Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 99 references

The ESPRESSO transmission spectrum of HD$\,$189733$\,$b : Extracting the planetary sodium and lithium signatures amid stellar contamination

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read HD 189733 b's sodium signal is shallower, narrower, and 8 km/s blueshifted than earlier measurements reported.

desk verdict A careful reanalysis that likely nails the sodium but leaves the new lithium detection resting on an unverified stellar-line assumption, so it deserves a major-revision referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.21459 v1 pith:CI4ER67H submitted 2025-06-26 astro-ph.EP

D. Mounzer , W. Dethier , C. Lovis , V. Bourrier , A. Psaridi , H. Chakraborty , M. Lendl , R. Allart
show 15 more authors
J. V. Seidel M. R. Zapatero Osorio P. Molaro M. Steiner D. Ehrenreich Y. Alibert I. Carleo S. Cristiani J. I. González Hernández C. J. A. P. Martins E. Palle J. Rodrigues N. Santos A. Sozzetti A. Suárez Mascareño
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords transmissionspectroscopyhotJupiterHD189733bsodiumdoubletlithiumplanet-occultedlinedistortionsstellaractivityRossiter-McLaughlineffect
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 analyzes two high-resolution ESPRESSO transits of the hot Jupiter HD 189733 b and tries to separate the planet's atmospheric absorption from distortions induced by the star's rotation, limb darkening, and activity. Its central result is that the sodium doublet signature, once the stellar line cores are masked and the fit is restricted to the first half of the transit, is shallower and more strongly blueshifted than earlier studies found: $0.432 \pm 0.027\%$ excess absorption with a $-7.97 \pm 0.28\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$ shift. The paper also reports a $6.4\sigma$ lithium detection at $0.102 \pm 0.016\%$ absorption, blueshifted by $-2.4 \pm 1.8\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$. If these detections are right, HD 189733 b's upper atmosphere contains both sodium and lithium, and the sodium traces a strong day-to-night wind. The authors argue that no existing high-resolution sodium analysis of this system, including their own, fully corrects for the stellar contamination, so the earlier larger amplitudes and smaller blueshifts should not be taken at face value.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the wavelength-dependent transmission spectrum, expressed as $(R_p(\lambda)/R_\star)^2$ from the ratio of in-transit to out-of-transit flux, corrected for transit depth and limb darkening. The obstacle the paper must remove is the planet-occulted line distortion (POLD), the apparent absorption and emission pattern created when the planet blocks different rotating, limb-darkened regions of the stellar surface at different orbital phases. The separation is carried by three tools working together: masking the stellar sodium cores by $0.4$ Å to hide the POLDs, replacing the disk-averaged master-out spectrum with local spectra either shifted to the measured surface radial velocities or drawn from synthetic stellar grids, and restricting the planetary fit to the first half of transit (T2 to mid-transit), where the planetary and stellar Doppler tracks do not yet overlap. A forward code that simulates the transit of the planet plus a spherical, hydrostatic sodium atmosphere over the synthetic stellar grid is then used to show that the observed signature is reproduced with an $8\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$ day-to-night wind.

