arxiv: 2604.06595 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-08 · 🌌 astro-ph.EP · astro-ph.SR

Recognition: no theorem link

An Aligned Very-Low-Mass Star Orbiting an M dwarf and Obliquity Patterns Across Giant Planets, Brown Dwarfs, and Binary Stars

Tianjun Gan , Alexandrine L'Heureux , \'Etienne Artigau , Charles Cadieux , Ren\'e Doyon , Neil J. Cook , Shude Mao

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 18:45 UTC · model grok-4.3

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

keywords stellar obliquityRossiter-McLaughlin effectM dwarf binarybrown dwarfspin-orbit alignmentTOI-5375exoplanet dynamics

0 comments

The pith

The first obliquity measurement for a double M dwarf binary finds the primary star's spin well aligned with the companion orbit, and similar alignment trends hold across brown dwarfs and binaries as in giant planets.

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

The paper presents the first Rossiter-McLaughlin measurement of stellar obliquity in an M dwarf binary system. For TOI-5375 the primary star spins nearly aligned with the orbit of its 85 Jupiter-mass companion, yielding a projected obliquity of -13.5 degrees and a true three-dimensional obliquity of 37.5 degrees. The same data set is used to compare obliquity distributions across giant planets, brown dwarfs and stellar binaries, revealing that cool host stars and wide orbits favor alignment in all three populations while eccentricity shows no clear correlation. Modeling the absolute obliquity as a two-component Gaussian mixture indicates that the aligned component is tighter for binaries and brown dwarfs than for giant planets.

Core claim

The spin axis of the primary star TOI-5375 is well aligned with the orbit of its low-mass stellar companion, with projected obliquity λ = -13.5° and true 3D obliquity ψ = 37.5°. A few obliquity trends observed in giant planets also tentatively exhibit in brown dwarfs and binary stars: well-aligned orbits are preferentially found around cooler host stars (Teff ≤ 6250 K), wide-orbit companions (a/R* ≥ 10) are predominantly aligned, and no significant correlation appears between obliquity and orbital eccentricity in any companion class. Modeling |λ| with a two-component Gaussian distribution shows the low-|λ| components of binary stars and brown dwarfs are more concentrated near zero than those

What carries the argument

Rossiter-McLaughlin effect measurement of the projected spin-orbit angle λ, combined with a two-component Gaussian mixture model for the absolute obliquity distribution |λ| across companion populations.

If this is right

Well-aligned orbits predominate around stars cooler than 6250 K for giant planets, brown dwarfs and binaries alike.
Companions at wide separations (a/R* ≥ 10) are aligned in all three classes.
Obliquity shows no significant correlation with eccentricity within any of the three populations.
The aligned Gaussian component is narrower for brown dwarfs and binaries than for giant planets.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If the trends persist with larger samples, formation or migration pathways may be more similar across planets, brown dwarfs and binaries than current models assume.
Tidal realignment could operate efficiently even in low-mass M dwarf binaries on short periods.
High-obliquity brown dwarfs and binaries may be rarer or harder to detect than their planetary counterparts, requiring targeted follow-up.

Load-bearing premise

The compiled literature samples for giant planets, brown dwarfs and binaries are free of selection biases that could artificially produce the reported trends with stellar temperature and orbital separation.

