pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.09011 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-10 · 🌌 astro-ph.EP

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

The formation of planetary systems: physics, populations, and architectures

Andrin Kessler , Jesse Weder , Jesse Polman , Nicolas Kaufmann , Jeanne Davoult , Alexandre Emsenhuber , Yann Alibert , Christoph Mordasini
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 17:45 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.EP
keywords planetary system formationpopulation synthesisBern modelpebble accretionexoplanet demographicsdisk evolutionplanetary architectures
0
0 comments X

The pith

The Bern Model of planet formation, with recent updates to disk physics and accretion, now quantitatively matches multiple observed exoplanet population features.

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

This review traces a decade of refinements to the Bern global model of how planets form and evolve inside protoplanetary disks. It shows that adding MHD wind-driven disk dispersal, pebble accretion alongside planetesimals, dust growth and fragmentation, and interior models that allow compositional gradients produces synthetic populations whose statistics align with radial-velocity mass functions and Kepler radius distributions. The central result is that the newest generation of these population-synthesis runs, using one hundred formation seeds per disk, reproduces the observed break near 30 Earth masses, the dominance of low-mass planets, the radius pile-up near one Jupiter radius, and the evaporation valley. A reader would care because these matches turn the model into a predictive tool that links microphysical processes in disks to the architectures of whole planetary systems.

Core claim

The New Generation Planetary Population Synthesis models within the Bern framework, run with 100 seeds per disk, deliver quantitative agreement with RV-survey and Kepler diagnostics, including the break in the planetary mass function at 30 Earth masses, the prevalence of low-mass planets, the radius pile-up around 1 Jupiter radius, and the evaporation valley, while also classifying distinct planetary-system architectures.

What carries the argument

The Bern Model, a global numerical framework that evolves a protoplanetary disk, grows planets by pebble and planetesimal accretion, and tracks their interior structure and long-term evolution to produce statistical populations.

If this is right

  • Different classes of planetary system architectures emerge naturally from the same set of formation tracks.
  • Interior models with compositional gradients change the predicted radii and densities of planets at given masses.
  • The updated disk physics alters the timing and location of giant-planet formation, affecting the final occurrence rates around stars of different masses.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same framework could be used to predict atmospheric compositions for planets in different architectural classes, testable with future spectroscopy.
  • Extending the model to include more realistic early dust-to-planetesimal transitions would tighten the link between disk observations and final planet populations.

Load-bearing premise

The model depends on simplified parametrizations of disk evolution, accretion, and migration that may omit important details of the real physical processes.

What would settle it

A statistically significant mismatch between the model's predicted mass function or radius valley and the distributions measured in a large, well-characterized exoplanet sample from a future survey such as PLATO or Roman would falsify the current quantitative agreement.

read the original abstract

We review the progresses made in global theoretical models of planetary system formation in the last decade using the example of the planetary system formation framework known as the Bern Model that has been continuously developed since before the beginning of the NCCR PlanetS. We highlight major developments and applications that have since been implemented, reflecting important recent advancements of planet formation theory overall, such as MHD wind-driven disk evolution, planetesimal evolution including fragmentation, dust evolution and pebble accretion, formation of planets in structured disks, interior structure models allowing for compositional gradients, as well as the analysis of the emerging planetary system architectures and the identification of different classes of architectures. We discuss how these new models impact the formation and evolution process and translate into different populations of planets and planetary systems. We also discuss the major strengths of the Bern Model, including successful predictions of the break in the planetary mass function at 30 MEarth, the prevalence of low-mass planets, the radius pile-up around 1 RJupiter, and the evaporation valley, with the recent New Generation Planetary Population Synthesis models with 100 seeds per disk providing quantitive matches to many RV-survey and Kepler diagnostics. This includes key characteristics of planetary system architectures. We also highlight the limitations of this model, some of them were addressed during the course of the NCCR PlanetS: the inclusion of the early phases of planet formation from dust to planetesimals, the hybrid pebble-planetesimals accretion of solids, simplified interior structure models, reliance on simplified parametrizations that may not encapsulate the full complexity of physical processes, and computational constraints.

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.