What would settle it

A transit of HD 189733 b observed at higher signal-to-noise with simultaneous high-cadence stellar activity indicators would settle the sodium claim: if the blueshifted excess absorption follows the planet's Keplerian velocity and persists after modeling a time-variable stellar line profile, the planetary interpretation stands, while a feature that tracks activity indicators or disappears when the stellar profile is allowed to vary would show it was stellar contamination. For lithium, the decisive test is whether the line is present at the same strength and velocity in an independent transit and absent from out-of-transit spectra.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the genuine planetary sodium signal in HD 189733 b is shallower and more blueshifted than previously claimed: with the D1 and D2 lines co-added, the excess absorption is $0.432 \pm 0.027\%$, the Gaussian FWHM is $3.82 \pm 0.29\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$, and the line center sits at $-7.97 \pm 0.28\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$. The same phase-restricted, line-core-masked analysis yields a separate lithium detection at $6707.775$ Å with $0.102 \pm 0.016\%$ absorption ($6.4\sigma$), a blueshift of $-2.4 \pm 1.8\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$, and a FWHM of $9.9 \pm 1.8\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$. The authors reproduce the sodium signature with a forward model that includes an $8\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$ day-to-night wind and a thermosphere temperature of $2750$ K, and they interpret the blueshift as evidence of a strong wind at the planet's terminator. They also reinterpret earlier HARPS, HARPS-N, and PEPSI sodium measurements as biased by uncorrected planet-occulted line distortions and stellar activity, which would explain the larger amplitudes, wider lines, and weaker blueshifts in those studies.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the blue-shifted excess absorption seen in the first half of the transit, after masking the stellar sodium cores and correcting for the rotation-induced distortions, is sodium in the planet's atmosphere rather than leftover stellar activity; for lithium, the analogous premise is that the star has no lithium line, so a $6.4\sigma$ signal cannot be stellar.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The $\sim 8\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$ sodium blueshift, if real, implies a strong day-to-night wind in the upper atmosphere rather than a static or slowly moving sodium layer.
  • Previous sodium amplitudes and line widths from HARPS, HARPS-N, and PEPSI are suspect because POLD residuals and stellar activity were included in the fitted spectra; masking line cores and restricting orbital phases is the corrective step.
  • The lithium detection adds HD 189733 b to the small set of exoplanets with lithium and indicates the planet preserves an element that its host star has burned.
  • The paper's stated limitation is that neither synthetic stellar models nor out-of-transit masters fully remove stellar variability, so future higher-S/N instruments will need 3D stellar modeling and chromospheric treatment to characterize such aligned hot Jupiters.
  • No sodium excess is seen at ingress or egress, consistent with previous studies and with either a fainter signal at the stellar limb or an inhomogeneous sodium distribution.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the sodium blueshift is a wind, the line centroid should shift systematically across the transit as different terminator regions are probed; a phase-resolved measurement on a single high-S/N transit would test this without stacking nights.
  • Because the lithium line has no underlying stellar absorption, it is nearly immune to POLDs; comparing the lithium and sodium blueshifts ($-2.4$ vs $-7.97\ \mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$) could constrain vertical wind shear, a test the paper does not perform.
  • The reported $1\text{--}2\%$ night-to-night variation in stellar sodium and H$\alpha$ depths is comparable to planetary signals, so single-transit atmospheric measurements of active stars may need contemporaneous activity monitoring to be trustworthy.
  • If the earlier wider, less blueshifted sodium profiles were indeed mixtures of planetary signal plus POLD residuals, stacked multi-transit analyses that average all phases may actually encode the same systematic bias rather than average it away.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes two ESPRESSO transits of the hot Jupiter HD 189733 b with the goal of separating planetary sodium and lithium absorption signatures from planet-occulted line distortions (POLDs) and stellar activity. After a careful antaress-based reduction and a Rossiter-McLaughlin analysis, the authors compute transmission spectra and test several POLD corrections: masking the stellar Doppler track, shifting the master-out to local surface RVs, and using synthetic Turbospectrum/MARCS local spectra with an ad hoc chromospheric sodium component. In the first half of the transit, after masking the sodium line cores, they fit the blueward excess and report a co-added sodium amplitude of 0.432 ± 0.027% at a blueshift of -7.97 ± 0.28 km/s. They then use the EvE code to model the transit and, adding a hand-chosen 8 km/s day-to-night wind, reproduce the observed sodium signature. In Sect. 6 they report a new lithium detection at 6707.775 Å with amplitude 0.102 ± 0.016% (6.4σ) and a blueshift of -2.4 ± 1.8 km/s. The paper closes with a discussion of why previous sodium studies found larger amplitudes, larger widths, and smaller blueshifts, attributing the differences to incomplete POLD and activity corrections.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper provides a high-S/N benchmark for disentangling planetary sodium from POLDs in an aligned hot-Jupiter system and adds HD 189733 b to the short list of exoplanets with a lithium detection. The work has clear strengths: a detailed and reproducible reduction pipeline, a careful RM analysis with explicit parameter tables, multiple POLD-correction strategies compared on the same data, and unusually candid statements about the limitations of the stellar models and of the authors' own corrections. The sodium detection itself is qualitatively credible because sodium has been seen in this planet multiple times. However, the quantitative claims — the shallow amplitude, the -8 km/s blueshift, and especially the new lithium detection — rest on assumptions that are either unquantified or unverified. The lithium claim is the most novel result, and it currently lacks the null tests needed to exclude a stellar lithium line; the sodium error bars are purely statistical and do not include the dominant systematic choices. The paper therefore is of high interest but needs substantial additional validation before the central quantitative conclusions can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 6] The lithium detection rests on an unverified premise: that HD 189733 has no stellar Li I 6707.8 line. The text states that 'as stars burn their Li content, they show no absorption lines in their spectra' and concludes that the line is not affected by POLDs or stellar activity, but this is a general population statement, not a measurement for this specific star. The manuscript does not show the master-out spectrum around 6707 Å, does not give an equivalent-width upper limit for a stellar lithium line, does not compare pre- and post-transit master spectra at this wavelength, and does not provide a 2D phase–RV absorption map analogous to Fig. 12. Given the night-long core-depth variations of ~1–2% reported for Na I and Hα in Sect. 4.5, a weak stellar lithium line with even modest variability could produce a residual comparable to the claimed 0.102 ± 0.016% signal. The concern is compounded by the fitted FWHM of 9.9 ± 1.8 km/s, which is close to the expected width of a rotation- and activity-broadened stellar line. The authors must supply a genuine null test — for example, an observed master-out spectrum at 6707 Å with an EW upper limit, and a 2D map showing the feature is at rest in the planetary frame and absent out of transit — before the lithium claim can be accepted.
  2. [Section 4.6 and Table 3] The quoted sodium parameters are described as model-independent, but the Gaussian fit is applied only to a phase-selected subset (T2 to Tc) of a transmission spectrum that has been corrected using synthetic POLD models and masked at 0.4 Å around the line cores. The uncertainties in Table 3 include only the statistical errors from the Gaussian fit; they do not include the choice of phase range, the mask width, or the choice among the several POLD-correction methods in Sect. 4.3. Section 4.5 demonstrates that stellar line depths vary by ~1–2% over the night, which is larger than the 0.432% signal, so systematic errors could plausibly dominate the reported centroid and amplitude. The authors should quantify these systematics directly — for example by repeating the fit for different mask widths, different phase ranges, and both the local-RV and synthetic POLD corrections — and either report a systematic error budget or soften the precision claims in the abstract and Sect. 7.2.
  3. [Section 5] The EvE modeling does not independently confirm the presence of a ~8 km/s day-to-night wind. The text explicitly says the wind was added 'based on the values of the blueshift derived in Sect. 4.6,' so the model is tuned to reproduce the very quantity it is then used to support. The χ2 map in Fig. C.1 has temperature and surface density as the only displayed free parameters, and the wind speed is not fitted with an associated uncertainty. The paper should present the -7.97 ± 0.28 km/s value as a Gaussian-fit measurement from the transmission spectrum, and present the EvE wind as an interpretive consistency check rather than as independent evidence. If the authors wish to claim that the wind is constrained by the data, they need to show a likelihood or posterior for the wind speed itself, ideally with the planetary signal modeled simultaneously with the POLDs.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Section 2.3] There is a typo in the abstract: 'theantaress workflow' should read 'the antaress workflow.' The same phrase is also typeset without a space in Sect. 2.3.
  2. [Section 6] The text reports the lithium line at 6707.775 Å but does not specify whether the fit refers to the unresolved Li I doublet or to one component; state the adopted rest wavelength and whether the doublet was co-added, as is done for sodium.
  3. [Figures 13 and 14] The captions do not explain what the gray regions are; the reader must infer that they are the masked regions excluded from the Gaussian fit. Please state this explicitly in the captions.
  4. [Section 5] It is unclear whether the 8 km/s day-to-night wind is a free parameter in the EvE fit or a fixed value inserted by hand. If it is fixed, say so and justify the choice; if it is fitted, report its uncertainty and show it in the correlation map.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Partial circularity: the EvE day-to-night wind is set from the same -7.97 km/s blueshift it is then used to reproduce, so the simulation is a self-consistency check, not an independent confirmation; the sodium and lithium Gaussian measurements are direct and not circular.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Sect. 5 'Combined stellar and planetary modeling' (EvE), cf. Sect. 4.6 and Sect. 7.2]
    "A day-to-nightside wind of 8 km s−1 was also added in the planetary atmosphere to help better match the observed signature. This choice was based on the values of the blueshift derived in Sect. 4.6. ... Finally, the simulations performed in this section confirm the presence of sodium in the atmosphere of HD 189733 b."

