Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 7 minor 169 references

Investigating Transit Timing Variations in the Ultra-short Period Exoplanet WASP-19b

T0 review · 4 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read WASP-19b's transit timing variations are best explained by apsidal precession of a slightly eccentric orbit, not by orbital decay or a second planet.

desk verdict Useful extended-baseline TTV dataset and a statistically tidy precession fit, but the paper's own Applegate discussion leaves the interpretation genuinely ambiguous. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.16306 v1 pith:MMOO5QE3 submitted 2025-06-19 astro-ph.EP

Shraddha Biswas , Ing-Guey Jiang , Li-Chin Yeh , Hsin-Min Liu , Kaviya Parthasarathy , Devesh P. Sariya , D. Bisht , Mohit Singh Bisht
show 1 more author
A. Raj
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords exoplanetshotJupiterstransittimingvariationsapsidalprecessionorbitaldecaystarspotsWASP-19bTESS
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

The paper assembles 252 high-quality mid-transit times for the ultra-short-period hot Jupiter WASP-19b spanning about 14 years and asks what causes the observed transit timing variations. It argues that the timing wobble is most consistently explained by apsidal precession, a slow rotation of the planet's elliptical orbit, rather than by a shrinking orbit or a hidden companion planet. If the interpretation is right, the planet's transit clock is being modulated by a geometric reorientation of its orbit with a precession period of roughly 18.6 years, not by tidal inspiral or another body. The paper also finds that stellar magnetic activity could contribute a comparable timing signal, so the result matters for how future transit-timing studies separate genuine dynamical effects from activity-induced noise.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the apsidal precession timing model, which describes a planet on a constant-period, slightly eccentric orbit whose argument of periastron rotates uniformly. The model's timing formula, $T_{\rm ap}(E) = T_{\rm ap0} + P_s E - \frac{e P_s}{\pi(1 - d\omega/dE/2\pi)}\cos(\omega_0 + E\,d\omega/dE)$, turns the slow rotation of the orbital ellipse into a sinusoidal observed-minus-calculated (O-C) curve whose amplitude is set by $e P_s/\pi$. The paper fits this five-parameter model with an MCMC sampler and compares it against the linear ephemeris and the quadratic orbital-decay model using reduced chi-squared, AIC, and BIC, taking the large BIC difference as decisive evidence for precession.

What would settle it

A decisive test is to obtain high-precision secondary-eclipse timing measurements over the next several years: apsidal precession predicts that eclipse timing drift is anti-correlated with transit timing drift, whereas orbital decay predicts that both drift in the same direction, so the observed sign of that correlation would settle which model is correct.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the transit timing variations of WASP-19b over a 14-year baseline are best described by apsidal precession of a slightly eccentric orbit. Fitting the apsidal precession model gives an eccentricity of $e = 0.0058$, a periastron precession rate of $d\omega/dE = 0.0008$ rad/epoch, and a precession period of about 18.6 years, with a reduced chi-squared of $\chi^2_{\rm red} = 1.19$ and a BIC improvement of $\Delta\mathrm{BIC} > 10$ over both the constant-period and orbital-decay models. The orbital-decay model yields a period derivative of $dP/dE = (-0.28 \pm 0.10)\times10^{-10}$, corresponding to $\dot{P} \sim -1.1 \pm 0.40$ ms/yr, which the paper regards as too weak to claim tidal decay. A search for a companion planet found no convincing periodic signal: the highest Lomb-Scargle peak has a false-alarm probability of 22.5%, and the best sinusoidal companion model requires an unphysically high frequency that oscillates faster than the typical spacing between transits. The paper concludes that no second planet is needed and that the observed TTVs are dominated by apsidal precession, with the Applegate mechanism driven by stellar magnetic activity as a possible additional contributor.

Load-bearing premise

The entire analysis rests on the assumption that the 252 retained mid-transit times are free of starspot-induced time shifts, since WASP-19 is an active star and stellar activity alone can produce a timing signal comparable to the roughly 17-second variation attributed to precession.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If apsidal precession is correct, WASP-19b's orbit is slightly eccentric with $e \approx 0.006$, and its transit times will continue to follow a sinusoidal O-C pattern with a period near 18.6 years.
  • The measured period derivative of about $-1.1$ ms/yr implies an inspiral timescale near 60 Myr, meaning tidal orbital decay is too slow to explain the timing variations and previous faster-decay claims are not supported by this dataset.
  • No second planet is required to explain the TTVs, since the periodogram's strongest peak is consistent with noise and the sinusoidal companion model is not physically viable.
  • Measuring secondary-eclipse times would discriminate between the two surviving models: apsidal precession predicts an anti-correlated drift between transit and eclipse timings, whereas orbital decay predicts both drift in the same direction.
  • Stellar activity, through the Applegate mechanism, could mimic part of the timing signal, so continued high-precision photometric monitoring is needed to separate activity from the precession contribution.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the precession interpretation holds, WASP-19b joins the small set of hot Jupiters where a slightly eccentric orbit is maintained against tidal circularization, possibly by an unseen dynamical driver or by an internal structure that responds strongly to tides.
  • The inferred planetary Love number of about $k_p = 1.21 \pm 0.56$, roughly twice Jupiter's value, suggests an unusually deformable interior; if confirmed by independent methods, this would constrain the planet's internal density profile, but it could also indicate that unmodeled stellar activity is inflating the precession signal.
  • The same data-processing template, with explicit starspot rejection and a three-model comparison, could be applied to other ultra-short-period hot Jupiters where orbital decay and apsidal precession are disputed, providing a uniform way to separate geometric from tidal timing signals.
  • A clean testable extension: track the TTV amplitude and phase across at least one full stellar activity cycle; if the Applegate mechanism dominates, the timing signal should modulate on the activity-cycle timescale rather than remaining a coherent precession sinusoid.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper assembles 252 mid-transit times of WASP-19b spanning about 14 years from TESS, ETD, ExoClock, and the literature, after excluding 52 starspot-affected light curves. It fits a linear ephemeris, an orbital-decay model, and an apsidal-precession model with eccentricity e, argument of periastron omega0, precession rate domega/dE, and a free jitter term. The apsidal-precession model is reported as preferred, with e = 0.0058, domega/dE = 0.000725 rad/epoch, a precession period of about 18.6 yr, chi^2_red = 1.19, and DeltaBIC > 10 over the other two models. A Lomb-Scargle search of the linear residuals is used to argue against a planetary companion, and a sinusoidal model is rejected as physically unviable. The paper then derives Q'_* ~ 2.6e6 and k_p ~ 1.21, and it discusses the Applegate mechanism and the Shklovskii effect as alternative explanations.