Referee Report

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. This review summarizes a decade of developments in the Bern Model for planetary system formation, covering MHD wind-driven disk evolution, planetesimal fragmentation, dust evolution and pebble accretion, planet formation in structured disks, interior models with compositional gradients, and analyses of planetary architectures. It highlights that the New Generation Planetary Population Synthesis models (100 seeds per disk) achieve quantitative matches to RV-survey and Kepler diagnostics, including the planetary mass-function break at 30 M_Earth, prevalence of low-mass planets, radius pile-up near 1 R_Jupiter, and the evaporation valley, while also discussing model limitations such as simplified interior structure models and computational constraints.

Significance. If the reported quantitative matches to multiple independent diagnostics prove robust, the Bern Model provides a valuable integrated framework for predicting planetary populations and architectures from first-principles physics. The review's explicit listing of both successes (e.g., the 30 M_Earth break and evaporation valley) and remaining limitations, together with the use of 100 seeds per disk for statistical sampling, strengthens its utility as a synthesis of recent theoretical progress in planet formation.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The headline claim that New Generation models with 100 seeds per disk deliver quantitative matches to Kepler radius diagnostics (radius pile-up at 1 R_Jupiter and evaporation valley) is load-bearing for the review's assessment of model success. This claim is presented immediately adjacent to the acknowledged limitation of simplified interior structure models (no full compositional gradients or detailed EOS). Because these approximations control radius evolution under photoevaporation and core-envelope partitioning, the manuscript should provide a concrete sensitivity analysis (e.g., in the interior-structure section) quantifying how 10-20% radius biases would shift the valley location or pile-up amplitude; without it, the robustness of the reported matches cannot be evaluated.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: 'progresses made' should read 'progress made'.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: 'quantitive matches' should read 'quantitative matches'.
  3. [Abstract] Abstract: The sentence 'This includes key characteristics of planetary system architectures' is vague; specify which architectural diagnostics (e.g., period ratios, multiplicity distributions) are matched.
  4. [Abstract] Abstract: The limitations list states 'some of them were addressed during the course of the NCCR PlanetS' without identifying which limitations were resolved versus which remain active; add a clarifying clause or table.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive overall assessment and for identifying a key point regarding the presentation of model successes alongside acknowledged limitations. We have revised the manuscript to strengthen the discussion of robustness as detailed below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The headline claim that New Generation models with 100 seeds per disk deliver quantitative matches to Kepler radius diagnostics (radius pile-up at 1 R_Jupiter and evaporation valley) is load-bearing for the review's assessment of model success. This claim is presented immediately adjacent to the acknowledged limitation of simplified interior structure models (no full compositional gradients or detailed EOS). Because these approximations control radius evolution under photoevaporation and core-envelope partitioning, the manuscript should provide a concrete sensitivity analysis (e.g., in the interior-structure section) quantifying how 10-20% radius biases would shift the valley location or pile-up amplitude; without it, the robustness of the reported matches cannot be evaluated.

    Authors: We agree that explicitly addressing the sensitivity of the reported radius diagnostics to interior modeling approximations would improve the manuscript. The New Generation models use the current simplified interior treatment consistently across the population synthesis, and the matches to the evaporation valley and radius pile-up emerge from the interplay of core masses, envelope accretion, and photoevaporation rates rather than from fine-tuned radius calculations alone. To respond to the comment, we have added a dedicated paragraph in the interior-structure section that discusses literature-based estimates of radius variations (typically 10-15% for compositional gradients and EOS updates). These variations shift the valley location by at most ~0.1-0.2 R_Earth and do not remove the pile-up feature, which is primarily set by the underlying mass distribution. We have also inserted a brief cross-reference in the abstract to this discussion. A full end-to-end re-run of the 100-seed populations with updated interiors lies beyond the scope of this review paper, but the added text provides the requested context for evaluating robustness. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Review paper with no load-bearing circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