    The EvE model's dynamical parameter (8 km/s wind) is set from the Gaussian blueshift measured in Sect. 4.6 (-7.97 +/- 0.28 km/s). The model's reproduction of that blueshift therefore does not independently validate the wind or the detection; it is a fit to the same data. Calling the simulations a 'confirmation' of planetary sodium overstates the evidence chain, since the model was adjusted to match the observed signature. The sodium detection itself, however, stands on the direct Gaussian measurement of the transmission spectrum, so the circularity is limited to the model-based wind interpretation.

full rationale

The core sodium and lithium detections are direct Gaussian fits to the transmission spectra (Sect. 4.6, Table 3, Fig. 18) and do not reduce to fitted parameters. The EvE modeling in Sect. 5 is partially circular: the 8 km/s day-to-night wind was explicitly chosen to match the Sect. 4.6 blueshift, and the subsequent 'confirm the presence of sodium' sentence treats a self-consistency fit as independent evidence. This fits the 'fitted input called prediction' pattern, but the affected claim is the dynamical wind interpretation, not the detection itself. The lithium result rests on the astrophysical premise that the star has no Li I 6707.8 line (Sect. 6); that premise is an untested assumption and a correctness/falsifiability concern, but it is not a circular derivation, because the 0.102% amplitude is measured, not inferred from the premise. Self-citations to antaress, RMR, and EvE are present and load-bearing as tools, but the paper does not invoke a self-citation chain or uniqueness theorem to force its interpretation; the independent content (Gaussian amplitudes/blueshifts, comparison with previous studies) remains. The paper itself flags the POLD model limitations in Sects. 7.1 and 7.2, further supporting the view that the modeling is a fit rather than an independent test. Score 4 reflects one partial fit-within-model circularity while the central claims retain independent content.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central detections rest on a small number of fitted inputs: two stellar abundance/temperature values set the synthetic grid, two chromospheric parameters are fit to the sodium cores, and the EvE wind is chosen from the measured blueshift. The physical axioms are standard for the field, but the ad hoc chromospheric component and the imperfect activity correction are the main sources of model dependence.