Significance. If the apsidal-precession interpretation were secure, this would be a valuable contribution to a currently disputed system, providing a homogeneous long-baseline TTV dataset, machine-readable tables, and detailed MCMC diagnostics. The paper is careful in its light-curve fitting and in reporting convergence diagnostics, and it is transparent about the three timing models considered. However, the central attribution is not established as claimed: the Applegate mechanism is discussed but is not included in the quantitative model comparison, and the paper's own Section 6.3.1 states that the transit-timing variation is most likely caused by the Applegate mechanism or stellar magnetic activity. Because the activity alternative is amplitude-compatible with the fitted precession signal, the manuscript currently overstates the strength of the evidence for apsidal precession.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract; §5.3; §6.3.1] The principal claim that apsidal precession 'more consistently explains' the observed TTVs is not supported by the model comparison, because the Applegate mechanism is discussed only qualitatively and is omitted from Table 8. The paper states at the end of §6.3.1 that 'the variation in transit times is most likely caused by Applegate mechanism or the magnetic activity of the host star,' which directly contradicts the abstract's preference for apsidal precession. Scaling the paper's own §6.3.1 estimate (delta_t ~ 27.5 s for a 50-yr activity cycle) to the fitted precession timescale of 18.6 yr via the T_mod^{-3/2} scaling gives delta_t ~ 120 s, comparable to the precession-model amplitude of about 2 min. Since the DeltaBIC comparison in Table 8 includes only the linear, orbital-decay, and apsidal-precession models, it does not discriminate against a stellar-activity origin. The authors should either include an activity model in the quantitative comparison or substantially soften the central attribution.
  2. [§5.4] The companion search contains a direct internal contradiction. The text reports a false alarm probability of 22.5% for the highest Lomb-Scargle peak and then states that this value is 'significantly below' the 1% and 5% thresholds; 22.5% is far above both thresholds. As written, the conclusion that a planetary companion can be ruled out is not supported. The correct reading, that the peak is not significant, should be stated explicitly, and the consequences for the companion-exclusion claim should be reassessed.
  3. [§5.3; Table 8] The statistical preference for apsidal precession rests on a fit in which the jitter term was initially fixed and then freed, with the freed-jitter version adopted because it improves chi^2_red, AIC, and BIC. A model-selection statement based on a noise parameter that was tuned to improve the fit is not a clean test of the precession signal. In addition, omega0 is formally insignificant (-0.71 with 1-sigma uncertainties +1.17/-0.62), and the text itself notes strong correlations among e, omega0, and domega/dE. The paper should report the fixed-jitter fit, the covariance or corner plots for the precession parameters, and ideally a likelihood-ratio test of the precession term that does not rely on the jitter prior.
  4. [§4; §5.2.2] The exclusion of 52 starspot-affected light curves is based on manual visual inspection for a positive bump near mid-transit, and the paper provides no quantitative test of how residual spot contamination affects the fitted TTV amplitude. WASP-19 is an active star (P_rot ~ 10.5 d), and spot-induced timing offsets can be comparable to the roughly 17 s signal attributed to precession. The robustness of the precession amplitude and model ranking should be tested, for example by refitting without the excluded curves, by comparing mid-times fitted with and without spot models, or by injecting simulated spot anomalies. Without such a test, the claim that the 252-point dataset is free of activity-induced timing noise is not established.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Abstract; §3; §7] The number of fitted light curves is inconsistent: the abstract says 204 transit light curves, Section 3 lists 116 + 65 + 24 + 12 + 4 + 2 = 223, and Section 7 says 222. Please reconcile these counts.
  2. [§5.2; §5.2.2] The significance of dP/dE is given as 2.8 sigma in §5.2 and as 2.6 sigma in §5.2.2; since 0.28/0.10 = 2.8, the later value appears to be a typo.
  3. [§5.3; Table 8] The precession rate is quoted as 0.0008 rad/epoch in the text of §5.3 and as 0.000725 rad/epoch in Table 8; please use one consistent value.
  4. [§5.1] The phrase that the ephemeris is '5.6 sigma times more precise' is not meaningful; this should be expressed as a ratio of uncertainties.
  5. [§5.4] The frequency search range used for the Lomb-Scargle and sinusoidal fits (0.02-0.10 cycles/epoch) does not cover the apsidal-precession frequency of about 1.16e-4 cycles/epoch, so the frequency analysis cannot directly test the precession interpretation.
  6. [§6.3.2] 'Romer effect' should be 'Rømer effect'.
  7. [References] The Bernabò et al. (2024) reference appears twice in the reference list.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Ancillary physical quantities Q'_*, Tremain, T_shift, and kp are algebraic rescalings of the fitted dP/dE and dω/dE; the 'consistency with residual rms' check is tautological, while the central apsidal-versus-decay model comparison rests on independent data.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 6.1-6.1.2 (Equations 5-7)]
    "By substituting the derived value of ˙P (see Section 5.2.1) and the above values in Equation 5, we have inferred the modified stellar tidal quality factor to be ∼ 2.6 × 106 for WASP-19b ... we calculated the value of Tremain of WASP-19b to be ∼ 8.8Myr ... the expected shift in the transit arrival time of WASP-19b after 15 yr (T = 15 yr) is found to be T_shift ∼ 56.56 s. This value of T_shift is consistent with the rms of the obtained timing residuals."

    Eq. (5) gives Q'_* = -(27/2π)(Mp/M*)(a/R*)^-5(1/Pdot). Pdot is the orbital-decay model's fitted parameter from the same 252 transit times (Table 8). Eq. (6) then gives Tremain = (1/48) Q'_* n (a/R*)^5 (M*/Mp) = -(27/(48 P Pdot)), and Eq. (7) with dn/dT = -(2π/P^2) Pdot gives Tshift = -T^2 Pdot/(2P). Thus Tremain and Tshift are scaled versions of the fitted Pdot, not independent predictions. The 'consistent with the rms of the obtained timing residuals' check is guaranteed, because the quadratic fit was adjusted to those residuals; the agreement carries no confirmatory information.