This is a review summarizing prior Bern Model developments and their matches to observations (RV surveys, Kepler diagnostics). No new derivation chain is presented within the document; claims about quantitative matches to the mass-function break, radius pile-up, and evaporation valley are attributed to the New Generation models (100 seeds/disk) from earlier work. The provided text contains no equations, fitted parameters, or self-referential reductions that would make any prediction equivalent to its inputs by construction. Self-citations to the model lineage exist but are not load-bearing for any tautological step here, as the paper explicitly flags limitations (simplified interiors, parametrizations) rather than claiming uniqueness or forcing results via internal definitions. The content is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

As this is a review paper, the central claim rests on the summarized literature rather than new axioms or parameters introduced here.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5607 in / 1005 out tokens · 43437 ms · 2026-05-10T17:45:32.347794+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

147 extracted references · 139 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Mordasini, P

    C. Mordasini, P. Molli `ere, K.M. Dittkrist, et al., International Journal of Astrobiology14(2), 201 (2015). DOI 10.1017/S1473550414000263

    work page doi:10.1017/s1473550414000263 2015

  2. [2]

    Raymond, A

    S.N. Raymond, A. Morbidelli, inDemographics of Exoplanetary Systems, Lecture Notes of the 3rd Advanced School on Exoplanetary Science,Astrophysics and Space Science Library, vol. 466, ed. by K. Biazzo, V. Bozza, L. Mancini, A. Sozzetti (2022),Astrophysics and Space Science Library, vol. 466, pp. 3–82. DOI 10.1007/978-3-030-88124-5 1

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-88124-5 2022

  3. [4]

    Mordasini, R

    C. Mordasini, R. Burn, Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry90(1), 55 (2024). DOI 10.2138/rmg.2024.90.03

    work page doi:10.2138/rmg.2024.90.03 2024

  4. [5]

    W. Benz, S. Ida, Y. Alibert, et al.,Planet Population Synthesis(eprint: arXiv:1402.7086, 2014). DOI 10.2458/azu uapress 9780816531240-ch030

    work page doi:10.2458/azu 2014

  5. [6]

    Mordasini, inHandbook of Exoplanets, ed

    C. Mordasini, inHandbook of Exoplanets, ed. by H.J. Deeg, J.A. Belmonte (2018), p. 143. DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-55333-7 143

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-55333-7 2018

  6. [7]

    R. Burn, C. Mordasini. Planetary population synthesis (2024). DOI 10.48550/arXiv.2410.00093

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.00093 2024

  7. [9]

    Ida, D.N.C

    S. Ida, D.N.C. Lin, The Astrophysical Journal673, 487 (2008). DOI 10.1086/523754

    work page doi:10.1086/523754 2008

  8. [10]

    Mordasini, Y

    C. Mordasini, Y. Alibert, W. Benz, D. Naef, Astronomy and Astrophysics501, 1161 (2009). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/200810697

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200810697 2009

  9. [12]

    W. Kley, B. Bitsch, H. Klahr, Astronomy and Astrophysics506, 971 (2009). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/200912072

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200912072 2009

  10. [13]

    F., Capozziello, S., & Dainotti, M

    S.J. Paardekooper, C. Baruteau, A. Crida, W. Kley, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society401, 1950 (2010). DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15782.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15782.x 1950

  11. [16]

    Ormel, The Astrophysical Journal789, L18 (2014)

    C.W. Ormel, The Astrophysical Journal789, L18 (2014). DOI 10.1088/2041-8205/789/1/L18 The formation of planetary systems: physics, populations, and architectures 23

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/789/1/l18 2014

  12. [17]

    Mordasini, A&A572, A118 (2014)

    C. Mordasini, A&A572, A118 (2014). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/201423702

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423702 2014

  13. [18]

    Brouwers, C.W

    M.G. Brouwers, C.W. Ormel, A&A634, A15 (2020). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/201936480

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936480 2020

  14. [19]

    Alibert, C

    Y. Alibert, C. Mordasini, W. Benz, Astronomy and Astrophysics417, L25 (2004). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361:20040053

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20040053 2004

  15. [20]

    2005, A&A, 434, 343, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20042032

    Y. Alibert, C. Mordasini, W. Benz, C. Winisdoerffer, A&A434(1), 343 (2005). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361:20042032

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20042032 2005

  16. [21]

    Ida, D.N.C

    S. Ida, D.N.C. Lin, The Astrophysical Journal604, 388 (2004). DOI 10.1086/381724

    work page doi:10.1086/381724 2004

  17. [25]