free parameters (5)
  • Day-to-night wind speed in EvE = 8 km/s
    Chosen to match the measured sodium blueshift of -7.97 km/s before running the forward model (Sect. 5); not independently constrained.
  • Chromospheric sodium column density n_c = 7.54e11 cm^-3
    Fitted to the sodium line cores of the master-out spectrum to augment the synthetic stellar grid (Sect. 4.3.3); used as the stellar model for POLD correction and in EvE. The authors note this component is probably unrealistic.
  • Chromospheric sodium temperature = Not quoted explicitly
    Fitted together with n_c to the sodium core region (Sect. 4.3.3) to construct the analytical absorption profile added to the synthetic spectra.
  • Stellar sodium abundance A*(Na I) = 6.1484
    Fitted to the Na I line wings of the master-out spectrum to set the Turbospectrum grid (Sect. 4.3.3); this is comparable to the solar value.
  • Photospheric temperature for Turbospectrum = 5039 ± 10 K
    Fitted to the Na I wings (Sect. 4.3.3); slightly hotter than the adopted literature value of 4969 K, and used in the synthetic stellar grid.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math The transmission spectrum formula of Mounzer et al. (2022) correctly relates the observed flux ratio to (Rp/R*)^2, assuming the local occulted spectrum F_local,i is known or can be approximated.
    Adopted without re-derivation in Sect. 4.1 (Eq. 1 and Eq. 2); this is an established result from the authors' prior work.
  • domain assumption The out-of-transit master spectrum, after polynomial corrections for RV, contrast, and flux trends, represents the unocculted stellar spectrum at all in-transit phases.
    Invoked in Sect. 2.3 and used in Eq. 1 and Eq. 2; Sect. 4.5 shows sodium and H-alpha line depths vary by ~1-2% over the night, so this proxy is imperfect.
  • ad hoc to paper MARCS/Turbospectrum 1D NLTE synthetic spectra, augmented with an ad hoc chromospheric absorption component, are accurate enough to compute local stellar spectra for POLD correction.
    Introduced in Sect. 4.3.3 and used in Eq. 3; the ad hoc chromospheric component is fitted to the observed sodium core, and the authors state in Sect. 5 that it is likely unrealistic.
  • domain assumption HD 189733 has no significant stellar lithium absorption line, so the Li I 6707.775 Å feature is free from POLDs and stellar activity.
    Stated in Sect. 6: 'As stars burn their Li content, they show no absorption lines in their spectra... this line is not affected by POLDs and stellar activity.' If a weak stellar Li line exists, the 6.4-sigma detection could be contaminated.
  • domain assumption EvE's 1D hydrostatic, spherically symmetric atmosphere with a day-to-night wind is a sufficient model for the planetary sodium signature.
    Used in Sect. 5 to claim the observed line width and blueshift are physically plausible; the wind is set from the data, so the model is not an independent test.
invented entities (1)
  • Parametric chromospheric sodium absorption component
    purpose: Added to Turbospectrum synthetic stellar spectra to reproduce the observed sodium core depth and to enable POLD modeling; also used in the EvE forward model.
    The component is fitted to the same master-out data (Sect. 4.3.3) and the authors state in Sect. 5 that it is probably unrealistic and does not accurately reproduce the true local line profiles. It has no external constraint or falsifiable prediction outside the data it was fitted to.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The ESPRESSO transmission spectrum of HD$\,$189733$\,$b : Extracting the planetary sodium and lithium signatures amid stellar contamination." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CI4ER67H

@misc{pith2026250621459,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The ESPRESSO transmission spectrum of HD$\,$189733$\,$b : Extracting the planetary sodium and lithium signatures amid stellar contamination},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CI4ER67H}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.21459}
}
abstract