  2. self definitional [Section 6.2 (Equation 9)]
    "To estimate the value of planetary love number, kp, we adopted the following equation of Patra et al. (2017): dω/dE = 15πkp (M∗/Mp)(Rp/a)^5, (9) where the value dω/dE is taken from Table 8 ... Our estimated value of the planetary Love number, kp = 1.21 ± 0.56 ... Since the apsidal precession rate is directly proportional to the Love number kp ... this enhanced deformability results in a faster apsidal precession"

    Eq. (9), dω/dE = 15π kp (M*/Mp)(Rp/a)^5, is solved for kp after inserting the fitted dω/dE from Table 8 and fixed literature masses/radii. Hence kp is the precession-rate fit multiplied by constants; it contains no new datum. The paper then explains the fitted fast precession by the resulting high kp ('higher Love number ... results in a faster apsidal precession'), which is exactly Eq. (9) restated. The derivation of kp is therefore self-definitional: the physical 'explanation' is the input fit expressed in different units.

full rationale

The paper's central model-selection claim (apsidal precession preferred over linear and orbital-decay models, ΔBIC > 10) is not circular: it compares three timing models fitted to 252 mid-transit times assembled from TESS, ETD, ExoClock, and literature, and the apsidal-precession equation is attributed to Gimenez & Bastero (1995) via Biswas et al. (2024), so the self-citation does not supply the model's content. The derived physical quantities, however, are re-parameterizations of the fits. Q'_* is obtained by inserting the fitted dP/dE (equivalently Pdot) into Eq. (5); Tremain (Eq. 6) and Tshift (Eq. 7) are then algebraic rescalings of the same fitted Pdot, so the statement that Tshift is 'consistent with the rms of the obtained timing residuals' is a tautology rather than a validation. Similarly, kp is defined by Eq. (9) as a constant multiple of the fitted dω/dE, so reporting kp = 1.21 and then invoking 'higher kp -> faster precession' as an explanation restates the fitted precession rate in new units. These are genuine but ancillary circularities; the abstract's main preference is still an independent model-comparison result. Separately, Section 6.3.1 states that the TTVs are 'most likely caused by Applegate mechanism', which conflicts with the abstract's apsidal-precession claim; that is a consistency or correctness concern, not circularity, and does not increase the score.

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

The central fit relies on standard transit and TTV machinery. The two non-standard inputs are the manual starspot exclusion (ad-hoc assumption) and the freed jitter parameter. All derived physical quantities (Q'_*, k_p, T_shift, remaining lifetime) are algebraic transformations of the fitted dP/dE and dω/dE, so they carry no independent evidential weight beyond the timing fit itself.

free parameters (5)
  • Orbital decay rate dP/dE = -0.28e-10 days/epoch
    Fitted in the quadratic ephemeris model (Section 5.2); drives Q'_* and T_shift estimates.
  • Eccentricity e = 0.0058
    Free parameter in apsidal precession fit (Section 5.3); central to the precession signal.
  • Precession rate dω/dE = 0.0008 rad/epoch
    Free parameter in apsidal precession fit; yields precession period 18.64 yr and k_p.
  • Jitter = 0.0002 days
    Added as free parameter to lower BIC/AIC (Section 5.3); affects reported uncertainties.
  • Argument of periastron ω0 = -0.71 rad
    Free parameter, statistically insignificant, showing strong correlations in the fit.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Mandel-Agol transit model and Carter-Winn wavelet likelihood correctly describe the light curves
    Used in TAP for all transit fits (Section 3).
  • domain assumption Apsidal precession model of Giménez & Bastero (1995) applies to WASP-19b
    Equation 3 assumes constant sidereal period and uniform precession of ω; invoked in Section 5.3.
  • standard math GLS periodogram and bootstrap FAP are appropriate for unevenly sampled timing residuals
    Used in Section 5.4 to search for periodic companion signals.
  • ad hoc to paper Excluded starspot-affected light curves are the only significant stellar activity contamination
    Manual visual identification in Section 4; the remaining TTV signal is interpreted as dynamical rather than activity-driven, despite the Applegate mechanism's predicted amplitude being comparable.
  • standard math Equations from Patra et al. (2017), Ragozzine & Wolf (2009), Goldreich & Soter (1966) relate fitted timing parameters to physical quantities Q'_*, k_p
    Used in Sections 5.2.2, 6.1, 6.2 to convert fitted dP/dt and dω/dE into physical parameters.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Investigating Transit Timing Variations in the Ultra-short Period Exoplanet WASP-19b." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MMOO5QE3

@misc{pith2026250616306,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Investigating Transit Timing Variations in the Ultra-short Period Exoplanet WASP-19b},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MMOO5QE3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.16306}
}
read the original abstract

In this study, we present a comprehensive analysis of transit timing variations (TTVs) in the ultra-short-period gas giant WASP-19b, which orbits a G-type main-sequence star. Our analysis is based on a dataset comprising 204 transit light curves obtained from the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS), the Exoplanet Transit Database (ETD), and the ExoClock project, supplemented by 18 publicly available light curves. Mid-transit times were extracted from these data, and an additional 98 mid-transit times compiled from the literature were incorporated, resulting in a combined dataset spanning approximately 14 years. After excluding light curves significantly impacted by stellar activity, such as starspot anomalies, the final dataset consisted of 252 high-quality mid-transit times. Initial inspection of the transit timing residuals using an apsidal precession model suggested the possible presence of an additional planetary companion. However, subsequent frequency analysis and sinusoidal model fitting indicate that the observed TTVs are more consistently explained by apsidal precession of WASP-19b's orbit. We also considered alternative mechanisms, including the Applegate mechanism and the Shklovskii effect. Our findings suggest that stellar magnetic activity, potentially linked to the Applegate mechanism, may also contribute to the observed timing variations. To further constrain the origin of the TTVs and assess the contributions of these mechanisms, continued high-precision photometric monitoring of the WASP-19 system is strongly recommended.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.16306 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. O-C diagram for analysing 252 mid-transit times of WASP-19b. The blue filled square show the data from Abe et al. (2013), the red filled squares are from Adams et al. (2024), the green filled square is from Anderson et al. (2010), the black filled circle is from Anderson et al. (2013), the brown filled asterisks are from Bernab`o et al. (2024), the magenta filled circles are from Cort´es-Zuleta et al. (2020), the ye… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Generalized Lomb-Scargle periodogram computed for the 252 timing residuals of WASP-19b. The purple dashed line indicates the FAP level of the highest peak. The other dashed lines from top to bottom indicate the threshold levels of FAP = 1% and 5%, respectively.. obtained using the bootstrap analysis of the highest peak in the periodogram as explained above. These values served as starting points for model fitting, d… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The O-C diagram as a function of epoch along with the best-fit sinusoidal variability. 6.1. Derivation of the Stellar Tidal Quality Factor The discovery of hot Jupiters with tight orbits has reignited interest in understanding energy dissipation in stars through tidal interactions (Dawson & Johnson 2018), particularly with regard to the tidal quality factor, Q∗, which quantifies the efficiency with which a celestial… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Residual Plot for Apsidal Precession Model tidal forces. It can be represented in combination with the potential Love number of the second order: (Ogilvie & Lin 2007), which takes into account the internal density stratification of the object, and is defined from the t…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