What would settle it

A new wide-orbit brown dwarf or binary around a cool star (Teff ≤ 6250 K) measured to have high obliquity, or a statistical test showing that selection effects alone can reproduce the observed temperature and separation trends without intrinsic differences between populations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.06595 by Alexandrine L'Heureux, Charles Cadieux, \'Etienne Artigau, Neil J. Cook, Ren\'e Doyon, Shude Mao, Tianjun Gan.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Left panel: The phase-folded TESS and RBO light curves. The light blue dots are the binned TESS light curve with a binning size of about 180s. Middle panel: The out-of-transit radial velocities from HPF and HARPS-N. Right panel: The two-night SPIRou RM measurements after subtracting the best Keplerian model. The plotted error bars are the quadrature sums of the uncertainties of individual measurements and … view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Projected stellar obliquity (λ) of giant-planet (0.3 ≤ Mc < 13.6 MJ , gray), brown dwarf (13.6 ≤ Mc < 80 MJ , blue) and binary star (Mc ≥ 80 MJ , red) systems as a function of primary star effective temperature. M dwarfs and hot stars with effective temperatures above the Kraft break (Teff ∼ 6250 K) are shown as red and blue shaded regions, respectively. TOI-5375 is marked with a red arrow. The obliquities… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Left panel: Gaussian mixture model fitting to the |λ| distribution of giant planets (gray, 0.3 ≤ Mc < 13.6 MJ ), brown dwarfs (blue, 13.6 ≤ Mc < 80 MJ ) and binary stars (red, Mc ≥ 80 MJ ), based on 2000 randomly generated synthetic datasets (see Section 4 for details). The median results are shown as dashed curves. The low-|λ| components of binary stars and brown dwarfs are slightly more concentrated and … view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Projected stellar obliquity (λ) of three companion classes as a function of the companion-to-primary mass ratio. The top and bottom panels shows the systems with cool and hot primary stars, defined according to the Kraft break. The size of the symbol is proportional to the orbital eccentricity while the dots highlighted by a thick boundary represent companions with large scaled semi-major axis (a/R∗ ≥ 10).… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Stellar obliquity serves as a key diagnostic for tracing the dynamical evolution of bound systems-from giant planets and brown dwarfs to stellar binaries-revealing whether these diverse populations share analogous histories. Here, we report the first obliquity measurement for a double M dwarf system, determined via the Rossiter-McLaughlin effect. The spin axis of the primary star, TOI-5375 ($M_\ast=0.62\pm0.02\,M_\odot$), is well aligned with the orbit of its low-mass stellar companion ($M_c=84.8\pm1.5\, M_J$, $\rm P=1.72\,days$) with a projected obliquity of $\lambda=-13.5_{-13.8}^{+12.4}\,^{\circ}$ and a true 3D obliquity of $\psi=37.5_{-13.4}^{+10.6}\,^{\circ}$. The result indicates that the system either formed with a primordially aligned configuration or has undergone tidal realignment. We further investigate obliquity patterns across giant planets, brown dwarfs and binary stars. It turns out that a few obliquity trends observed in giant planets also tentatively exhibit in the latter two higher-mass populations: 1) well-aligned orbits are preferentially found around cooler host stars ($T_{\rm eff}\leq 6250\,K$); 2) wide-orbit ($a/R_\ast\geq 10$) companions are predominantly aligned; 3) no significant correlation shows up between obliquity and orbital eccentricity in any of the companion classes. By modeling $|\lambda|$ with a two-component Gaussian distribution, we find that the low-$|\lambda|$ components of binary stars and brown dwarfs are more concentrated near zero than giant planets while the high-$|\lambda|$ components of brown dwarfs and binaries remain unclear due to the small sample size.

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

The new RM measurement for TOI-5375 is a clean first datum for M-dwarf binaries, but the claimed shared obliquity trends with planets and brown dwarfs rest on small literature samples without bias checks.

read the letter

The main thing to know is that this paper delivers the first projected obliquity for any double M-dwarf system. TOI-5375 shows λ = -13.5° with uncertainties of order 13° and a derived 3D ψ around 37°, consistent with alignment. That single result is new and stands on its own as an observational addition to the obliquity catalog. The rest of the work compiles existing measurements for giant planets, brown dwarfs, and binaries, then fits a two-component Gaussian to the |λ| distributions and notes that the low-obliquity component appears tighter for the higher-mass populations while the high-obliquity tail stays poorly constrained by small numbers. They also flag three tentative patterns that echo the planet literature: cooler hosts more aligned, wide orbits more aligned, and no clear λ-eccentricity link. The measurement itself looks straightforward and the error bars are reported, so the TOI-5375 result is usable as a data point. The comparative section is more exploratory. The trends are labeled tentative in the abstract, and the stress-test concern about selection effects in the compiled samples is real: publication bias, detection biases tied to v sin i and impact parameter, and heterogeneous cuts can easily skew the low-|λ| bins for cooler or wider systems. Nothing in the provided text shows a uniform selection function or completeness correction, and the high-|λ| components for brown dwarfs and binaries are already noted as limited by sample size. This leaves the cross-population analogy suggestive rather than demonstrated. The paper is useful for anyone collecting obliquity measurements or thinking about formation pathways across mass regimes. A reader who wants the new M-dwarf binary datum will find it directly. The trend discussion is worth skimming but needs more systems before it can be treated as robust. It deserves peer review because the core measurement is concrete and the questions it raises are worth referee scrutiny, even if the broader claims will likely require revision or additional caveats.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the first Rossiter-McLaughlin measurement of stellar obliquity in a double M-dwarf system, TOI-5375. The primary (M* = 0.62 M⊙) is found to be well aligned with its short-period very-low-mass companion (Mc = 84.8 MJ, P = 1.72 d), yielding λ = −13.5°+12.4−13.8 and a true 3D obliquity ψ = 37.5°+10.6−13.4. The authors interpret this as evidence for either primordial alignment or tidal realignment. They then compile literature obliquity values for giant planets, brown dwarfs, and stellar binaries and identify three tentative trends that appear to hold across the higher-mass populations: (1) alignment is preferred around cooler hosts (Teff ≤ 6250 K), (2) wide-orbit companions (a/R* ≥ 10) are predominantly aligned, and (3) no significant λ–eccentricity correlation exists in any class. A two-component Gaussian mixture is fitted to the |λ| distributions, showing that the low-|λ| component is more concentrated near zero for binaries and brown dwarfs than for giant planets, while the high-|λ| components remain poorly constrained due to small sample sizes.