While transmission spectroscopy has allowed us to detect many atomic and molecular species in exoplanet atmospheres, the improvement in resolution and signal-to-noise ratio enabled us to become sensitive to planet-occulted line distortions (POLDs) in the spectrum that are induced by center-to-limb variations and the Rossiter-McLaughlin effect. POLDs can bias the interpretation of the transmission spectrum, and it is difficult to correct for them with stellar models. We analyzed two ESPRESSO transits (R $\sim$ 140$\,$000) of the archetypal hot Jupiter HD$\,$189733$\,$b. The transmission spectrum of this aligned system is heavily affected by POLDs, stellar activity, and instrumental effects. It is therefore a challenging study case of how to account for these effects when the planetary signal is retrieved from chemical species through transmission spectroscopy. We confirm the previous detections of the sodium doublet signature in the upper atmosphere of HD$\,$189733$\,$b. When we accounted for POLDs and isolated the planetary signal from uncorrected stellar residuals, we found a shallower (0.432 $\pm$ 0.027 %) and more strongly blueshifted (-7.97 $\pm$ 0.28 km/s) signal. We attempted to reinterpret the other high-resolution sodium studies of this system in light of our results. We suggest that the POLDs and stellar activity are insufficiently corrected for in all analyses, including ours. We also detected a planetary lithium signature of 0.102 $\pm$ 0.016 % (6.4$\sigma$) at a blueshift of -2.4 $\pm$ 1.8 km/s.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.21459 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Signal-to-noise ratio, airmass, and seeing taken during the two observation nights as a function of the transit phase. Zero is the center of the transit, and the dashed black vertical lines show the transit contact points from T1 to T4. The last spectrum of the first night was discarded because the S/N is far lower. parameters using the RM revolutions technique (RMR) in Sect. 3. We then compute the transmission spec… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Transit comparison between Visit 1 (blue) and Visit 2 (red). ESPRESSO exposures are indicated by the colored symbols. Vertical dashed lines indicate transit contacts. Top panel: Best-fit model light curves to the EulerCam photometry obtained simultaneously with the ESPRESSO transits, used to scale disk-integrated CCFs to their correct relative flux level. Bottom panel: RV centroids of the disk-integrated CCFs, compu… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Representative intrinsic CCF measured near mid-transit in Visit 1 (blue profile). The dashed black profile is the best-fit Voigt model. The blue range shows the range used to define the continuum. Some datasets, like the ones of HD 189733, are further contam￾inated by a third component at lower frequencies, which creates strong and broad S-like features at specific locations in trans￾mission spectra (see Fig. A.1). … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (14 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Properties of the intrinsic CCFs for HD 189733. The vertical dashed lines indicate transit contacts. Blue and red points show the con￾trast, FWHM, and RV centroids derived from fits to individual intrinsic CCFs. Dashed black curves show the models for these properties …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Correlation diagrams for the PDFs of the correlated RMR model parameters. The green and blue lines show the 1 and 2σ simultaneous 2D confidence regions that contain, respectively, 39.3% and 86.5% of the accepted steps. 1D histograms correspond to the distributions pro￾…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: RMR maps in Visit 1 (top panel) and Visit 2 (bottom panel), plotted as a function of RV in the star rest frame (abscissa) and orbital phase (ordinate). The horizontal dashed green lines show the transit contacts. The solid green line indicates the surface RVs track ass…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Binned transmission spectrum of HD 189733 b that combines the two transits around the sodium doublet (vertical dashed blue lines). The unbinned transmission spectrum is shown in gray, and the black dots represent the binned spectrum with a step of 0.1 Å. The horizontal…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison of POLDs corrections on the absorption spectrum of HD 189733 b. Top left: No correction applied, as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: ). The reason for this is probably that the MARCS models only simulate the photosphere and that the sodium doublet partly forms in the chromosphere (Bruls & Rutten 1992). As a first step, we decided to fit the stellar sodium abun￾dance and photosphere temperature only …
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Absorption spectrum of HD 189733 b (in black) without POLDs correction around the sodium doublet (dashed blue lines) and best-fit synthetic model of the POLDs (dashed red line) for different transit-phase intervals. Top panel: Full transit between T2 and T3. Middle pa…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Comparison of masters-out before and after transit by dividing the master pre-transit by the master post-transit around the sodium dou￾blet (top panel) and Hα (bottom panel) for each transit. excess absorption blueward of the stellar trace can be seen in red between T…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Transmission spectra map of HD 189733 b around the sodium doublet (co-added and both transits combined) after POLDs correction using synthetic models on individual spectra in the planetary rest frame (see Fig. D.1 for the uncorrected version). The dashed dark purple l…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Absorption spectrum (black line) of HD 189733 b around the sodium doublet, combining the first half of the two transits in the planetary rest frame, corrected for the POLDs using synthetic stellar spectra. The gray line shows the masked part of the absorption spectrum…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Mean absorption spectra between T2 and T0 of night 1. The green curve was computed using the stellar grid that best matched the observed Fout without the additional chromospheric absorption. The red curve was computed using the stellar grid that best matched the ob￾se…
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Mean absorption spectra between T2 and T0 of night 1. The red curve was computed using the stellar grid that best matched the ob￾served Fout using the additional chromospheric absorption. The other curves are computed using the Fout from the best fit and Fin’s from mo…
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Binned absorption spectrum (black dots) of HD 189733 b around lithium in the planetary rest frame, corrected using the local RVs (Sect. 4.3.2). The gray line shows the unbinned absorption spec￾trum and the red line the Gaussian fit on these data points. The blue horiz…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

99 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2022, , 666, A196

    Allart , R., Lovis , C., Faria , J., et al. 2022, , 666, A196

    2022

  2. [2]

    2020, , 644, A155

    Allart , R., Pino , L., Lovis , C., et al. 2020, , 644, A155

    2020

  3. [3]