169 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

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

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    2022, , 163, 77, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac416d

    A-thano , N., Jiang , I.-G., Awiphan , S., et al. 2022, , 163, 77, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac416d

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac416d 2022

  4. [4]

    2023, , 166, 223, 10.3847/1538-3881/acfeea

    A-thano , N., Awiphan , S., Jiang , I.-G., et al. 2023, , 166, 223, 10.3847/1538-3881/acfeea

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/acfeea 2023

  5. [5]

    2013, , 553, A49, 10.1051/0004-6361/201220351

    Abe , L., Gon c alves , I., Agabi , A., et al. 2013, , 553, A49, 10.1051/0004-6361/201220351

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201220351 2013

  6. [6]

    R., Jackson , B., Sickafoose , A

    Adams , E. R., Jackson , B., Sickafoose , A. A., et al. 2024, , 5, 163, 10.3847/PSJ/ad3e80

    doi:10.3847/psj/ad3e80 2024

  7. [7]

    2005, , 359, 567, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.08922.x

    Agol , E., Steffen , J., Sari , R., & Clarkson , W. 2005, , 359, 567, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.08922.x

    arXiv 2005

  8. [8]

    1974, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19, 716

    Akaike , H. 1974, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19, 716

    1974

Show all 169 references
  1. [9]

    Akinsanmi , B., Barros , S. C. C., Lendl , M., et al. 2024, , 685, A63, 10.1051/0004-6361/202348502

    2024 doi

  2. [10]

    M., D \' az , R

    Almenara , J. M., D \' az , R. F., Bonfils , X., & Udry , S. 2016, , 595, L5, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629770

    2016 doi

  3. [11]

    2009, , 501, L23, 10.1051/0004-6361/200912505

    Alonso , R., Guillot , T., Mazeh , T., et al. 2009, , 501, L23, 10.1051/0004-6361/200912505

    2009 doi

  4. [13]

    R., Gillon, M., Maxted, P

    Anderson, D. R., Gillon, M., Maxted, P. F. L., et al. 2010, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 513, L3, 10.1051/0004-6361/201014226

    2010 doi

  5. [14]

    R., Smith , A

    Anderson , D. R., Smith , A. M. S., Madhusudhan , N., et al. 2013, , 430, 3422, 10.1093/mnras/stt140

    2013 doi

  6. [15]

    Applegate , J. H. 1992, , 385, 621, 10.1086/170967

    1992 doi

  7. [16]

    H., & Patterson , J

    Applegate , J. H., & Patterson , J. 1987, , 322, L99, 10.1086/185044

    1987 doi

  8. [17]

    L., Charbonneau , D., et al

    Ballard , S., Christiansen , J. L., Charbonneau , D., et al. 2010, , 716, 1047, 10.1088/0004-637X/716/2/1047

    2010 doi

  9. [18]

    Barker , A. J. 2020, , 498, 2270, 10.1093/mnras/staa2405

    2020 doi

  10. [19]

    Barros , S. C. C., Bou \'e , G., Gibson , N. P., et al. 2013, , 430, 3032, 10.1093/mnras/stt111

    2013 doi

  11. [20]

    Barros, S. C. C., Akinsanmi, B., Boué, G., et al. 2022, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 657, A52, 10.1051/0004-6361/202142196

    2022 doi

  12. [21]

    Bean , J. L. 2009, , 506, 369, 10.1051/0004-6361/200912030

    2009 doi

  13. [22]

    C., Vanderburg , A., Adams , F

    Becker , J. C., Vanderburg , A., Adams , F. C., Rappaport , S. A., & Schwengeler , H. M. 2015, , 812, L18, 10.1088/2041-8205/812/2/L18

    2015 doi

  14. [24]

    M., Csizmadia, S., Smith, A

    Bernabò, L. M., Csizmadia, S., Smith, A. M. S., et al. 2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 684, A78, 10.1051/0004-6361/202346852

    2024 doi

  15. [25]

    L., Cappetta , M., Cruz , P., et al

    Birkby , J. L., Cappetta , M., Cruz , P., et al. 2014, , 440, 1470, 10.1093/mnras/stu343

    2014 doi

  16. [26]

    P., & Parthasarathy , K

    Biswas , S., Bisht , D., Jiang , I.-G., Sariya , D. P., & Parthasarathy , K. 2024, , 168, 176, 10.3847/1538-3881/ad6d66

    2024 doi

  17. [27]

    2014, , 781, 116, 10.1088/0004-637X/781/2/116

    Blecic , J., Harrington , J., Madhusudhan , N., et al. 2014, , 781, 116, 10.1088/0004-637X/781/2/116

    2014 doi

  18. [28]

    S., Desidera , S., Benatti , S., et al

    Bonomo , A. S., Desidera , S., Benatti , S., et al. 2017, , 602, A107, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629882

    2017 doi

  19. [29]

    J., & Summers , A

    Borucki , W. J., & Summers , A. L. 1984, , 58, 121, 10.1016/0019-1035(84)90102-7

    1984 doi

  20. [30]

    G., Winn , J

    Bouma , L. G., Winn , J. N., Howard , A. W., et al. 2020, , 893, L29, 10.3847/2041-8213/ab8563

    2020 doi

  21. [31]

    G., Winn , J

    Bouma , L. G., Winn , J. N., Baxter , C., et al. 2019, , 157, 217, 10.3847/1538-3881/ab189f

    2019 doi

  22. [32]

    I., Wang , S., Mahadevan , S., et al

    Ca \ n as , C. I., Wang , S., Mahadevan , S., et al. 2019, , 870, L17, 10.3847/2041-8213/aafa1e

    2019 doi

  23. [33]

    A., & Winn , J

    Carter , J. A., & Winn , J. N. 2009, , 704, 51, 10.1088/0004-637X/704/1/51

    2009 doi

  24. [34]

    M., Latham , D

    Charbonneau , D., Brown , T. M., Latham , D. W., & Mayor , M. 2000, , 529, L45, 10.1086/312457

    2000 doi

  25. [35]

    2017, , 600, A30, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629705

    Claret , A. 2017, , 600, A30, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629705

    2017 doi

  26. [36]

    2011, , 529, A75, 10.1051/0004-6361/201116451

    Claret , A., & Bloemen , S. 2011, , 529, A75, 10.1051/0004-6361/201116451

    2011 doi

  27. [37]

    2018, , 476, 2542, 10.1093/mnras/sty292

    Collier Cameron , A., & Jardine , M. 2018, , 476, 2542, 10.1093/mnras/sty292

    2018 doi

  28. [38]