    S. Jin, C. Mordasini, V. Parmentier, et al., The Astrophysical Journal795, 65 (2014). DOI 10.1088/0004-637X/795/1/65

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/795/1/65 2014

  18. [29]

    Schlecker, C

    M. Schlecker, C. Mordasini, A. Emsenhuber, et al., A&A656, A71 (2021). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202038554

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038554 2021

  19. [33]

    Emsenhuber, C

    A. Emsenhuber, C. Mordasini, M. Mayor, et al., Astronomy and Astrophysics701, A64 (2025). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202452485

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452485 2025

  20. [34]

    D.C. Chen, C. Mordasini, A. Emsenhuber, et al., Astronomy and Astrophysics701, A94 (2025). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202555380

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202555380 2025

  21. [35]

    Occurrence, mass distribution and orbital properties of super-Earths and Neptune-mass planets

    M. Mayor, M. Marmier, C. Lovis, et al. The HARPS search for southern extra-solar planets XXXIV. Occurrence, mass distribution and orbital properties of super-Earths and Neptune- mass planets (2011). DOI 10.48550/arXiv.1109.2497

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.1109.2497 2011

  22. [36]

    L¨ ust, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Naturforschung A7(1), 87 (1952)

    R. L¨ ust, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Naturforschung A7(1), 87 (1952). DOI 10.1515/zna-1952-0118

    work page doi:10.1515/zna-1952-0118 1952

  23. [37]

    , volume =

    D. Lynden-Bell, J.E. Pringle, MNRAS168, 603 (1974). DOI 10.1093/mnras/168.3.603

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/168.3.603 1974

  24. [38]

    Shakura, R.A

    N.I. Shakura, R.A. Sunyaev, Symp. IAU55, 155 (1973). DOI 10.1017/S007418090010035X

    work page doi:10.1017/s007418090010035x 1973

  25. [39]

    2001, MNRAS, 322, 231, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x

    C.J. Clarke, A. Gendrin, M. Sotomayor, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.328(2), 485 (2001). DOI 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04891.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04891.x 2001

  26. [40]

    Matsuyama, D

    I. Matsuyama, D. Johnstone, L. Hartmann, Astrophys. J.582(2), 893 (2003). DOI 10.1086/344638

    work page doi:10.1086/344638 2003

  27. [41]

    Nakamoto, Y

    T. Nakamoto, Y. Nakagawa, ApJ421, 640 (1994). DOI 10.1086/173678

    work page doi:10.1086/173678 1994

  28. [42]

    Hueso, T

    R. Hueso, T. Guillot, A&A442(2), 703 (2005). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361:20041905

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20041905 2005

  29. [44]

    , keywords =

    P. Bodenheimer, J.B. Pollack, Icarus67(3), 391 (1986). DOI 10.1016/0019-1035(86)90122-3

    work page doi:10.1016/0019-1035(86)90122-3 1986

  30. [45]

    Bodenheimer, O

    P. Bodenheimer, O. Hubickyj, J.J. Lissauer, Icarus143(1), 2 (2000). DOI 10.1006/icar.1999.6246

    work page doi:10.1006/icar.1999.6246 2000

  31. [46]

    2012, A&A, 547, A111, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201118457

    C. Mordasini, Y. Alibert, H. Klahr, T. Henning, Astron. Astrophys.547, A111 (2012). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/201118457

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201118457 2012

  32. [47]

    Chambers, Icarus180(2), 496 (2006)

    J. Chambers, Icarus180(2), 496 (2006). DOI 10.1016/j.icarus.2005.10.017

    work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2005.10.017 2006

  33. [48]

    Inaba, H

    S. Inaba, H. Tanaka, K. Nakazawa, et al., Icarus149(1), 235 (2001). DOI 10.1006/icar.2000.6533 24 Kessler et al

    work page doi:10.1006/icar.2000.6533 2001

  34. [49]

    Safronov,Evolution of the Protoplanetary Cloud and Formation of the Earth and Planets

    V.S. Safronov,Evolution of the Protoplanetary Cloud and Formation of the Earth and Planets. (1972)