Significance. If the TOI-5375 measurement is robust and the literature trends survive bias corrections, the work supplies the first obliquity datum for an M-dwarf binary and suggests that dynamical pathways producing spin–orbit alignment may be shared across companion masses from giant planets to stellar binaries. The new system is a useful anchor at the low-mass end. The cross-population comparison is exploratory and limited by sample size, but the explicit two-component modeling and the three listed trends provide a concrete framework for future tests.

major comments (2)

[Discussion of obliquity patterns across populations] In the section presenting the cross-population trends and the two-component Gaussian modeling of |λ|, the manuscript does not quantify or correct for selection biases in the compiled brown-dwarf and binary samples (e.g., RM detection efficiency scaling with v sin i and impact parameter, or publication bias favoring aligned systems). Because the abstract already flags small sample sizes for the high-|λ| components, even modest incompleteness could artificially enhance the reported preference for alignment around cooler stars or at wide separations; this directly affects the strength of the claim that the three giant-planet trends “tentatively exhibit” in the higher-mass populations.
[Abstract and introductory summary of the new measurement] The abstract states that the TOI-5375 obliquity was determined via the Rossiter-McLaughlin effect but provides no information on the adopted data reduction, stellar parameters, limb-darkening treatment, or RM modeling code. While the full text presumably contains these details, their absence from the abstract and the lack of a dedicated methods subsection citation in the summary paragraph make it impossible for a reader to assess the robustness of λ = −13.5°+12.4−13.8 and ψ = 37.5°+10.6−13.4 without reading the entire methods section.

minor comments (3)

[Abstract] The companion mass is given as 84.8 ± 1.5 MJ in the abstract; the symbol MJ should be defined on first use (or replaced by the more conventional MJup) to avoid ambiguity with Jupiter-mass units.
[Modeling of |λ| distributions] The two-component Gaussian fit to |λ| is described only qualitatively (“more concentrated near zero”). Reporting the best-fit means, widths, and mixture weights (with uncertainties) would allow readers to judge the statistical significance of the difference between populations.
[Figures presenting trends] Figure captions for any obliquity-versus-Teff or obliquity-versus-a/R* plots should explicitly state the source of each datum (new measurement vs. literature) and whether error bars are 1σ or 2σ.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback and recommendation for minor revision. We have addressed both major comments by adding an explicit discussion of selection biases and limitations in the cross-population analysis, and by revising the abstract to include a brief methods pointer while preserving its length and focus.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: In the section presenting the cross-population trends and the two-component Gaussian modeling of |λ|, the manuscript does not quantify or correct for selection biases in the compiled brown-dwarf and binary samples (e.g., RM detection efficiency scaling with v sin i and impact parameter, or publication bias favoring aligned systems). Because the abstract already flags small sample sizes for the high-|λ| components, even modest incompleteness could artificially enhance the reported preference for alignment around cooler stars or at wide separations; this directly affects the strength of the claim that the three giant-planet trends “tentatively exhibit” in the higher-mass populations.

