume thermochemical equilibrium or free profiles, which may fail to capture disequilibrium processes like photodissociation and vertical mixing. This study leverages the TauREx 3.1 retrieval framework coupled with FRECKLL, a disequilibrium chemistry model, to address these challenges. The study aims to (1) assess the impact of disequilibrium chemistry on constraining metallicity and C/O ratios; (2) evaluate the role of refractory species (TiO and VO) in spectral retrievals; (3) explore consistency between transit and eclipse observations for temperature and chemical profiles; and (4) determine the effects of retrieval priors and data reduction methods. Ten hot-Jupiter atmospheres were reanalyzed using Hubble Space Telescope (HST) WFC3 data in eclipse and transit. The TauREx-FRECKLL model incorporated disequilibrium chemistry calculations with a Bayesian framework to infer atmospheric properties. The disequilibrium approach significantly altered retrieved metallicity and C/O ratios compared to equilibrium models, impacting planet formation insights. Retrievals reconciled transit and eclipse temperature profiles in deeper atmospheric layers but not in upper layers. Results were highly dependent on spectral resolution and retrieval priors, emphasizing limitations of HST data and the need for broader spectral coverage from instruments like JWST. This study demonstrates the feasibility and importance of incorporating disequilibrium chemistry in atmospheric retrievals, highlighting its potential for advancing our understanding of exoplanetary atmospheres with next-generation telescopes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.12806 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FRECKLL-only fit spectra of all the planets considered in this study – except for HD 189733 b (FRECKLL-log(Z)<0, for which re￾stricting the metallicity prior to the subsolar region improved ln(E) by 30 compared to the reference “FRECKLL-only” retrieval) and WASP￾77 A b (FRECKLL-TiO retrieval, for which adding TiO really improve the fitting spectrum) – for the HST observations in eclipse. Individual analyses and addi… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Eclipse retrievals: (Left panel) Metallicity (O/H) and C/O retrieved from the FRECKLL-only retrievals, except for HD 189733 b (FRECKLL-log(Z)<0, for which restricting the metallicity prior to the subsolar region improved ln(E) by 30 compared to the reference “FRECKLL-only” retrieval) and WASP-77 A b (FRECKLL-TiO retrieval, for which adding TiO really improves the fitted spectrum). C/O re￾mains very difficult to retr… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Transit retrievals: Metallicity (O/H) and C/O retrieved from the FRECKLL-isothermal retrievals. C/O remains very difficult to be re￾trieved because HST observations lack sensitivity to carbon-bearing species. metallicity toward solar (for WASP-4 b) to strongly supersolar (WASP-74 b, HAT-P-2 b and WASP-19 b), impacting as well their C/O ratio. For the most extreme example, WASP-74 b displayed a subsolar metallicity o… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Detailed retrieval results for WASP-43 b: Upper row presents (from left to right) the fitting spectra for each retrieval configuration tested through this population study, the retrieved temperature profile, as well as the chemical structure of the planet (only for the…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Detailed retrieval results for WASP-43 b using data reduced by Kreidberg et al. (2014b): Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Detailed retrieval results for WASP-43 b with a restrictive metallicity (log(Z)) prior: Upper row presents (from left to right) the fitting spectra for each retrieval configuration tested through this population study, the retrieved temperature profile, as well as the …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Detailed retrieval results for WASP-43 b using data reduced by Kreidberg et al. (2014b) with a restrictive metallicity (log(Z)) prior: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID 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. The majority of hot Jupiters formed beyond the water ice line

    astro-ph.EP 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    At least six of nine hot Jupiters are consistent with forming beyond the water ice line, implying inward migration with dynamical scattering for many of them.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

95 extracted references · 75 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  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]

    Abel , M., Frommhold , L., Li , X., & Hunt , K. L. C. 2011, J. Chemical Phys., 134, 076101

    2011

  4. [4]

    Abel , M., Frommhold , L., Li , X., & Hunt , K. L. C. 2012, J. Chemical Phys., 136, 044319

    2012

  5. [5]

    J., Wittenmyer , R

    Addison , B., Wright , D. J., Wittenmyer , R. A., et al. 2019, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 131, 115003