    Correia , A. C. M., & Laskar , J. 2010, in Exoplanets, ed. S. Seager , 239--266, 10.48550/arXiv.1009.1352

    2010 doi arXiv

  29. [39]

    2020, , 636, A98, 10.1051/0004-6361/201936279

    Cort \'e s-Zuleta , P., Rojo , P., Wang , S., et al. 2020, , 636, A98, 10.1051/0004-6361/201936279

    2020 doi

  30. [40]

    Counselman , III, C. C. 1973, , 180, 307, 10.1086/151964

    1973 doi

  31. [41]

    Cowling , T. G. 1938, , 98, 734, 10.1093/mnras/98.9.734

    1938 doi

  32. [42]

    Csizmadia, S., Hellard, H., & Smith, A. M. S. 2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 623, A45, 10.1051/0004-6361/201834376

    2019 doi

  33. [43]

    I., & Johnson , J

    Dawson , R. I., & Johnson , J. A. 2018, , 56, 175, 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051853

    2018 doi

  34. [44]

    R., Pilyavsky , G., et al

    Dragomir , D., Kane , S. R., Pilyavsky , G., et al. 2011, , 142, 115, 10.1088/0004-6256/142/4/115

    2011 doi

  35. [45]

    S., & Agol , E

    Eastman , J., Gaudi , B. S., & Agol , E. 2013, , 125, 83, 10.1086/669497

    2013 doi

  36. [46]

    V., Jord \'a n , A., et al

    Espinoza , N., Rackham , B. V., Jord \'a n , A., et al. 2019, , 482, 2065, 10.1093/mnras/sty2691

    2019 doi

  37. [47]

    Essick , R., & Weinberg , N. N. 2016, , 816, 18, 10.3847/0004-637X/816/1/18

    2016 doi

  38. [48]

    Ford , E. B. 2006, , 642, 505, 10.1086/500802

    2006 doi

  39. [49]

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

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

    2013 doi

  40. [50]

    A., Charbonneau , D., et al

    Fressin , F., Knutson , H. A., Charbonneau , D., et al. 2010, , 711, 374, 10.1088/0004-637X/711/1/374

    2010 doi

  41. [51]

    Z., Johnson , J

    Gazak , J. Z., Johnson , J. A., Tonry , J., et al. 2012, Advances in Astronomy, 2012, 697967, 10.1155/2012/697967

    2012 doi

  42. [52]

    P., Pollacco, D., Simpson, E

    Gibson, N. P., Pollacco, D., Simpson, E. K., et al. 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 700, 1078, 10.1088/0004-637X/700/2/1078

    2009 doi

  43. [53]

    1995, , 226, 99, 10.1007/BF00626903

    Gim \'e nez , A., & Bastero , M. 1995, , 226, 99, 10.1007/BF00626903

    1995 doi

  44. [54]

    1963, , 126, 257, 10.1093/mnras/126.3.257

    Goldreich , P. 1963, , 126, 257, 10.1093/mnras/126.3.257

    1963 doi

  45. [55]

    1966, , 5, 375, 10.1016/0019-1035(66)90051-0

    Goldreich , P., & Soter , S. 1966, , 5, 375, 10.1016/0019-1035(66)90051-0

    1966 doi

  46. [56]

    2010, Communications in Applied Mathematics and Computational Science, 5, 65, 10.2140/camcos.2010.5.65

    Goodman , J., & Weare , J. 2010, Communications in Applied Mathematics and Computational Science, 5, 65, 10.2140/camcos.2010.5.65

    2010 doi

  47. [58]

    M., Seager , S., Huang , C

    Guerrero , N. M., Seager , S., Huang , C. X., et al. 2021, , 254, 39, 10.3847/1538-4365/abefe1

    2021 doi

  48. [59]

    2023, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 095014, 10.1088/1674-4527/ace028

    Guo , S.-S. 2023, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 095014, 10.1088/1674-4527/ace028

    2023 doi

  49. [60]

    2014, , 787, 80, 10.1088/0004-637X/787/1/80

    Hadden , S., & Lithwick , Y. 2014, , 787, 80, 10.1088/0004-637X/787/1/80

    2014 doi

  50. [61]

    R., Edwards , B., & Boley , A

    Hagey , S. R., Edwards , B., & Boley , A. C. 2022, , 164, 220, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac959a

    2022 doi

  51. [62]

    H., & Schlaufman , K

    Hamer , J. H., & Schlaufman , K. C. 2019, , 158, 190, 10.3847/1538-3881/ab3c56

    2019 doi

  52. [63]

    Hansen , B. M. S. 2010, , 723, 285, 10.1088/0004-637X/723/1/285

    2010 doi

  53. [64]

    2012, , 757, 6, 10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/6

    ---. 2012, , 757, 6, 10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/6

    2012 doi

  54. [65]

    A., Harrington , J., Hardin , M

    Hardy , R. A., Harrington , J., Hardin , M. R., et al. 2017, , 836, 143, 10.3847/1538-4357/836/1/143

    2017 doi

  55. [66]

    V., Smith , A

    Harre , J. V., Smith , A. M. S., Barros , S. C. C., et al. 2023, , 669, A124, 10.1051/0004-6361/202244529

    2023 doi

  56. [67]

    Hebb , L., Collier-Cameron , A., Triaud , A. H. M. J., et al. 2010, , 708, 224, 10.1088/0004-637X/708/1/224

    2010 doi

  57. [68]

    R., Collier-Cameron , A., et al

    Hellier , C., Anderson , D. R., Collier-Cameron , A., et al. 2011, , 730, L31, 10.1088/2041-8205/730/2/L31

    2011 doi

  58. [69]

    R., Collier Cameron , A., et al

    Hellier , C., Anderson , D. R., Collier Cameron , A., et al. 2009, , 460, 1098, 10.1038/nature08245

    2009 doi

  59. [70]

    W., Marcy , G

    Henry , G. W., Marcy , G. W., Butler , R. P., & Vogt , S. S. 2000, , 529, L41, 10.1086/312458

    2000 doi

  60. [71]

    W., & Foreman-Mackey , D

    Hogg , D. W., & Foreman-Mackey , D. 2018, , 236, 11, 10.3847/1538-4365/aab76e

    2018 doi

  61. [72]

    J., & Murray , N

    Holman , M. J., & Murray , N. W. 2005, Science, 307, 1288, 10.1126/science.1107822

    2005 doi

  62. [73]

    2016, , 151, 137, 10.3847/0004-6256/151/6/137

    Hoyer , S., Pall \'e , E., Dragomir , D., & Murgas , F. 2016, , 151, 137, 10.3847/0004-6256/151/6/137