Authors: We agree that selection biases cannot be fully quantified or corrected with the current heterogeneous literature samples, as the underlying detection efficiencies and publication biases are not well characterized. In the revised manuscript we have added a dedicated paragraph in the discussion section that explicitly addresses these issues, including RM detection efficiency, impact parameter effects, and potential publication bias favoring aligned systems. We retain the language that the trends are tentative and exploratory, consistent with the small sample sizes already flagged in the abstract, and we have softened the phrasing around the strength of the cross-population claims to reflect these limitations. revision: yes
Referee: The abstract states that the TOI-5375 obliquity was determined via the Rossiter-McLaughlin effect but provides no information on the adopted data reduction, stellar parameters, limb-darkening treatment, or RM modeling code. While the full text presumably contains these details, their absence from the abstract and the lack of a dedicated methods subsection citation in the summary paragraph make it impossible for a reader to assess the robustness of λ = −13.5°+12.4−13.8 and ψ = 37.5°+10.6−13.4 without reading the entire methods section.

Authors: We have revised the abstract to add a concise methods pointer: 'determined via the Rossiter-McLaughlin effect using high-resolution spectroscopy, with full details on data reduction, stellar parameters, limb-darkening, and modeling provided in Section 3.' This directs readers to the methods section without exceeding typical abstract length constraints. The complete information on data reduction, adopted stellar parameters, limb-darkening treatment, and the specific RM modeling code remains unchanged in the methods section. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; purely observational result with independent literature compilation

full rationale

The paper reports a new Rossiter-McLaughlin measurement of projected and true obliquity for TOI-5375 and compiles independent literature samples to note tentative trend similarities across populations. The two-component Gaussian modeling of |λ| is a descriptive statistical summary of the compiled data, not a derivation that reduces any claimed result to a fitted parameter or self-citation by construction. No self-definitional steps, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the derivation chain. The analysis remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard interpretation of Rossiter-McLaughlin spectroscopic data and compilation of published obliquity values; no new physical constants, free parameters, or postulated entities are introduced.

axioms (1)

domain assumption The Rossiter-McLaughlin effect can be modeled to extract projected obliquity from line-profile distortions during transit
Invoked to convert the observed spectroscopic signal into the reported λ and ψ values.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5685 in / 1284 out tokens · 65895 ms · 2026-05-10T18:45:59.399376+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

96 extracted references · 92 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

C., Ruden, S

Adams, F. C., Ruden, S. P., & Shu, F. H. 1989, ApJ, 347, 959, doi: 10.1086/168187 11 T able B.1.SPIRou radial velocities and stellar activity indicators. BJD RV (m s −1)σ RV (m s−1) CRXσ CRX dTempσ dTemp UT 2025 February 10th 2460716.863249 -57547.64 59.32 -824.29 448.72 5.44 2.92 2460716.873957 -57969.18 57.84 191.92 430.86 2.52 2.84 2460716.884729 -5877...

work page doi:10.1086/168187 1989
[2]

Albrecht, S., Reffert, S., Snellen, I. A. G., & Winn, J. N. 2009, Nature, 461, 373, doi: 10.1038/nature08408

work page doi:10.1038/nature08408 2009
[3]

Winn, J. N. 2013, ApJ, 767, 32, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/767/1/32

work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/767/1/32 2013
[4]

N., Johnson, J

Albrecht, S., Winn, J. N., Johnson, J. A., et al. 2012, ApJ, 757, 18, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/18

work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/757/1/18 2012
[5]

N., Torres, G., et al

Albrecht, S., Winn, J. N., Torres, G., et al. 2014, ApJ, 785, 83, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/785/2/83

work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/785/2/83 2014
[6]

H., Dawson, R

Albrecht, S. H., Dawson, R. I., & Winn, J. N. 2022, PASP, 134, 082001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ac6c09 Artigau, É., Cadieux, C., Cook, N. J., et al. 2022, AJ, 164, 84, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac7ce6 —. 2024, AJ, 168, 252, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad7b30

work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ac6c09 2022
[7]

F., Henry, T

Benedict, G. F., Henry, T. J., Franz, O. G., et al. 2016, AJ, 152, 141, doi: 10.3847/0004-6256/152/5/141

work page doi:10.3847/0004-6256/152/5/141 2016
[8]

2014, A&A, 564, A46, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322383

Bodichon, R. 2014, A&A, 564, A46, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322383

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322383 2014
[9]

2001, A&A, 374, 733, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20010730

Bouchy, F., Pepe, F., & Queloz, D. 2001, A&A, 374, 733, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20010730

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20010730 2001
[10]

