arxiv: 2603.24662 · v1 · submitted 2026-03-25 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR · astro-ph.EP

Recognition: no theorem link

Clouds with a silicate lining: Using JWST spectra to probe atmospheric diversity in young AB Dor L dwarfs

M. B. Lam , J. M. Vos , G. Su\'arez , C.-C. Hsu , T. P. Bickle , J. Faherty , J. Gagn\'e , D. Bardalez Gagliuffi

show 8 more authors

B. Biller B. Burningham K. L. Cruz C. V. Morley S. Luszcz-Cook S. Lawsky C. L. Phillips A. Rothermich

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 00:12 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.EP

keywords L dwarfsbrown dwarfssilicate absorptionJWST spectracloud structureinclinationatmospheric diversityAB Doradus

0 comments

The pith

Young L dwarfs viewed equator-on show deeper silicate absorption than those seen pole-on in JWST spectra.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper presents the first full 0.6-14 micron JWST spectra for five young L dwarfs in the AB Doradus group that have measured inclination angles ranging from near pole-on to equator-on. The analysis centers on the silicate absorption feature from 8 to 11 microns, which traces cloud properties in these cool atmospheres. Four of the five L-type objects follow the pattern that equator-on views produce deeper absorption, while one object shows unusually strong absorption despite its near pole-on orientation. The data also suggest a possible link between the wavelength of peak absorption and the inclination angle. These results indicate that cloud structure in young brown dwarfs can vary with viewing geometry within a coeval population.

Core claim

The spectra display molecular absorption from H2O, CH4, CO, and CO2, but the silicate feature at 8-11 microns varies in shape and strength across the sample. Four out of five L dwarfs exhibit deeper silicate absorption at higher inclinations consistent with equator-on viewing, matching earlier trends. W1741-46 emerges as an outlier with strong absorption despite its near pole-on tilt. A tentative correlation appears between the wavelength of the silicate absorption peak and inclination, potentially signaling differences in cloud chemical composition or physical properties with latitude.

What carries the argument

Silicate absorption feature at 8-11 microns, which probes cloud structure and is tested for dependence on viewing inclination within a coeval group of brown dwarfs.

Load-bearing premise

The silicate absorption arises mainly from cloud properties that change with latitude, and the known inclination angles accurately reflect the true viewing geometry without major contamination from other effects.

What would settle it

A new spectrum of a young L dwarf with confirmed near-equator inclination that shows shallow rather than deep silicate absorption, or atmospheric modeling that reproduces the variations through temperature or composition changes alone.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.24662 by A. Rothermich, B. Biller, B. Burningham, C.-C. Hsu, C. L. Phillips, C. V. Morley, D. Bardalez Gagliuffi, G. Su\'arez, J. Faherty, J. Gagn\'e, J. M. Vos, K. L. Cruz, M. B. Lam, S. Lawsky, S. Luszcz-Cook, T. P. Bickle.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Colour-magnitude diagram indicating locations of our targets (coloured stars) at the L-T transition. The location of VHS 1256 b has also been included as a cyan circle. Planets in the HR 8799 system are also indicated as black circles. PSO J318 is indicated as a pink circle. The coral points are M dwarfs, dark red points are L dwarfs, and blue points are T dwarfs. Photometric data for each point was obtain… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Distance-calibrated spectra for each object (top panel). Shaded regions show key absorption bands for CH4, CO, CO2, NH3 and H2O. The dotted line shows the offset level for each spectrum. The spectra are ordered by decreasing effective temperature from top to bottom. The cross sections for each species, computed at T = 1300 K and P = 1 bar, are included in the bottom panels. Article number, page 6 of 19 [P… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: and we present our updated spectral types in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: JWST/NIRSpec Prism NIR spectrum of 2M0642+41 (black), dereddened and compared to L/T transition low-gravity spectral standards. The T1γ spectral standard is the best fit to 2M0642+41. CH4 absorption regions are shaded in orange. et al. 2021). These parameters further characterise our sample and place them in context with a wider sample of brown dwarfs. Physical parameters derived from the bolometric lumin… view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Visualisation of the fundamental parameters of the sample analysed in Sanghi et al. (2023) (grey circles) and our sample (coloured outlined stars). Teff is plotted against IR spectral type. The fill colour is indicative of the mass of the object. Random noise of 0.3 spectral types was added along the x-axis to minimise overlapping points in visualisation. The fundamental parameters were calculated using … view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: SMART fits to IGRINS spectra for W1741−46 (top) and 2M2206−42 (bottom). The grey line is the observed IGRINS spectra, the red line is the fitted model including telluric absorption, and the blue line is the fitted model without tellurics. At the bottom of each plot is the residual between the model (including tellurics) and the observed data. The shaded blue region is the ±1σ uncertainty. dwarfs (W0047+68,… view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Calculated CH4 (top), H2O (middle), and silicate (bottom) indices for our sample (coloured stars) compared to those from the Spitzer IRS sample (shown as black points). The spectral types of W0047+68 and 2M2244+20 have an additional −0.15 and +0.15, respectively, for visualisation purposes. The dashed black line represents the median index for the bins of two spectral types in the Spitzer IRS sample usin… view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Isolated silicate absorption features of the objects in our AB Dor sample, after continuum removal. The spectra of the silicate feature has been ordered with inclination angle, with objects viewed more equator-on towards the top, and objects viewed more pole-on towards the bottom. The left panel directly compares the shape of the silicate feature with the mean silicate feature of our sample, shown as the b… view at source ↗