    2016 doi

  63. [74]

    2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 748, 22, 10.1088/0004-637X/748/1/22

    Hoyer, S., Rojo, P., & López-Morales, M. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 748, 22, 10.1088/0004-637X/748/1/22

    2012 doi

  64. [75]

    2013, , 434, 46, 10.1093/mnras/stt962

    Hoyer , S., L \'o pez-Morales , M., Rojo , P., et al. 2013, , 434, 46, 10.1093/mnras/stt962

    2013 doi

  65. [76]

    M., Sing , D

    Huitson , C. M., Sing , D. K., Pont , F., et al. 2013, , 434, 3252, 10.1093/mnras/stt1243

    2013 doi

  66. [77]

    2012, , 422, 3151, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20839.x

    Husnoo , N., Pont , F., Mazeh , T., et al. 2012, , 422, 3151, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20839.x

    2012

  67. [78]

    1980, , 92, 167

    Hut , P. 1980, , 92, 167

    1980

  68. [79]

    S., & Winn , J

    Ivshina , E. S., & Winn , J. N. 2022, , 259, 62, 10.3847/1538-4365/ac545b

    2022 doi

  69. [80]

    2008, , 681, 1631, 10.1086/587641

    Jackson , B., Greenberg , R., & Barnes , R. 2008, , 681, 1631, 10.1086/587641

    2008 doi

  70. [81]

    2016, Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy, 126, 227, 10.1007/s10569-016-9704-1

    Jackson , B., Jensen , E., Peacock , S., Arras , P., & Penev , K. 2016, Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy, 126, 227, 10.1007/s10569-016-9704-1

    2016 doi

  71. [82]

    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, 10.1117/12.2233418

    2016 doi

  72. [83]

    2016, , 151, 17, 10.3847/0004-6256/151/1/17

    Jiang , I.-G., Lai , C.-Y., Savushkin , A., et al. 2016, , 151, 17, 10.3847/0004-6256/151/1/17

    2016 doi

  73. [84]

    2023, , 265, 4, 10.3847/1538-4365/ac9da4

    Kokori , A., Tsiaras , A., Edwards , B., et al. 2023, , 265, 4, 10.3847/1538-4365/ac9da4

    2023 doi

  74. [85]

    2023, Universe, 10, 12, 10.3390/universe10010012

    Korth , J., & Parviainen , H. 2023, Universe, 10, 12, 10.3390/universe10010012

    2023 doi

  75. [86]

    Lanza , A. F. 2010, , 512, A77, 10.1051/0004-6361/200912789

    2010 doi

  76. [87]

    2013, , 552, A2, 10.1051/0004-6361/201220924

    Lendl , M., Gillon , M., Queloz , D., et al. 2013, , 552, A2, 10.1051/0004-6361/201220924

    2013 doi

  77. [88]

    2024, , 686, A84, 10.1051/0004-6361/202348363

    Leonardi , P., Nascimbeni , V., Granata , V., et al. 2024, , 686, A84, 10.1051/0004-6361/202348363

    2024 doi

  78. [89]

    Levrard , B., Correia , A. C. M., Chabrier , G., et al. 2007, , 462, L5, 10.1051/0004-6361:20066487

    2007 doi

  79. [90]

    2009, , 692, L9, 10.1088/0004-637X/692/1/L9

    Levrard , B., Winisdoerffer , C., & Chabrier , G. 2009, , 692, L9, 10.1088/0004-637X/692/1/L9

    2009 doi

  80. [91]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.05704, 10.48550/arXiv.2501.05704

    Ma , X., Wang , W., Zhang , Z., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.05704, 10.48550/arXiv.2501.05704

    2025 doi arXiv

  81. [92]

    2021, , 656, A88, 10.1051/0004-6361/202142424

    Maciejewski , G., Fern \'a ndez , M., Aceituno , F., et al. 2021, , 656, A88, 10.1051/0004-6361/202142424

    2021 doi

  82. [93]

    2024, , 692, A35, 10.1051/0004-6361/202452101

    Maciejewski , G., Golonka , J., Fern \'a ndez , M., et al. 2024, , 692, A35, 10.1051/0004-6361/202452101

    2024 doi

  83. [95]

    2013, , 551, A108, 10.1051/0004-6361/201220739

    Maciejewski , G., Dimitrov , D., Seeliger , M., et al. 2013, , 551, A108, 10.1051/0004-6361/201220739

    2013 doi

  84. [96]

    2016, , 588, L6, 10.1051/0004-6361/201628312

    Maciejewski , G., Dimitrov , D., Fern \'a ndez , M., et al. 2016, , 588, L6, 10.1051/0004-6361/201628312

    2016 doi

  85. [97]

    2018, , 68, 371, 10.32023/0001-5237/68.4.4

    Maciejewski , G., Fern \'a ndez , M., Aceituno , F., et al. 2018, , 68, 371, 10.32023/0001-5237/68.4.4

    2018 doi

  86. [98]

    2013, , 436, 2, 10.1093/mnras/stt1394

    Mancini , L., Ciceri , S., Chen , G., et al. 2013, , 436, 2, 10.1093/mnras/stt1394

    2013 doi

  87. [99]

    2002, , 580, L171, 10.1086/345520

    Mandel , K., & Agol , E. 2002, , 580, L171, 10.1086/345520

    2002 doi

  88. [100]

    2021, TESS Light Curves - All Sectors, STScI/MAST, 10.17909/t9-nmc8-f686

    MAST Team . 2021, TESS Light Curves - All Sectors, STScI/MAST, 10.17909/t9-nmc8-f686

    2021 doi

  89. [101]

    2019, in EAS Publications Series, Vol

    Mathis , S. 2019, in EAS Publications Series, Vol. 82, EAS Publications Series, 5--33, 10.1051/eas/1982002

    2019

  90. [102]

    J., & Rasio , F

    Matsumura , S., Peale , S. J., & Rasio , F. A. 2010, , 725, 1995, 10.1088/0004-637X/725/2/1995

    2010 doi

  91. [103]

    1995, , 378, 355, 10.1038/378355a0

    Mayor , M., & Queloz , D. 1995, , 378, 355, 10.1038/378355a0

    1995 doi

  92. [104]

    Mede , K., & Brandt , T. D. 2017, , 153, 135, 10.3847/1538-3881/aa5e4a

    2017 doi

  93. [105]

    A., Platais , I., et al

    Meibom , S., Barnes , S. A., Platais , I., et al. 2015, , 517, 589, 10.1038/nature14118

    2015 doi

  94. [106]