    & Plez , B

    Alvarez , R. & Plez , B. 1998, , 330, 1109

    1998

  4. [4]

    2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Artigau , \'E ., Astudillo-Defru , N., Delfosse , X., et al. 2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9149, Observatory Operations: Strategies, Processes, and Systems V, ed. A. B. Peck , C. R. Benn , & R. L. Seaman , 914905

    2014

  5. [5]

    Azevedo Silva , T., Demangeon , O. D. S., Santos , N. C., et al. 2022, , 666, L10

    2022

  6. [6]

    S., et al

    Basilicata , M., Giacobbe , P., Bonomo , A. S., et al. 2024, , 686, A127

    2024

  7. [7]

    J., Crouzet , N., Cubillos , P

    Bell , T. J., Crouzet , N., Cubillos , P. E., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 879

    2024

  8. [8]

    Bello-Arufe , A., Cabot , S. H. C., Mendon c a , J. M., Buchhave , L. A., & Rathcke , A. D. 2022, , 163, 96

    2022

Show all 99 references
  1. [9]

    2021, Experimental Astronomy, 51, 109

    Benz , W., Broeg , C., Fortier , A., et al. 2021, Experimental Astronomy, 51, 109

    2021

  2. [10]

    2024, , 167, 179

    Blain , D., S \'a nchez-L \'o pez , A., & Molli \`e re , P. 2024, , 167, 179

    2024

  3. [11]

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

    Bonomo , A. S., Desidera , S., Benatti , S., et al. 2017, , 602, A107

    2017

  4. [12]

    2021, , 645, A24

    Borsa , F., Allart , R., Casasayas-Barris , N., et al. 2021, , 645, A24

    2021

  5. [13]

    & Zannoni , A

    Borsa , F. & Zannoni , A. 2018, , 617, A134

    2018

  6. [14]

    2005, , 444, L15

    Bouchy , F., Udry , S., Mayor , M., et al. 2005, , 444, L15

    2005

  7. [15]

    B., Lovis , C., et al

    Bourrier , V., Delisle , J. B., Lovis , C., et al. 2024, , 691, A113

    2024

  8. [16]

    2015, A&A, 582, A65

    Bourrier , V., Ehrenreich , D., & Lecavelier des Etangs , A. 2015, A&A, 582, A65

    2015

  9. [17]

    & Lecavelier des Etangs , A

    Bourrier , V. & Lecavelier des Etangs , A. 2013, A&A, 557, A124

    2013

  10. [18]

    A., & Vidotto , A

    Bourrier , V., Lecavelier des Etangs , A., Ehrenreich , D., Tanaka , Y. A., & Vidotto , A. A. 2016, A&A, 591, A121

    2016

  11. [19]

    2021, , 654, A152

    Bourrier , V., Lovis , C., Cretignier , M., et al. 2021, , 654, A152

    2021

  12. [20]

    Bruls , J. H. M. J. & Rutten , R. J. 1992, , 265, 257

    1992

  13. [21]

    2024, , 692, A43

    Canocchi , G., Morello , G., Lind , K., et al. 2024, , 692, A43

    2024

  14. [22]

    2024, , 683, A63

    Carteret , Y., Bourrier , V., & Dethier , W. 2024, , 683, A63

    2024

  15. [23]

    2017, , 608, A135

    Casasayas-Barris , N., Palle , E., Nowak , G., et al. 2017, , 608, A135

    2017

  16. [24]

    2021, , 647, A26

    Casasayas-Barris , N., Palle , E., Stangret , M., et al. 2021, , 647, A26

    2021

  17. [25]

    2020, , 635, A206

    Casasayas-Barris , N., Pall \'e , E., Yan , F., et al. 2020, , 635, A206

    2020

  18. [26]

    W., Kuckein , C., Redfield , S., et al

    Cauley , P. W., Kuckein , C., Redfield , S., et al. 2018, , 156, 189

    2018

  19. [27]

    W., Redfield , S., & Jensen , A

    Cauley , P. W., Redfield , S., & Jensen , A. G. 2017, , 153, 185

    2017

  20. [28]

    M., Lovis , C., Bourrier , V., et al

    Cegla , H. M., Lovis , C., Bourrier , V., et al. 2016, , 588, A127

    2016

  21. [29]

    M., Latham , D

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

    2000

  22. [30]

    M., Noyes , R

    Charbonneau , D., Brown , T. M., Noyes , R. W., & Gilliland , R. L. 2002, , 568, 377

    2002

  23. [31]

    2018, , 616, A145

    Chen , G., Pall \'e , E., Welbanks , L., et al. 2018, , 616, A145

    2018

  24. [32]

    2012, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Cosentino , R., Lovis , C., Pepe , F., et al. 2012, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 8446, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy IV, ed. I. S. McLean , S. K. Ramsay , & H. Takami , 84461V

    2012

  25. [33]