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Correlation between the inclination and the silicate index for our sample (stars) compared with the Spitzer sample (circles) from Suárez et al. (2023). VHS 1256 b is also included with a triangle marker and black error bars. The upper panel is colour-coded according to the J-KS MKO colour anomaly calculated from young objects in the UltracoolSheet (Best et al. 2024). The bottom panel is colour-coded accor… view at source ↗

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: Spectral comparison between Spitzer IRS observations (Suárez & Metchev 2022) and our JWST MIRI LRS observations for 2M0355+11 and 2M2244+20. The Spitzer spectra are shown in black and our spectra are coloured. The top two panels show the comparison for 2M0355+11 and the bottom two panels show the comparison for 2M2244+20. The uncertainties are shown as the shaded envelope region. Below each spectral comp… view at source ↗

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: Comparison between our objects W0047+68 and 2M2244+20 (coloured lines), and other directly imaged exoplanets PSO J318, VHS 1256 b and YSES-1 c (dashed, solid, and dotted black lines, respectively). For ease of comparison, the spectra of each object not included in our sample were renormalised to match the spectral resolutions of our JWST NIRSpec Prism and MIRI LRS spectra. To highlight the 8 – 11 µm silic… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

We present the first full JWST NIRSpec Prism and MIRI LRS 0.6 - 14 $\mu$m (R ~ 100) spectra and analysis of five ~ 133 Myr L dwarf members of the AB Doradus moving group and one probable $\sim 500$ Myr T dwarf of the Oceanus moving group with known inclination angles between ~ $23 - 90^{\circ}$: W0047+68, 2M0355+11, 2M0642+41, W1741-46, 2M2206-42, and 2M2244+20. We construct near-complete spectral energy distributions of each of our objects to measure their bolometric luminosities, and estimate their fundamental parameters ($T_{\text{eff}}$, radius, $M$ and $\log g$). We use cross-sections of relevant gases to identify the species that are present in each atmosphere. Of particular interest is the silicate absorption feature at 8 - 11 $\mu$m, which provides insight into the complex cloud structure of brown dwarfs. We examine this silicate absorption feature in detail and also test whether there exists a latitudinal dependence in the silicate absorption feature within a coeval sample of brown dwarfs. Various molecular absorption bands are visible in our spectra, including H$_2$O, CH$_4$, CO and CO$_2$. The shape of the silicate absorption feature varies within our sample, and we find that 4/5 of our L type objects agree with previously observed trends stating that objects viewed equator-on have deeper silicate absorption. We highlight W1741-46 as an outlier in our sample with an unusually strong silicate absorption given its near pole-on orientation. We also present a tentative correlation between the wavelength of peak silicate absorption and inclination, which may suggest variations in cloud chemical composition or physical properties. We find an unexpected spectral diversity within our sample, which motivates future studies on these objects through atmospheric retrievals, which will determine the silicate cloud composition and reveal whether there exists a trend with inclination.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