L., Stefánsson, G., et al

Brady, M., Bean, J. L., Stefánsson, G., et al. 2025, AJ, 169, 64, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad9c66 12 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4Normalized flux TOI5375 - T emplate Fit OH lines Input spectrum Template × tellurics 1635 1636 1637 1638 1639 1640 1641 1642 1643 Wavelength (nm) 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0TransmissionH2O CO2+O2+CH4 Figure A.1.Template for a represent...

work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad9c66 2025
[11]

E., Megeath, S

Charbonneau, D., Allen, L. E., Megeath, S. T., et al. 2005, ApJ, 626, 523, doi: 10.1086/429991

work page doi:10.1086/429991 2005
[12]

, keywords =

Chatterjee, S., Ford, E. B., Matsumura, S., & Rasio, F. A. 2008, ApJ, 686, 580, doi: 10.1086/590227

work page doi:10.1086/590227 2008
[13]

A., González-Payo, J., et al

Cifuentes, C., Caballero, J. A., González-Payo, J., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A228, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452527

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452527 2025
[14]

A., van Belle, G

Clark, C. A., van Belle, G. T., Horch, E. P., et al. 2024, AJ, 167, 174, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad267d

work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad267d 2024
[15]

J., Artigau, É., Doyon, R., et al

Cook, N. J., Artigau, É., Doyon, R., et al. 2022, PASP, 134, 114509, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ac9e74

work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ac9e74 2022
[16]

Origins of Hot Jupiters

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

work page Pith review doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051853 2018
[17]

F., Kouach, D., Moutou, C., et al

Donati, J. F., Kouach, D., Moutou, C., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 5684, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2569

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2569 2020
[18]

2023, AJ, 166, 112, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ace105

Dong, J., & Foreman-Mackey, D. 2023, AJ, 166, 112, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ace105

work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ace105 2023
[19]

I., Libby-Roberts, J

Doyle, L., Cañas, C. I., Libby-Roberts, J. E., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 536, 3745, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2819 Duchêne, G., & Kraus, A. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 269, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102602

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2819 2025
[20]

1991, A&A, 248, 485

Duquennoy, A., & Mayor, M. 1991, A&A, 248, 485

1991
[21]

P., & Kisseleva-Eggleton, L

Eggleton, P. P., & Kisseleva-Eggleton, L. 2006, Ap&SS, 304, 75, doi: 10.1007/s10509-006-9078-z

work page doi:10.1007/s10509-006-9078-z 2006
[22]

, keywords =

Fabrycky, D., & Tremaine, S. 2007, ApJ, 669, 1298, doi: 10.1086/521702

work page doi:10.1086/521702 2007
[23]

B., & Rasio, F

Ford, E. B., & Rasio, F. A. 2008, ApJ, 686, 621, doi: 10.1086/590926

work page doi:10.1086/590926 2008
[24]

2016, The Journal of Open Source Software, 1, 24, doi: 10.21105/joss.00024

Foreman-Mackey, D. 2016, The Journal of Open Source Software, 1, 24, doi: 10.21105/joss.00024

work page doi:10.21105/joss.00024 2016
[25]

AJ , volume =

Foreman-Mackey, D., Agol, E., Ambikasaran, S., & Angus, R. 2017, AJ, 154, 220, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa9332

work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa9332 2017
[26]

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

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

work page doi:10.1086/670067 2013
[27]

X., Wang, S., et al

Gan, T., Wang, S. X., Wang, S., et al. 2023, AJ, 165, 17, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac9b12

work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac9b12 2023
[28]

X., Dai, F., et al

Gan, T., Wang, S. X., Dai, F., et al. 2024, ApJL, 969, L24, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad5967

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad5967 2024
[29]

2025, ApJL, 988, L78, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adef55

Gan, T., Cadieux, C., Ida, S., et al. 2025, ApJL, 988, L78, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adef55

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adef55 2025
[30]

Gill, S., Maxted, P. F. L., Evans, J. A., et al. 2019, A&A, 626, A119, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833054

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833054 2019
[31]

Gray, D. F. 2005, PASP, 117, 711, doi: 10.1086/430412 Günther, M. N., & Daylan, T. 2019, Allesfitter: Flexible Star and Exoplanet Inference From Photometry and Radial Velocity, Astrophysics Source Code Library. http://ascl.net/1903.003 —. 2021, ApJS, 254, 13, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abe70e Hébrard, G., Ehrenreich, D., Bouchy, F., et al. 2011, A&A, 527, L11...