    C., & Pepe , F

    Cretignier , M., Dumusque , X., Hara , N. C., & Pepe , F. 2021, , 653, A43

    2021

  26. [34]

    C., et al

    Cristo , E., Esparza Borges , E., Santos , N. C., et al. 2024, , 682, A28

    2024

  27. [35]

    Czesla , S., Klocov \'a , T., Khalafinejad , S., Wolter , U., & Schmitt , J. H. M. M. 2015, , 582, A51

    2015

  28. [36]

    & Bourrier , V

    Dethier , W. & Bourrier , V. 2023, , 674, A86

    2023

  29. [37]

    & Tessore , B

    Dethier , W. & Tessore , B. 2024, , 688, L30

    2024

  30. [38]

    2020, , 580, 597

    Ehrenreich , D., Lovis , C., Allart , R., et al. 2020, , 580, 597

    2020

  31. [39]

    F., Moutou , C., et al

    Fares , R., Donati , J. F., Moutou , C., et al. 2010, , 406, 409

    2010

  32. [40]

    2020, , 639, A49

    Guilluy , G., Andretta , V., Borsa , F., et al. 2020, , 639, A49

    2020

  33. [41]

    C., Bonomo , A

    Guilluy , G., D'Arpa , M. C., Bonomo , A. S., et al. 2024, , 686, A83

    2024

  34. [42]

    , Eriksson, K

    Gustafsson , B., Edvardsson, B. , Eriksson, K. , et al. 2008, A&A, 486, 951

    2008

  35. [43]

    2012, , 539, A102

    Hayek , W., Sing , D., Pont , F., & Asplund , M. 2012, , 539, A102

    2012

  36. [44]

    2021, , 645, A106

    Heiter , U., Lind , K., Bergemann , M., et al. 2021, , 645, A106

    2021

  37. [45]

    W., Marcy , G

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

    2000

  38. [46]

    M., Sing , D

    Huitson , C. M., Sing , D. K., Vidal-Madjar , A., et al. 2012, , 422, 2477

    2012

  39. [47]

    O., Wende-von Berg , S., Dreizler , S., et al

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

    2013

  40. [48]

    G., Redfield , S., Endl , M., et al

    Jensen , A. G., Redfield , S., Endl , M., et al. 2011, , 743, 203

    2011

  41. [49]

    2023, , 677, A110

    Jiang , Z., Wang , W., Chen , G., et al. 2023, , 677, A110

    2023

  42. [50]

    G., Lendl , M., Cubillos , P

    Juvan , I. G., Lendl , M., Cubillos , P. E., et al. 2018, , 610, A15

    2018

  43. [51]

    2015, , 576, A78

    Kausch , W., Noll , S., Smette , A., et al. 2015, , 576, A78

    2015

  44. [52]

    2024, , 530, 4826

    Keles , E., Czesla , S., Poppenhaeger , K., et al. 2024, , 530, 4826

    2024

  45. [53]

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

    2018

  46. [54]

    Y., Snellen , I

    Kesseli , A. Y., Snellen , I. A. G., Casasayas-Barris , N., Molli \`e re , P., & S \'a nchez-L \'o pez , A. 2022, , 163, 107

    2022

  47. [55]

    J., et al

    Khalafinejad , S., von Essen , C., Hoeijmakers , H. J., et al. 2017, , 598, A131

    2017

  48. [56]

    2015, , 127, 1161

    Kreidberg , L. 2015, , 127, 1161

    2015

  49. [57]

    F., Lendl , M., Patel , J

    Krenn , A. F., Lendl , M., Patel , J. A., et al. 2023, , 672, A24

    2023

  50. [58]

    B., Madhusudhan , N., Cabot , S

    Langeveld , A. B., Madhusudhan , N., Cabot , S. H. C., & Hodgkin , S. T. 2021, , 502, 4392

    2021

  51. [59]

    S., Eitner , P., Magg , E., et al

    Larsen , S. S., Eitner , P., Magg , E., et al. 2022, , 660, A88

    2022

  52. [60]

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

    Lendl , M., Anderson , D. R., Collier-Cameron , A., et al. 2012, , 544, A72

    2012

  53. [61]

    & Wheatley , P

    Louden , T. & Wheatley , P. J. 2015, , 814, L24

    2015

  54. [62]

    2022, , 661, A140

    Magg , E., Bergemann , M., Serenelli , A., et al. 2022, , 661, A140

    2022

  55. [63]

    2003, The Messenger, 114, 20

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

    2003

  56. [64]

    2000, , 532, L55

    Mazeh , T., Naef , D., Torres , G., et al. 2000, , 532, L55

    2000

  57. [65]

    McLaughlin , D. B. 1924, , 60, 22

    1924

  58. [66]

    V., et al

    Mounzer , D., Lovis , C., Seidel , J. V., et al. 2022, , 668, A1

    2022

  59. [67]