New JWST spectra for five young AB Dor L dwarfs with known inclinations add useful 0.6-14 micron coverage and flag silicate feature variation, but the latitudinal trend claim rests on a 5-object sample without numbers, errors, or retrievals.

read the letter

The paper's real contribution is the first complete JWST NIRSpec Prism plus MIRI LRS spectra for this coeval set of five ~133 Myr L dwarfs and one T dwarf, all with published inclinations from 23 to 90 degrees. They build SEDs, estimate Teff, radius, mass, and log g, flag the usual molecular bands, and zoom in on the 8-11 micron silicate absorption. That data set is new and worth having for anyone modeling young brown dwarf clouds as exoplanet analogs. They also note that four of the five L dwarfs line up with earlier reports of deeper silicate absorption at equator-on views, call out W1741-46 as an outlier, and mention a possible shift in peak wavelength with inclination. Those observations are presented plainly. The soft spots are straightforward. The abstract and summary give no measured depths, no error bars, no statistical test on the 4/5 agreement, and no description of how the silicate band was separated from overlapping gas opacity. No atmospheric retrievals are run, so the claim that the feature traces cloud properties versus temperature or gravity structure stays untested. With only five objects and one highlighted outlier, even modest uncertainty in the input inclinations or in feature measurement can erase the reported pattern. The authors themselves flag the need for future retrieval work. This is the kind of paper that belongs in a specialist journal on substellar atmospheres. The spectra themselves are solid observational material; the interpretation is still preliminary. I would send it to referees rather than desk reject, with the expectation that the analysis section will need quantitative measurements and some modeling before the inclination correlation can be treated as more than a hint.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents the first complete 0.6–14 μm JWST NIRSpec Prism + MIRI LRS spectra (R~100) for five ~133 Myr AB Dor L dwarfs and one ~500 Myr Oceanus T dwarf with published inclinations spanning 23–90°. It constructs SEDs to derive bolometric luminosities and fundamental parameters (T_eff, radius, mass, log g), identifies molecular bands (H2O, CH4, CO, CO2) via cross-sections, and focuses on the 8–11 μm silicate absorption feature. The central results are that 4/5 L dwarfs follow the previously reported trend of deeper silicate absorption when viewed equator-on, W1741-46 is highlighted as an outlier with unusually strong absorption despite near pole-on orientation, and a tentative correlation is noted between the wavelength of peak silicate absorption and inclination.

Significance. If the reported trends are placed on a quantitative footing, the work would supply useful observational constraints on possible latitudinal variations in silicate cloud properties within a coeval sample, complementing existing Spitzer and ground-based studies of brown-dwarf cloud structure. The explicit call for future atmospheric retrievals is appropriate given the current data.

major comments (2)

[silicate absorption analysis] The claim that 4/5 L dwarfs agree with the equator-on deeper-silicate trend (abstract and silicate-feature section) is presented without measured absorption depths, uncertainties, or any statistical test. For a sample of five objects with one highlighted outlier, the absence of these quantities leaves the agreement unquantified and vulnerable to modest systematic shifts in either feature measurement or inclination.
[inclination and correlation discussion] The tentative correlation between peak silicate wavelength and inclination is reported without description of how the peak position was determined, how inclination uncertainties (23–90°) were propagated, or any assessment of its statistical significance. Given the small N and the noted outlier, this correlation cannot yet be considered load-bearing evidence for latitudinal cloud-composition variations.

minor comments (2)

[abstract] The abstract states that cross-sections were used to identify species but does not list the specific wavelength ranges or reference cross-section sources employed; adding these would improve reproducibility.
[conclusions] The text notes that future retrievals are needed to confirm composition; a brief forward-looking paragraph outlining which parameters (e.g., cloud particle size, vertical distribution) would be most diagnostic would strengthen the discussion.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thoughtful and constructive review. The comments highlight important opportunities to strengthen the quantitative presentation of our results. We have revised the manuscript to address both major points by adding explicit measurements, clarifying methods, and tempering claims about statistical significance given the small sample size.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [silicate absorption analysis] The claim that 4/5 L dwarfs agree with the equator-on deeper-silicate trend (abstract and silicate-feature section) is presented without measured absorption depths, uncertainties, or any statistical test. For a sample of five objects with one highlighted outlier, the absence of these quantities leaves the agreement unquantified and vulnerable to modest systematic shifts in either feature measurement or inclination.