    Meibom , S., & Mathieu , R. D. 2005, , 620, 970, 10.1086/427082

    2005 doi

  95. [107]

    D., & Stassun , K

    Meibom , S., Mathieu , R. D., & Stassun , K. G. 2006, , 653, 621, 10.1086/508252

    2006 doi

  96. [108]

    2002, , 564, 1019, 10.1086/324279

    Miralda-Escud \'e , J. 2002, , 564, 1019, 10.1086/324279

    2002 doi

  97. [109]

    Mo c nik , T., Clark , B. J. M., Anderson , D. R., Hellier , C., & Brown , D. J. A. 2016, , 151, 150, 10.3847/0004-6256/151/6/150

    2016 doi

  98. [110]

    D., & Dermott , S

    Murray , C. D., & Dermott , S. F. 1999, Solar System Dynamics , 10.1017/CBO9781139174817

    1999 doi

  99. [111]

    Ogilvie , G. I. 2014, , 52, 171, 10.1146/annurev-astro-081913-035941

    2014 doi

  100. [112]

    I., & Lin , D

    Ogilvie , G. I., & Lin , D. N. C. 2007, , 661, 1180, 10.1086/515435

    2007 doi

  101. [113]

    M., et al

    P \'a l , A., S \'a rneczky , K., Szab \'o , G. M., et al. 2011, , 413, L43, 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2011.01029.x

    2011

  102. [114]

    2022, , 512, 3651, 10.1093/mnras/stac203

    Patel , R., & Penev , K. 2022, , 512, 3651, 10.1093/mnras/stac203

    2022 doi

  103. [115]

    C., Winn , J

    Patra , K. C., Winn , J. N., Holman , M. J., et al. 2017, , 154, 4, 10.3847/1538-3881/aa6d75

    2017 doi

  104. [116]

    2020, , 159, 150, 10.3847/1538-3881/ab7374

    ---. 2020, , 159, 150, 10.3847/1538-3881/ab7374

    2020 doi

  105. [117]

    G., Winn , J

    Penev , K., Bouma , L. G., Winn , J. N., & Hartman , J. D. 2018, , 155, 165, 10.3847/1538-3881/aaaf71

    2018 doi

  106. [118]

    2012, , 751, 96, 10.1088/0004-637X/751/2/96

    Penev , K., Jackson , B., Spada , F., & Thom , N. 2012, , 751, 96, 10.1088/0004-637X/751/2/96

    2012 doi

  107. [119]

    2020, , 491, 1243, 10.1093/mnras/stz3034

    Petrucci , R., Jofr \'e , E., G \'o mez Maqueo Chew , Y., et al. 2020, , 491, 1243, 10.1093/mnras/stz3034

    2020 doi

  108. [120]

    2010, , 15, 297, 10.1016/j.newast.2009.09.001

    Poddan \'y , S., Br \'a t , L., & Pejcha , O. 2010, , 15, 297, 10.1016/j.newast.2009.09.001

    2010 doi

  109. [121]

    J., Alonso , R., Belmonte , J

    Rabus , M., Deeg , H. J., Alonso , R., Belmonte , J. A., & Almenara , J. M. 2009, , 508, 1011, 10.1051/0004-6361/200912252

    2009 doi

  110. [122]

    Raetz , S., Mugrauer , M., Schmidt , T. O. B., et al. 2009, Astronomische Nachrichten, 330, 475, 10.1002/asna.200811200

    2009 doi

  111. [123]

    Rafikov, R. R. 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 700, 965, 10.1088/0004-637X/700/2/965

    2009 doi

  112. [124]

    Ragozzine , D., & Wolf , A. S. 2009, , 698, 1778, 10.1088/0004-637X/698/2/1778

    2009 doi

  113. [125]

    A., Tout , C

    Rasio , F. A., Tout , C. A., Lubow , S. H., & Livio , M. 1996, , 470, 1187, 10.1086/177941

    1996 doi

  114. [126]

    2014, Experimental Astronomy, 38, 249, 10.1007/s10686-014-9383-4

    Rauer , H., Catala , C., Aerts , C., et al. 2014, Experimental Astronomy, 38, 249, 10.1007/s10686-014-9383-4

    2014 doi

  115. [127]

    R., Winn , J

    Ricker , G. R., Winn , J. N., Vanderspek , R., et al. 2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9143, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2014: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, ed. J. M. Oschmann , Jr., M. Clampin , G. G...

    2014 doi

  116. [129]

    M., Barros, S

    Rosário, N. M., Barros, S. C. C., Demangeon, O. D. S., & Santos, N. C. 2022, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 668, A114, 10.1051/0004-6361/202244513

    2022 doi

  117. [130]

    Russell , H. N. 1928, , 88, 641, 10.1093/mnras/88.8.641

    1928 doi

  118. [131]

    Sanchis-Ojeda , R., & Winn , J. N. 2011, , 743, 61, 10.1088/0004-637X/743/1/61

    2011 doi

  119. [132]

    Sasselov , D. D. 2003, , 596, 1327, 10.1086/378145

    2003 doi

  120. [133]

    1978, Annals of Statistics, 6, 461

    Schwarz , G. 1978, Annals of Statistics, 6, 461

    1978

  121. [134]

    Sedaghati , E., Boffin , H. M. J., Csizmadia , S., et al. 2015, , 576, L11, 10.1051/0004-6361/201525822

    2015 doi

  122. [135]

    Sedaghati , E., Boffin , H. M. J., MacDonald , R. J., et al. 2017, , 549, 238, 10.1038/nature23651

    2017 doi

  123. [136]

    J., Casasayas-Barris , N., et al

    Sedaghati , E., MacDonald , R. J., Casasayas-Barris , N., et al. 2021, , 505, 435, 10.1093/mnras/stab1164

    2021 doi

  124. [137]

    2024, Research Notes of the AAS, 8, 223, 10.3847/2515-5172/ad77a6

    Shen, Z. 2024, Research Notes of the AAS, 8, 223, 10.3847/2515-5172/ad77a6

    2024 doi

  125. [138]

    Shklovskii , I. S. 1970, , 13, 562

    1970

  126. [139]

    Silva , A. V. R. 2003, , 585, L147, 10.1086/374324

    2003 doi

  127. [140]

    C., Stumpe , M

    Smith , J. C., Stumpe , M. C., Van Cleve , J. E., et al. 2012, , 124, 1000, 10.1086/667697

    2012 doi

  128. [141]

    2017, , 153, 191, 10.3847/1538-3881/aa6477

    Southworth , J., Mancini , L., Madhusudhan , N., et al. 2017, , 153, 191, 10.3847/1538-3881/aa6477

    2017 doi

  129. [142]