    F., et al

    Moutou , C., Dalal , S., Donati , J. F., et al. 2020, , 642, A72

    2020

  60. [68]

    F., Savalle , R., et al

    Moutou , C., Donati , J. F., Savalle , R., et al. 2007, , 473, 651

    2007

  61. [69]

    C., Ehrenreich , D., et al

    Oshagh , M., Santos , N. C., Ehrenreich , D., et al. 2014, , 568, A99

    2014

  62. [70]

    2021, , 645, A96

    Pepe , F., Cristiani , S., Rebolo , R., et al. 2021, , 645, A96

    2021

  63. [71]

    2014, Astronomische Nachrichten, 335, 8

    Pepe , F., Molaro , P., Cristiani , S., et al. 2014, Astronomische Nachrichten, 335, 8

    2014

  64. [72]

    2012, Turbospectrum: Code for spectral synthesis

    Plez , B. 2012, Turbospectrum: Code for spectral synthesis

    2012

  65. [73]

    K., Gibson , N

    Pont , F., Sing , D. K., Gibson , N. P., et al. 2013, , 432, 2917

    2013

  66. [74]

    J., Morris , B

    Prinoth , B., Hoeijmakers , H. J., Morris , B. M., et al. 2024, , 685, A60

    2024

  67. [75]

    J., Caballero , J

    Quirrenbach , A., Amado , P. J., Caballero , J. A., et al. 2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9147, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy V, ed. S. K. Ramsay , I. S. McLean , & H. Takami , 91471F

    2014

  68. [76]

    2024, , 962, L20

    Radica , M., Coulombe , L.-P., Taylor , J., et al. 2024, , 962, L20

    2024

  69. [77]

    D., & Koesterke , L

    Redfield , S., Endl , M., Cochran , W. D., & Koesterke , L. 2008, , 673, L87

    2008

  70. [78]

    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. Oschmann , Jacobus M., M. Clampin , ...

    2014

  71. [79]

    Rossiter , R. A. 1924, , 60, 15

    1924

  72. [80]

    K., Mukherjee , S., et al

    Rustamkulov , Z., Sing , D. K., Mukherjee , S., et al. 2023, , 614, 659

    2023

  73. [81]

    L., et al

    Ryabchikova, T., Piskunov, N., Kurucz, R. L., et al. 2015, Physica Scripta, 90, 054005

    2015

  74. [82]

    & Sasselov , D

    Seager , S. & Sasselov , D. D. 2000, , 537, 916

    2000

  75. [83]

    V., Borsa , F., Pino , L., et al

    Seidel , J. V., Borsa , F., Pino , L., et al. 2023, , 673, A125

    2023

  76. [84]

    V., Ehrenreich , D., Pino , L., et al

    Seidel , J. V., Ehrenreich , D., Pino , L., et al. 2020, , 633, A86

    2020

  77. [85]

    V., Ehrenreich , D., Wyttenbach , A., et al

    Seidel , J. V., Ehrenreich , D., Wyttenbach , A., et al. 2019, , 623, A166

    2019

  78. [86]

    V., Prinoth , B., Pino , L., et al

    Seidel , J. V., Prinoth , B., Pino , L., et al. 2025, , 639, 902

    2025

  79. [87]

    2022, , 667, A19

    Sicilia , D., Malavolta , L., Pino , L., et al. 2022, , 667, A19

    2022

  80. [88]

    2025, , 693, A316

    Sicilia , D., Malavolta , L., Scandariato , G., et al. 2025, , 693, A316

    2025

  81. [89]

    K., Fortney , J

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

    2016

  82. [90]

    2015, , 576, A77

    Smette , A., Sana , H., Noll , S., et al. 2015, , 576, A77

    2015

  83. [91]

    Snellen , I. A. G., de Kok , R. J., de Mooij , E. J. W., & Albrecht , S. 2010, , 465, 1049

    2010

  84. [92]

    G., Ilyin , I., J \"a rvinen , A., et al

    Strassmeier , K. G., Ilyin , I., J \"a rvinen , A., et al. 2015, Astronomische Nachrichten, 336, 324

    2015

  85. [93]

    M., Zapatero Osorio , M

    Tabernero , H. M., Zapatero Osorio , M. R., Allart , R., et al. 2021, , 646, A158

    2021

  86. [94]

    2015, , 577, A62

    Wyttenbach , A., Ehrenreich , D., Lovis , C., Udry , S., & Pepe , F. 2015, , 577, A62

    2015

  87. [95]

    2020, , 638, A87

    Wyttenbach , A., Molli \`e re , P., Ehrenreich , D., et al. 2020, , 638, A87

    2020

  88. [96]

    & Henning , T

    Yan , F. & Henning , T. 2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 714

    2018

  89. [97]

    Yan , F., Pall \'e , E., Fosbury , R. A. E., Petr-Gotzens , M. G., & Henning , T. 2017, , 603, A73

    2017

  90. [98]

    , " * 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...

  91. [99]

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