Authors: We agree that the original presentation lacked the necessary quantitative detail. In the revised manuscript we now report measured silicate absorption depths for each object, defined as the minimum normalized flux in the 8–11 μm region relative to a local linear continuum fit, together with 1σ uncertainties derived from the spectral noise in adjacent continuum regions. We retain the qualitative statement that four of the five L dwarfs follow the previously reported trend but explicitly note the small sample size and the absence of a formal statistical test, which would be underpowered here. These additions make the agreement verifiable and reduce vulnerability to systematic shifts. revision: yes
Referee: [inclination and correlation discussion] The tentative correlation between peak silicate wavelength and inclination is reported without description of how the peak position was determined, how inclination uncertainties (23–90°) were propagated, or any assessment of its statistical significance. Given the small N and the noted outlier, this correlation cannot yet be considered load-bearing evidence for latitudinal cloud-composition variations.

Authors: We appreciate the referee’s call for methodological transparency. The revised text now states that the peak wavelength is identified as the wavelength of minimum flux within the silicate feature after applying a 5-pixel boxcar smooth to reduce noise. We note the literature inclination uncertainties but explain that, given their broad ranges and the exploratory nature of the correlation, we did not attempt formal error propagation or a significance test. We have strengthened the language to emphasize that the correlation remains tentative and is not presented as load-bearing evidence, consistent with the small sample and the presence of the outlier W1741-46. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in observational comparisons

full rationale

The paper reports new JWST spectra, constructs SEDs to derive bolometric luminosities and fundamental parameters, identifies molecular species via cross-sections, and directly measures the 8-11 µm silicate feature depth and peak wavelength. It then compares these measurements to previously reported trends in the literature for inclination dependence. No equations, fitted parameters, or self-citations are used to derive or predict the reported agreement (4/5 objects) or tentative correlation; the results are empirical observations on an independent dataset with no reduction to inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on standard assumptions for brown dwarf parameter estimation from spectra and SEDs, plus the premise that the sample shares a common age and that inclination angles are independently known.

free parameters (3)

T_eff
Estimated from spectral features and bolometric luminosity
radius
Derived from luminosity and effective temperature
log g
Estimated as a fundamental parameter from mass and radius

axioms (2)

domain assumption The five L dwarfs are ~133 Myr members of the AB Doradus moving group and the T dwarf is ~500 Myr in the Oceanus group
Used to establish the sample as coeval for testing inclination trends
domain assumption Inclination angles between ~23-90 degrees are known accurately from prior measurements
Central to interpreting silicate absorption depth as a latitudinal effect

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5778 in / 1644 out tokens · 68749 ms · 2026-05-15T00:12:52.971708+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

103 extracted references · 103 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

Ackerman, A. S. & Marley, M. S. 2001, ApJ, 556, 872

work page 2001
[2]

2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 370, 2765

Allard, F., Homeier, D., & Freytag, B. 2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 370, 2765

work page 2012
[3]

N., Gallimore, J

Allers, K. N., Gallimore, J. F., Liu, M. C., & Dupuy, T. J. 2016, ApJ, 819, 133

work page 2016
[4]

Allers, K. N. & Liu, M. C. 2013, ApJ, 772, 79

work page 2013
[5]

S., et al

Apai, D., Karalidi, T., Marley, M. S., et al. 2017, Science, 357, 683

work page 2017
[6]

2013, ApJ, 768, 121 Artigau, É., Bouchard, S., Doyon, R., & Lafrenière, D

Apai, D., Radigan, J., Buenzli, E., et al. 2013, ApJ, 768, 121 Artigau, É., Bouchard, S., Doyon, R., & Lafrenière, D. 2009, ApJ, 701, 1534

work page 2013
[7]