    2019

  6. [6]

    R., Furtenbacher , T., Tennyson , J., Yurchenko , S

    Al Derzi , A. R., Furtenbacher , T., Tennyson , J., Yurchenko , S. N., & Cs \'a sz \'a r , A. G. 2015, J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transfer, 161, 117

    2015

  7. [7]

    F., Changeat , Q., Waldmann , I

    Al-Refaie , A. F., Changeat , Q., Waldmann , I. P., & Tinetti , G. 2021, Astrophysical Journal, 917, 37

    2021

  8. [8]

    F., Venot , O., Changeat , Q., & Edwards , B

    Al-Refaie , A. F., Venot , O., Changeat , Q., & Edwards , B. 2024, Astrophysical Journal, 967, 132

    2024

Show all 95 references
  1. [9]

    F., Yachmenev , A., Tennyson , J., & Yurchenko , S

    Al-Refaie , A. F., Yachmenev , A., Tennyson , J., & Yurchenko , S. N. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 448, 1704

    2015

  2. [10]

    J., Strange , J

    Barber , R. J., Strange , J. K., Hill , C., et al. 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 437, 1828

    2014

  3. [11]

    K., Aigrain , S., Irwin , P

    Barstow , J. K., Aigrain , S., Irwin , P. G. J., & Sing , D. K. 2017, Astrophysical Journal, 834, 50

    2017

  4. [12]

    J., Hill , C., Yurchenko , S

    Barton , E. J., Hill , C., Yurchenko , S. N., et al. 2017, J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transfer, 187, 453

    2017

  5. [13]

    M., Rowe , J

    Batalha , N. M., Rowe , J. F., Bryson , S. T., et al. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement, 204, 24

    2013

  6. [14]

    & Pollack , J

    Bodenheimer , P. & Pollack , J. B. 1986, Icarus, 67, 391

    1986

  7. [15]

    M., Fischer , D

    Brewer , J. M., Fischer , D. A., & Madhusudhan , N. 2017, Astron. Jour., 153, 83

    2017

  8. [16]

    N., Byrne, G

    Brown, P. N., Byrne, G. D., & Hindmarsh, A. C. 1989, SIAM Journal on Scientific and Statistical Computing, 10, 1038

    1989

  9. [17]

    2014, Astron

    Buchner , J., Georgakakis , A., Nandra , K., et al. 2014, Astron. Astrophys., 564, A125

    2014

  10. [18]

    F., Edwards , B., Waldmann , I

    Changeat , Q., Al-Refaie , A. F., Edwards , B., Waldmann , I. P., & Tinetti , G. 2021, Astrophysical Journal, 913, 73

    2021

  11. [19]

    F., et al

    Changeat, Q., Edwards, B., Al-Refaie, A. F., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 260, 3

    2022

  12. [20]

    P., & Tinetti , G

    Changeat , Q., Edwards , B., Waldmann , I. P., & Tinetti , G. 2019, Astrophysical Journal, 886, 39

    2019

  13. [21]

    L., Rocchetto , M., Yurchenko , S

    Chubb , K. L., Rocchetto , M., Yurchenko , S. N., et al. 2021, Astron. Astrophys., 646, A21

    2021

  14. [22]

    L., Tennyson , J., & Yurchenko , S

    Chubb , K. L., Tennyson , J., & Yurchenko , S. N. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 493, 1531

    2020

  15. [23]

    A., Yurchenko , S

    Coles , P. A., Yurchenko , S. N., & Tennyson , J. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 490, 4638

    2019

  16. [24]

    2020, Astron

    Cort \'e s-Zuleta , P., Rojo , P., Wang , S., et al. 2020, Astron. Astrophys., 636, A98

    2020

  17. [25]

    Cox, A. N. 2015, Allen’s astrophysical quantities (Springer)

    2015

  18. [26]

    L., H \'e brard , E., et al

    Drummond , B., Carter , A. L., H \'e brard , E., et al. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 486, 1123

    2019

  19. [27]