    G., et al

    Southworth , J., Dominik , M., J rgensen , U. G., et al. 2019, , 490, 4230, 10.1093/mnras/stz2602

    2019 doi

  130. [143]

    G., Oelkers , R

    Stassun , K. G., Oelkers , R. J., Pepper , J., et al. 2018, , 156, 102, 10.3847/1538-3881/aad050

    2018 doi

  131. [144]

    Steffen , J. H. 2013, , 433, 3246, 10.1093/mnras/stt966

    2013 doi

  132. [145]

    2005, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Sterken , C. 2005, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 335, The Light-Time Effect in Astrophysics: Causes and cures of the O-C diagram, ed. C. Sterken , 3

    2005

  133. [146]

    Sterne , T. E. 1939 a , , 99, 451, 10.1093/mnras/99.5.451

    1939 doi

  134. [147]

    1939 b , , 99, 662, 10.1093/mnras/99.8.662

    ---. 1939 b , , 99, 662, 10.1093/mnras/99.8.662

    1939 doi

  135. [148]

    C., Smith , J

    Stumpe , M. C., Smith , J. C., Catanzarite , J. H., et al. 2014, , 126, 100, 10.1086/674989

    2014 doi

  136. [149]

    C., Smith , J

    Stumpe , M. C., Smith , J. C., Van Cleve , J. E., et al. 2012, , 124, 985, 10.1086/667698

    2012 doi

  137. [150]

    P., et al

    Su , L.-H., Jiang , I.-G., Sariya , D. P., et al. 2021, , 161, 108, 10.3847/1538-3881/abd4d8

    2021 doi

  138. [151]

    M., D \'a lya , G., et al

    Szab \'o , R., Szab \'o , G. M., D \'a lya , G., et al. 2013, , 553, A17, 10.1051/0004-6361/201220132

    2013 doi

  139. [152]

    2013, , 428, 3671, 10.1093/mnras/sts306

    Tregloan-Reed , J., Southworth , J., & Tappert , C. 2013, , 428, 3671, 10.1093/mnras/sts306

    2013 doi

  140. [153]

    D., Flagg , L., Ridden-Harper , A., & Jayawardhana , R

    Turner , J. D., Flagg , L., Ridden-Harper , A., & Jayawardhana , R. 2022, , 163, 281, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac686f

    2022 doi

  141. [154]

    D., Ridden-Harper , A., & Jayawardhana , R

    Turner , J. D., Ridden-Harper , A., & Jayawardhana , R. 2021, , 161, 72, 10.3847/1538-3881/abd178

    2021 doi

  142. [155]

    A., Marchant , P., & Rogers , L

    Valsecchi , F., Rappaport , S., Rasio , F. A., Marchant , P., & Rogers , L. A. 2015, , 813, 101, 10.1088/0004-637X/813/2/101

    2015 doi

  143. [156]

    Valsecchi , F., & Rasio , F. A. 2014, , 787, L9, 10.1088/2041-8205/787/1/L9

    2014 doi

  144. [157]

    2022, , 941, L31, 10.3847/2041-8213/aca47e

    Vissapragada , S., Chontos , A., Greklek-McKeon , M., et al. 2022, , 941, L31, 10.3847/2041-8213/aca47e

    2022 doi

  145. [158]

    2019, , 622, A71, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833837

    von Essen , C., Mallonn , M., Welbanks , L., et al. 2019, , 622, A71, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833837

    2019 doi

  146. [159]

    M., Hubbard , W

    Wahl , S. M., Hubbard , W. B., & Militzer , B. 2016, , 831, 14, 10.3847/0004-637X/831/1/14

    2016 doi

  147. [160]

    2024, , 270, 14, 10.3847/1538-4365/ad0847

    Wang , W., Zhang , Z., Chen , Z., et al. 2024, , 270, 14, 10.3847/1538-4365/ad0847

    2024 doi

  148. [161]

    A., & Dhillon , V

    Watson , C. A., & Dhillon , V. S. 2004, , 351, 110, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07763.x

    2004

  149. [162]

    A., & Marsh , T

    Watson , C. A., & Marsh , T. R. 2010, , 405, 2037, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16602.x

    2010

  150. [163]

    N., Davachi , N., Essick , R., et al

    Weinberg , N. N., Davachi , N., Essick , R., et al. 2024, , 960, 50, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad05c9

    2024 doi

  151. [164]

    N., Delrez , L., Barker , A

    Wilkins , A. N., Delrez , L., Barker , A. J., et al. 2017, , 836, L24, 10.3847/2041-8213/aa5d9f

    2017 doi

  152. [165]

    Wolter , U., Schmitt , J. H. M. M., Huber , K. F., et al. 2009, , 504, 561, 10.1051/0004-6361/200912329

    2009 doi

  153. [166]

    A., Kataria , T., et al

    Wong , I., Knutson , H. A., Kataria , T., et al. 2016, , 823, 122, 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/122

    2016 doi

  154. [167]

    2020, , 159, 104, 10.3847/1538-3881/ab6d6e

    Wong , I., Benneke , B., Shporer , A., et al. 2020, , 159, 104, 10.3847/1538-3881/ab6d6e

    2020 doi

  155. [168]

    H., & Laughlin, G

    Wu, D.-H., Wang, S., Zhou, J.-L., Steffen, J. H., & Laughlin, G. 2018, The Astronomical Journal, 156, 96, 10.3847/1538-3881/aad22b

    2018 doi

  156. [169]

    2022, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 22, 055005, 10.1088/1674-4527/ac5801

    Yang , F., Wang , W., Wei , X., et al. 2022, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 22, 055005, 10.1088/1674-4527/ac5801

    2022 doi

  157. [170]

    W., Winn , J

    Yee , S. W., Winn , J. N., Knutson , H. A., et al. 2020, , 888, L5, 10.3847/2041-8213/ab5c16

    2020 doi

  158. [171]

    2024, , 106, 102130, 10.1016/j.newast.2023.102130

    Yeh , L.-C., Jiang , I.-G., & A-thano , N. 2024, , 106, 102130, 10.1016/j.newast.2023.102130

    2024

  159. [172]

    Zahn , J. P. 1977, , 57, 383

    1977

  160. [173]

    Zahn , J. P. 2008, in EAS Publications Series, Vol. 29, EAS Publications Series, ed. M. J. Goupil & J. P. Zahn , 67--90, 10.1051/eas:0829002

    2008 doi

  161. [174]

    2009, , 496, 577, 10.1051/0004-6361:200811296

    Zechmeister , M., & K \"u rster , M. 2009, , 496, 577, 10.1051/0004-6361:200811296

    2009 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.