2015, A&A, 577, A42 Bardalez Gagliuffi, D

Baraffe, I., Homeier, D., Allard, F., & Chabrier, G. 2015, A&A, 577, A42 Bardalez Gagliuffi, D. C., Balmer, W. O., Pueyo, L., et al. 2025, ApJ, 988, L18 Bardalez Gagliuffi, D. C., Faherty, J. K., Li, Y ., et al. 2021, ApJ, 922, L43

work page 2015
[8]

2020, Resampled Opacity Database for PICASO

Batalha, N., Freedman, R., Gharib-Nezhad, E., & Lupu, R. 2020, Resampled Opacity Database for PICASO

work page 2020
[9]

Best, W. M. J., Dupuy, T. J., Liu, M. C., et al. 2024, The UltracoolSheet: Photom- etry, Astrometry, Spectroscopy, and Multiplicity for 4000+Ultracool Dwarfs and Imaged Exoplanets

work page 2024
[10]

Best, W. M. J., Liu, M. C., Magnier, E. A., et al. 2015, ApJ, 814, 118

work page 2015
[11]

Best, W. M. J., Liu, M. C., Magnier, E. A., & Dupuy, T. J. 2021, AJ, 161, 42

work page 2021
[12]

Best, W. M. J., Sanghi, A., Liu, M. C., Magnier, E. A., & Dupuy, T. J. 2024, ApJ, 967, 115

work page 2024
[13]

A., V os, J

Biller, B. A., V os, J. M., Zhou, Y ., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 532, 2207

work page 2024
[14]

H., Charbonneau, D., & White, R

Blake, C. H., Charbonneau, D., & White, R. J. 2010, ApJ, 723, 684

work page 2010
[15]

J., Kenworthy, M

Bohn, A. J., Kenworthy, M. A., Ginski, C., et al. 2020, ApJ, 898, L16

work page 2020
[16]

P., Zhou, Y ., Morley, C

Bowler, B. P., Zhou, Y ., Morley, C. V ., et al. 2020, ApJ, 893, L30

work page 2020
[17]

M., Brandt, T

Brandt, G. M., Brandt, T. D., Dupuy, T. J., Michalik, D., & Marleau, G.-D. 2021, ApJ, 915, L16

work page 2021
[18]

J., Kirkpatrick, J

Burgasser, A. J., Kirkpatrick, J. D., Brown, M. E., et al. 2002, ApJ, 564, 421

work page 2002
[19]

K., Gonzales, E

Burningham, B., Faherty, J. K., Gonzales, E. C., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 1944

work page 2021
[20]

S., Line, M

Burningham, B., Marley, M. S., Line, M. R., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 470, 1177

work page 2017
[21]

B., Lunine, J

Burrows, A., Hubbard, W. B., Lunine, J. I., & Liebert, J. 2001, Reviews of Mod- ern Physics, 73, 719

work page 2001
[22]

2006, ApJ, 640, 1063

Burrows, A., Sudarsky, D., & Hubeny, I. 2006, ApJ, 640, 1063

work page 2006
[23]

2024, JWST Calibration Pipeline

Bushouse, H., Eisenhamer, J., Dencheva, N., et al. 2024, JWST Calibration Pipeline

work page 2024
[24]

A., Clayton, G

Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245

work page 1989
[25]

Carnall, A. C. 2017, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1705.05165

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017
[26]

2023, A&A, 671, A119

Chabrier, G., Baraffe, I., Phillips, M., & Debras, F. 2023, A&A, 671, A119

work page 2023
[27]

A., Tan, X., et al

Chen, X., Biller, B. A., Tan, X., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 539, 3758

work page 2025
[28]

L., Kirkpatrick, J

Cruz, K. L., Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Burgasser, A. J. 2009, AJ, 137, 3345

work page 2009
[29]

L., Núñez, A., Burgasser, A

Cruz, K. L., Núñez, A., Burgasser, A. J., et al. 2018, AJ, 155, 34

work page 2018
[30]

C., Roellig, T

Cushing, M. C., Roellig, T. L., Marley, M. S., et al. 2006, ApJ, 648, 614

work page 2006
[31]

C., Harris, H

Dahn, C. C., Harris, H. C., Vrba, F. J., et al. 2002, AJ, 124, 1170

work page 2002
[32]

J., Liu, M

Dupuy, T. J., Liu, M. C., Evans, E. L., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 1688

work page 2023
[33]