work page doi:10.1086/430412 2005
[32]

N., et al

Hirano, T., Suto, Y., Winn, J. N., et al. 2011, ApJ, 742, 69, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/742/2/69

work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/742/2/69 2011
[33]

2008, ApJ, 678, 1396, doi: 10.1086/529187

Jackson, B., Greenberg, R., & Barnes, R. 2008, ApJ, 678, 1396, doi: 10.1086/529187

work page doi:10.1086/529187 2008
[34]

M., Twicken, J

Jenkins, J. M., Twicken, J. D., McCauliff, S., et al. 2016, in Proc. SPIE, Vol. 9913, Software and Cyberinfrastructure for Astronomy IV, 99133E, doi: 10.1117/12.2233418

work page doi:10.1117/12.2233418 2016
[35]

H., Ellis, T

Kasper, D. H., Ellis, T. G., Yeigh, R. R., et al. 2016, PASP, 128, 105005, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/128/968/105005

work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/128/968/105005 2016
[36]

Kipping, D. M. 2013, MNRAS, 435, 2152, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1435

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1435 2013
[37]

Kraft, R. P. 1967, ApJ, 150, 551, doi: 10.1086/149359

work page doi:10.1086/149359 1967
[38]

2016, ARA&A, 54, 271, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023307 Kunovac Hodžić, V., Triaud, A

Kratter, K., & Lodato, G. 2016, ARA&A, 54, 271, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023307 Kunovac Hodžić, V., Triaud, A. H. M. J., Martin, D. V., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 497, 1627, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2071

work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023307 2016
[39]

L., & Haugbølle, T

Kuruwita, R. L., & Haugbølle, T. 2023, A&A, 674, A196, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244882

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244882 2023
[40]

F., Kanodia, S., et al

Lambert, M., Bender, C. F., Kanodia, S., et al. 2023, AJ, 165, 218, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acc651

work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/acc651 2023
[41]

Laughlin, G., Bodenheimer, P., & Adams, F. C. 1997, ApJ, 482, 420, doi: 10.1086/304125

work page doi:10.1086/304125 1997
[42]

T., Offner, S

Lee, A. T., Offner, S. S. R., Kratter, K. M., Smullen, R. A., & Li, P. S. 2019, ApJ, 887, 232, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab584b 13

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab584b 2019
[43]

2023, A&A, 674, A132, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346096

Maldonado, J., Petralia, A., Mantovan, G., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A132, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346096

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346096 2023
[44]

W., Dupuy, T., Kraus, A

Mann, A. W., Dupuy, T., Kraus, A. L., et al. 2019, ApJ, 871, 63, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf3bc

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf3bc 2019
[45]

L., & Albrecht, S

Marcussen, M. L., & Albrecht, S. H. 2022, ApJ, 933, 227, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac75c2

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac75c2 2022
[46]

L., Albrecht, S

Marcussen, M. L., Albrecht, S. H., Winn, J. N., et al. 2024, ApJ, 975, 149, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad75fa

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad75fa 2024
[47]

Masuda, K., & Winn, J. N. 2020, AJ, 159, 81, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab65be

work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab65be 2020
[48]

Maxted, P. F. L. 2016, A&A, 591, A111, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201628579

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201628579 2016
[49]

McLaughlin, D. B. 1924, ApJ, 60, 22, doi: 10.1086/142826

work page doi:10.1086/142826 1924
[50]

Moe, M., & Kratter, K. M. 2018, ApJ, 854, 44, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa6d2

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaa6d2 2018
[51]

M., van Dishoeck, E

Murillo, N. M., van Dishoeck, E. F., Tobin, J. J., & Fedele, D. 2016, A&A, 592, A56, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201628247

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201628247 2016
[52]

2016, ARA&A, 54, 441, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023315

Naoz, S. 2016, ARA&A, 54, 441, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023315

work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023315 2016
[53]

Naoz, S., & Fabrycky, D. C. 2014, ApJ, 793, 137, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/793/2/137

work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/793/2/137 2014
[54]

J., Payne, S

Norton, A. J., Payne, S. G., Evans, T., et al. 2011, A&A, 528, A90, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201116448

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201116448 2011
[55]

Offner, S. S. R., Moe, M., Kratter, K. M., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y. Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura, 275, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2203.10066

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.10066 2023
[56]

J., & Meyer, M

Parker, R. J., & Meyer, M. R. 2014, MNRAS, 442, 3722, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1101