    2024, Nature, 625, 51

    Dyrek , A., Min , M., Decin , L., et al. 2024, Nature, 625, 51

    2024

  20. [28]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement, 269, 31

    Edwards , B., Changeat , Q., Tsiaras , A., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement, 269, 31

    2023

  21. [29]

    Eistrup , C., Walsh , C., & van Dishoeck , E. F. 2018, Astron. Astrophys., 613, A14

    2018

  22. [30]

    2017, Astron

    Esposito , M., Covino , E., Desidera , S., et al. 2017, Astron. Astrophys., 601, A53

    2017

  23. [31]

    R., & Roudier , G

    Estrela , R., Swain , M. R., & Roudier , G. M. 2022, Astrophys. Jour. Lett., 941, L5

    2022

  24. [32]

    & Hobson , M

    Feroz , F. & Hobson , M. P. 2008, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 384, 449

    2008

  25. [33]

    P., & Bridges, M

    Feroz, F., Hobson, M. P., & Bridges, M. 2009, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 398, 1601–1614

    2009

  26. [34]

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

    Feroz , F., Hobson , M. P., Cameron , E., & Pettitt , A. N. 2019, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 2, 10

    2019

  27. [35]

    N., Gustafsson , M., & Orton , G

    Fletcher , L. N., Gustafsson , M., & Orton , G. S. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement, 235, 24

    2018

  28. [36]

    S., Wilzewski , J

    Gordon , I., Rothman , L. S., Wilzewski , J. S., et al. 2016, in AAS/Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 48, AAS/Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting Abstracts \#48, 421.13

    2016

  29. [37]

    Hebb , L., Collier-Cameron , A., Triaud , A. H. M. J., et al. 2010, Astrophysical Journal, 708, 224

    2010

  30. [38]

    N., & Tennyson , J

    Hill , C., Yurchenko , S. N., & Tennyson , J. 2013, Icarus, 226, 1673

    2013

  31. [39]

    M., D \'e sert , J

    Huitson , C. M., D \'e sert , J. M., Bean , J. L., et al. 2017, Astron. Jour., 154, 95

    2017

  32. [40]

    2000, Astrophysical Journal, 537, 1013

    Ikoma , M., Nakazawa , K., & Emori , H. 2000, Astrophysical Journal, 537, 1013

    2000

  33. [41]

    2023, Nature, 614, 649

    JWST Transiting Exoplanet Community Early Release Science Team , Ahrer , E.-M., Alderson , L., et al. 2023, Nature, 614, 649

    2023

  34. [42]

    Kass, R. E. & Raftery, A. E. 1995, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 773

    1995

  35. [43]

    & Min , M

    Kawashima , Y. & Min , M. 2021, Astron. Astrophys., 656, A90

    2021

  36. [44]

    L., D \'e sert , J.-M., et al

    Kreidberg , L., Bean , J. L., D \'e sert , J.-M., et al. 2014 a , Nature, 505, 69

    2014

  37. [45]

    L., D \'e sert , J.-M., et al

    Kreidberg , L., Bean , J. L., D \'e sert , J.-M., et al. 2014 b , Astrophys. Jour. Lett., 793, L27

    2014

  38. [46]

    N., & Irwin, P

    Lee, J.-M., Fletcher, L. N., & Irwin, P. G. J. 2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 420, 170

    2012

  39. [47]

    E., Rothman , L

    Li , G., Gordon , I. E., Rothman , L. S., et al. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement, 216, 15

    2015

  40. [48]

    R., Wolf , A

    Line , M. R., Wolf , A. S., Zhang , X., et al. 2013, Astrophysical Journal, 775, 137

    2013

  41. [49]

    2010, in Astrophysics and Space Science Proceedings, Vol

    Lodders , K. 2010, in Astrophysics and Space Science Proceedings, Vol. 16, Principles and Perspectives in Cosmochemistry, ed. A. Goswami & B. E. Reddy , 379

    2010

  42. [50]

    D., Rustamkulov , Z., Sing , D

    Lothringer , J. D., Rustamkulov , Z., Sing , D. K., et al. 2021, Astrophysical Journal, 914, 12