J., Liu, M

Dupuy, T. J., Liu, M. C., Magnier, E. A., et al. 2020, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 4, 54

work page 2020
[34]

K., Rice, E

Faherty, J. K., Rice, E. L., Cruz, K. L., Mamajek, E. E., & Núñez, A. 2013, AJ, 145, 2

work page 2013
[35]

K., Riedel, A

Faherty, J. K., Riedel, A. R., Cruz, K. L., et al. 2016, ApJS, 225, 10

work page 2016
[36]

C., Rice, E

Filippazzo, J. C., Rice, E. L., Faherty, J., et al. 2015, ApJ, 810, 158

work page 2015
[37]

& Apai, D

Fuda, N. & Apai, D. 2024, ApJ, 975, L32

work page 2024
[38]

2024, ApJ, 965, 182 Gagné, J., Faherty, J

Fuda, N., Apai, D., Nardiello, D., et al. 2024, ApJ, 965, 182 Gagné, J., Faherty, J. K., Cruz, K. L., et al. 2015, ApJS, 219, 33 Gagné, J., Fontaine, G., Simon, A., & Faherty, J. K. 2018a, ApJ, 861, L13 Gagné, J., Mamajek, E. E., Malo, L., et al. 2018b, ApJ, 856, 23 Gagné, J., Moranta, L., Faherty, J. K., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.15695 Gagn...

work page arXiv 2024
[39]

R., Moran, S

Gao, P., Wakeford, H. R., Moran, S. E., & Parmentier, V . 2021, Journal of Geo- physical Research (Planets), 126, e06655

work page 2021
[40]

Gauza, B., Béjar, V . J. S., Pérez-Garrido, A., et al. 2015, ApJ, 804, 96

work page 2015
[41]

N., et al

Ge, H., Zhang, X., Fletcher, L. N., et al. 2019, AJ, 157, 89

work page 2019
[42]

E., Allers, K

Gizis, J. E., Allers, K. N., Liu, M. C., et al. 2015, ApJ, 799, 203

work page 2015
[43]

E., Faherty, J

Gizis, J. E., Faherty, J. K., Liu, M. C., et al. 2012, AJ, 144, 94

work page 2012
[44]

K., Wakeford, H

Grant, D., Lewis, N. K., Wakeford, H. R., et al. 2023, ApJ, 956, L32

work page 2023
[45]

Hoch, K. K. W., Rowland, M., Petrus, S., et al. 2025, Nature, 643, 938

work page 2025
[46]

J., Theissen, C

Hsu, C.-C., Burgasser, A. J., Theissen, C. A., et al. 2021, ApJS, 257, 45

work page 2021
[47]

A., Liu, M

Hurt, S. A., Liu, M. C., Zhang, Z., et al. 2024, ApJ, 961, 121

work page 2024
[48]

2022, A&A, 661, A80

Jakobsen, P., Ferruit, P., Alves de Oliveira, C., et al. 2022, A&A, 661, A80

work page 2022
[49]

2024, igrins/plp

Kaplan, K., Lee, J.-J., Sawczynec, E., & Kim, H.-J. 2024, igrins/plp

work page 2024
[50]

R., Delfosse, X., Martín, E

Kendall, T. R., Delfosse, X., Martín, E. L., & Forveille, T. 2004, A&A, 416, L17

work page 2004
[51]

Kirkpatrick, J. D. 2005, ARA&A, 43, 195

work page 2005
[52]

D., Cruz, K

Kirkpatrick, J. D., Cruz, K. L., Barman, T. S., et al. 2008, ApJ, 689, 1295

work page 2008
[53]

D., Gelino, C

Kirkpatrick, J. D., Gelino, C. R., Faherty, J. K., et al. 2021, ApJS, 253, 7

work page 2021
[54]

D., Reid, I

Kirkpatrick, J. D., Reid, I. N., Liebert, J., et al. 2000, AJ, 120, 447

work page 2000
[55]

R., Leggett, S

Knapp, G. R., Leggett, S. K., Fan, X., et al. 2004, AJ, 127, 3553

work page 2004
[56]

Kumar, S. S. 1963, ApJ, 137, 1121

work page 1963
[57]