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1101 2014
[57]

J., & Mamajek, E

Pecaut, M. J., & Mamajek, E. E. 2013, ApJS, 208, 9, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/208/1/9

work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/208/1/9 2013
[58]

2011, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825

Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., et al. 2011, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825

2011
[59]

J., Kratter, K

Petrovich, C., Muñoz, D. J., Kratter, K. M., & Malhotra, R. 2020, ApJL, 902, L5, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abb952

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abb952 2020
[60]

H., DePoy, D

Pinsonneault, M. H., DePoy, D. L., & Coffee, M. 2001, ApJL, 556, L59, doi: 10.1086/323531 Prša, A., Kochoska, A., Conroy, K. E., et al. 2022, ApJS, 258, 16, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac324a

work page doi:10.1086/323531 2001
[61]

A Survey of Stellar Families: Multiplicity of Solar-Type Stars

Raghavan, D., McAlister, H. A., Henry, T. J., et al. 2010, ApJS, 190, 1, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/190/1/1

work page Pith review doi:10.1088/0067-0049/190/1/1 2010
[62]

Science , keywords =

Rasio, F. A., & Ford, E. B. 1996, Science, 274, 954, doi: 10.1126/science.274.5289.954

work page doi:10.1126/science.274.5289.954 1996
[63]

2022, AJ, 164, 104, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac8153

Rice, M., Wang, S., Wang, X.-Y., et al. 2022, AJ, 164, 104, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac8153

work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac8153 2022
[64]

M., Lin, D

Rogers, T. M., Lin, D. N. C., & Lau, H. H. B. 2012, ApJL, 758, L6, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/758/1/L6

work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/758/1/l6 2012
[65]

M., Lin, D

Rogers, T. M., Lin, D. N. C., McElwaine, J. N., & Lau, H. H. B. 2013, ApJ, 772, 21, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/772/1/21

work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/772/1/21 2013
[66]

Rossiter, R. A. 1924, ApJ, 60, 15, doi: 10.1086/142825

work page doi:10.1086/142825 1924
[67]

2000, A&A, 354, 1134

Monnet, G. 2000, A&A, 354, 1134

2000
[68]

2025, ApJL, 983, L42, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adc129

Rusznak, J., Wang, X.-Y., Rice, M., & Wang, S. 2025, ApJL, 983, L42, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adc129

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adc129 2025
[69]

C., Winn, J

Siegel, J. C., Winn, J. N., & Albrecht, S. H. 2023, ApJL, 950, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acd62f

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acd62f 2023
[70]

M., Santos, N

Silva, A. M., Santos, N. C., Faria, J. P., et al. 2025, A&A, 700, A93, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554955

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554955 2025
[71]

, keywords =

Smith, J. C., Stumpe, M. C., Van Cleve, J. E., et al. 2012, PASP, 124, 1000, doi: 10.1086/667697 Soszyński, I., Pawlak, M., Pietrukowicz, P., et al. 2016, AcA, 66, 405, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1701.03105

work page doi:10.1086/667697 2012
[72]

W., & Ebeling, H

Southworth, J. 2011, MNRAS, 417, 2166, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19399.x

work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19399.x 2011
[73]

V., Pandina, J., et al

Spejcher, B., Martin, D. V., Pandina, J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.23430, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2511.23430 —. 2026, MNRAS, 545, staf2236, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf2236

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.23430 2025
[74]

, keywords =

Stassun, K. G., Oelkers, R. J., Paegert, M., et al. 2019, AJ, 158, 138, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab3467

work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab3467 2019
[75]

, year = 2014, month = jan, volume = 126, pages =

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

work page doi:10.1086/674989 2014
[76]

, keywords =

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

work page doi:10.1086/667698 2012
[77]

Tohline, J. E. 2002, ARA&A, 40, 349, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.40.060401.093810

work page doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.40.060401.093810 2002
[78]

doi:10.1093/mnras/stz3299 , eprint =

Tokovinin, A., & Moe, M. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 5158, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3299

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz3299 2020
[79]

Triaud, A. H. M. J., Queloz, D., Bouchy, F., et al. 2009, A&A, 506, 377, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200911897

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200911897 2009
[80]

Triaud, A. H. M. J., Hebb, L., Anderson, D. R., et al. 2013, A&A, 549, A18, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219643

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201219643 2013

Showing first 80 references.