    2021

  43. [51]

    J., Goyal, J

    MacDonald, R. J., Goyal, J. M., & Lewis, N. K. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 893, L43

    2020

  44. [52]

    I., & Hu , Y

    Madhusudhan , N., Ag \'u ndez , M., Moses , J. I., & Hu , Y. 2016, Space Science Reviews, 205, 285

    2016

  45. [53]

    & Seager , S

    Madhusudhan , N. & Seager , S. 2009, Astrophysical Journal, 707, 24

    2009

  46. [54]

    2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 485, 5168

    Mancini , L., Southworth , J., Molli \`e re , P., et al. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 485, 5168

    2019

  47. [55]

    P., Yachmenev , A., Tennyson , J., & Yurchenko , S

    Mant , B. P., Yachmenev , A., Tennyson , J., & Yurchenko , S. N. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 478, 3220

    2018

  48. [56]

    K., Masseron , T., Hoeijmakers , H

    McKemmish , L. K., Masseron , T., Hoeijmakers , H. J., et al. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 488, 2836

    2019

  49. [57]

    K., Yurchenko , S

    McKemmish , L. K., Yurchenko , S. N., & Tennyson , J. 2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 463, 771

    2016

  50. [58]

    W., Chubb , K., Helling , C., & Kawashima , Y

    Min , M., Ormel , C. W., Chubb , K., Helling , C., & Kawashima , Y. 2020, Astron. Astrophys., 642, A28

    2020

  51. [59]

    1980, Progress of Theoretical Physics, 64, 544

    Mizuno , H. 1980, Progress of Theoretical Physics, 64, 544

    1980

  52. [60]

    2019, Astrophysical Journal, 883, 194

    Molaverdikhani , K., Henning , T., & Molli \`e re , P. 2019, Astrophysical Journal, 883, 194

    2019

  53. [61]

    2020, Astron

    Molli \`e re , P., Stolker , T., Lacour , S., et al. 2020, Astron. Astrophys., 640, A131

    2020

  54. [62]

    2016, Astrophysical Journal, 832, 41

    Mordasini , C., van Boekel , R., Molli \`e re , P., Henning , T., & Benneke , B. 2016, Astrophysical Journal, 832, 41

    2016

  55. [63]

    V., Knutson , H., Line , M., et al

    Morley , C. V., Knutson , H., Line , M., et al. 2017, Astron. Jour., 153, 86

    2017

  56. [64]

    I., Madhusudhan , N., Visscher , C., & Freedman , R

    Moses , J. I., Madhusudhan , N., Visscher , C., & Freedman , R. S. 2013, Astrophysical Journal, 763, 25

    2013

  57. [65]

    I., Marley , M

    Moses , J. I., Marley , M. S., Zahnle , K., et al. 2016, Astrophysical Journal, 829, 66

    2016

  58. [66]

    I., Visscher , C., Fortney , J

    Moses , J. I., Visscher , C., Fortney , J. J., et al. 2011, Astrophysical Journal, 737, 15

    2011

  59. [67]

    I., Murray-Clay , R., & Bergin , E

    \"O berg , K. I., Murray-Clay , R., & Bergin , E. A. 2011, Astrophys. Jour. Lett., 743, L16

    2011

  60. [68]

    T., Charbonneau , D., Bakos , G

    O'Donovan , F. T., Charbonneau , D., Bakos , G. \'A ., et al. 2007, Astrophys. Jour. Lett., 663, L37

    2007

  61. [69]

    L., Kyuberis , A

    Polyansky , O. L., Kyuberis , A. A., Zobov , N. F., et al. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 480, 2597

    2018

  62. [70]

    2014, Astrophysical Journal, 785, 148

    Ranjan , S., Charbonneau , D., D \'e sert , J.-M., et al. 2014, Astrophysical Journal, 785, 148

    2014

  63. [71]

    P., Venot , O., Lagage , P

    Rocchetto , M., Waldmann , I. P., Venot , O., Lagage , P. O., & Tinetti , G. 2016, Astrophysical Journal, 833, 120

    2016

  64. [72]