W., & Schlegel, D

Lang, D., Hogg, D. W., & Schlegel, D. J. 2016, AJ, 151, 36

work page 2016
[58]

J., Almaini, O., et al

Lawrence, A., Warren, S. J., Almaini, O., et al. 2007, MNRAS, 379, 1599

work page 2007
[59]

Lew, B. W. P., Apai, D., Zhou, Y ., et al. 2016, ApJ, 829, L32

work page 2016
[60]

C., Dupuy, T

Liu, M. C., Dupuy, T. J., & Allers, K. N. 2016, ApJ, 833, 96

work page 2016
[61]

C., Magnier, E

Liu, M. C., Magnier, E. A., Deacon, N. R., et al. 2013, ApJ, 777, L20

work page 2013
[62]

& Fegley, B

Lodders, K. & Fegley, B. 2002, Icarus, 155, 393

work page 2002
[63]

& Fegley, Jr., B

Lodders, K. & Fegley, Jr., B. 2006, in Astrophysics Update 2, ed. J. W. Mason, 1

work page 2006
[64]

Luhman, K. L. 2013, ApJ, 767, L1 Article number, page 17 of 19 A&A proofs:manuscript no. aa58421-25

work page 2013
[65]

Luhman, K. L. 2014, ApJ, 786, L18

work page 2014
[66]

Luna, J. L. & Morley, C. V . 2021, ApJ, 920, 146

work page 2021
[67]

T., et al

Mace, G., Kim, H., Jaffe, D. T., et al. 2016, in Society of Photo-Optical Instru- mentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 9908, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy VI, ed. C. J. Evans, L. Simard, & H. Takami, 99080C

work page 2016
[68]

2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instru- mentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol

Mace, G., Sokal, K., Lee, J.-J., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instru- mentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 10702, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy VII, ed. C. J. Evans, L. Simard, & H. Takami, 107020Q

work page 2018
[69]

N., Kirkpatrick, J

Mace, G. N., Kirkpatrick, J. D., Cushing, M. C., et al. 2013, ApJS, 205, 6

work page 2013
[70]

J., et al

Mader, E., Zhang, Z., Fortney, J. J., et al. 2026, AJ, 171, 198

work page 2026
[71]

S., Saumon, D., Cushing, M., et al

Marley, M. S., Saumon, D., Cushing, M., et al. 2012, ApJ, 754, 135

work page 2012
[72]

S., Saumon, D., & Goldblatt, C

Marley, M. S., Saumon, D., & Goldblatt, C. 2010, ApJ, 723, L117

work page 2010
[73]

S., Seager, S., Saumon, D., et al

Marley, M. S., Seager, S., Saumon, D., et al. 2002, ApJ, 568, 335

work page 2002
[74]

2008, Science, 322, 1348

Marois, C., Macintosh, B., Barman, T., et al. 2008, Science, 322, 1348

work page 2008
[75]

M., Macintosh, B., & Barman, T

Marois, C., Zuckerman, B., Konopacky, Q. M., Macintosh, B., & Barman, T. 2010, Nature, 468, 1080

work page 2010
[76]

C., Carter, A

Matthews, E. C., Carter, A. L., Pathak, P., et al. 2024, Nature, 633, 789

work page 2024
[77]

G., Banerji, M., Gonzalez, E., et al

McMahon, R. G., Banerji, M., Gonzalez, E., et al. 2013, The Messenger, 154, 35

work page 2013
[78]

E., Biller, B

Miles, B. E., Biller, B. A., Patapis, P., et al. 2023, ApJ, 946, L6 Mollière, P., Kühnle, H., Matthews, E. C., et al. 2025, A&A, 703, A79 Morales-Calderón, M., Stauffer, J. R., Kirkpatrick, J. D., et al. 2006, ApJ, 653, 1454

work page 2023
[79]

V ., Mukherjee, S., Marley, M

Morley, C. V ., Mukherjee, S., Marley, M. S., et al. 2024, ApJ, 975, 59

work page 2024
[80]

M., et al

Nasedkin, E., Schrader, M., V os, J. M., et al. 2025, A&A, 702, A1

work page 2025

Showing first 80 references.