    Rothman , L. S. & Gordon , I. E. 2014, in 13th International HITRAN Conference, 49

    2014

  65. [73]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.15505

    Saba , A., Thompson , A., Hou Yip , K., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.15505

    2024 arXiv

  66. [74]

    C., Czesla , S., & Schmitt , J

    Salz , M., Schneider , P. C., Czesla , S., & Schmitt , J. H. M. M. 2015, Astron. Astrophys., 576, A42

    2015

  67. [75]

    2024, Astron

    Schleich , S., Boro Saikia , S., Changeat , Q., et al. 2024, Astron. Astrophys., 690, A336

    2024

  68. [76]

    K., Fortney , J

    Sing , D. K., Fortney , J. J., Nikolov , N., et al. 2016, Nature, 529, 59

    2016

  69. [77]

    2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 417, 2166

    Southworth , J. 2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 417, 2166

    2011

  70. [78]

    & McKemmish , L

    Syme , A.-M. & McKemmish , L. K. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 505, 4383

    2021

  71. [79]

    N., Al-Refaie , A

    Tennyson , J., Yurchenko , S. N., Al-Refaie , A. F., et al. 2016, Journal of Molecular Spectroscopy, 327, 73

    2016

  72. [80]

    N., et al

    Thuillier , G., Floyd , L., Woods , T. N., et al. 2004, Advances in Space Research, 34, 256

    2004

  73. [81]

    Triaud , A. H. M. J., Collier Cameron , A., Queloz , D., et al. 2010, Astron. Astrophys., 524, A25

    2010

  74. [82]

    Tsai , S.-M., Lee , E. K. H., Powell , D., et al. 2023, Nature, 617, 483

    2023

  75. [83]

    2021, Astrophysical Journal, 923, 264

    Tsai , S.-M., Malik , M., Kitzmann , D., et al. 2021, Astrophysical Journal, 923, 264

    2021

  76. [84]

    2016, Astrophysics Source Code Library, ascl

    Tsiaras, A., Waldmann, I., Rocchetto, M., et al. 2016, Astrophysics Source Code Library, ascl

    2016

  77. [85]

    P., Rocchetto , M., et al

    Tsiaras , A., Waldmann , I. P., Rocchetto , M., et al. 2016, Astrophysical Journal, 832, 202

    2016

  78. [86]

    P., Zingales, T., et al

    Tsiaras, A., Waldmann, I. P., Zingales, T., et al. 2018, Astron. Jour., 155, 156

    2018

  79. [87]

    2021, Astrophysical Journal, 909, 40

    Turrini , D., Schisano , E., Fonte , S., et al. 2021, Astrophysical Journal, 909, 40

    2021

  80. [88]

    2014, Astron

    Venot , O., Ag \'u ndez , M., Selsis , F., Tessenyi , M., & Iro , N. 2014, Astron. Astrophys., 562, A51

    2014

  81. [89]

    2020 a , Astron

    Venot , O., Cavali \'e , T., Bounaceur , R., et al. 2020 a , Astron. Astrophys., 634, A78

    2020

  82. [90]

    2012, Astron

    Venot , O., H \'e brard , E., Ag \'u ndez , M., et al. 2012, Astron. Astrophys., 546, A43

    2012

  83. [91]

    2020 b , Astrophysical Journal, 890, 176

    Venot , O., Parmentier , V., Blecic , J., et al. 2020 b , Astrophysical Journal, 890, 176

    2020

  84. [92]

    P., Tinetti , G., Rocchetto , M., et al

    Waldmann , I. P., Tinetti , G., Rocchetto , M., et al. 2015, Astrophysical Journal, 802, 107

    2015

  85. [93]

    B., Johnson , S

    White , W. B., Johnson , S. M., & Dantzig , G. B. 1958, J. Chemical Phys., 28, 751

    1958

  86. [94]

    N., Mellor , T

    Yurchenko , S. N., Mellor , T. M., Freedman , R. S., & Tennyson , J. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 496, 5282

    2020

  87. [95]

    Yurchenko , S. N. & Tennyson , J. 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 440, 1649

    2014

Pith tools

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