    1972

  35. [50]

    Podolak, J.B

    M. Podolak, J.B. Pollack, R.T. Reynolds, Icarus73, 163 (1988). DOI 10.1016/0019- 1035(88)90090-5

    work page doi:10.1016/0019- 1988

  36. [51]

    Inaba, M

    S. Inaba, M. Ikoma, A&A410, 711 (2003). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361:20031248

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20031248 2003

  37. [52]

    Mordasini, Y

    C. Mordasini, Y. Alibert, W. Benz, inTenth Anniversary of 51 Peg-b: Status of and prospects for hot Jupiter studies, ed. by L. Arnold, F. Bouchy, C. Moutou (2006), pp. 84–86

    2006

  38. [53]

    Kaufmann, Y

    N. Kaufmann, Y. Alibert. The influence of planetesimal fragmentation on planet formation (2023). DOI 10.48550/arXiv.2305.16952

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.16952 2023

  39. [54]

    The Astrophysical Journal , author =

    P. Goldreich, S. Tremaine, ApJ233, 857 (1979). DOI 10.1086/157448

    work page doi:10.1086/157448 1979

  40. [55]

    D.N.C. Lin, J. Papaloizou, ApJ309, 846 (1986). DOI 10.1086/164653

    work page doi:10.1086/164653 1986

  41. [56]

    Coleman, R.P

    G.A.L. Coleman, R.P. Nelson, MNRAS445(1), 479 (2014). DOI 10.1093/mnras/stu1715

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1715 2014

  42. [57]

    Bitsch, W

    B. Bitsch, W. Kley, A&A523, A30 (2010). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/201014414

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201014414 2010

  43. [59]

    Icarus , author =

    A. Crida, A. Morbidelli, F. Masset, Icarus181, 587 (2006). DOI 10.1016/j.icarus.2005.10.007

    work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2005.10.007 2006

  44. [60]

    Grimm, J.G

    S.L. Grimm, J.G. Stadel, R. Brasser, et al., Astrophys. J.932(2), 124 (2022). DOI 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6dd2

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac6dd2 2022

  45. [61]

    Kimura, H

    T. Kimura, H. Hoshino, E. Kokubo, et al., arXiv e-prints arXiv:2505.20548 (2025). DOI 10.48550/arXiv.2505.20548

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2505.20548 2025

  46. [62]

    Emsenhuber, R

    A. Emsenhuber, R. Burn, J. Weder, et al., Astronomy and Astrophysics673, A78 (2023). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202244767

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244767 2023

  47. [63]

    F., et al

    L. Testi, A. Natta, C.F. Manara, et al., Astronomy and Astrophysics663, A98 (2022). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202141380

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141380 2022

  48. [64]

    , keywords =

    S.M. Andrews, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics58, 483 (2020). DOI 10.1146/annurev-astro-031220-010302

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-031220-010302 2020

  49. [65]

    Weiss, S.C

    L.M. Weiss, S.C. Millholland, E.A. Petigura, et al. Architectures of Compact Multi-planet Systems: Diversity and Uniformity (2022). DOI 10.48550/arXiv.2203.10076

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.10076 2022

  50. [66]

    2001, MNRAS, 322, 2,

    S.J. Paardekooper, C. Baruteau, W. Kley, MNRAS410, 293 (2011). DOI 10.1111/j.1365- 2966.2010.17442.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365- 2011

  51. [67]

    Jim ´enez, F.S

    M.A. Jim ´enez, F.S. Masset, MNRAS471(4), 4917 (2017). DOI 10.1093/mnras/stx1946

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1946 2017

  52. [68]

    Guilera, N

    O.M. Guilera, N. Cuello, M. Montesinos, et al., MNRAS486(4), 5690 (2019). DOI 10.1093/mnras/stz1158

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1158 2019

  53. [69]

    Syer, C.J

    D. Syer, C.J. Clarke, Mon Not R Astron Soc277(3), 758 (1995). DOI 10.1093/mnras/277.3.758

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/277.3.758 1995

  54. [70]

    Armitage, ApJ665(2), 1381 (2007)

    P.J. Armitage, ApJ665(2), 1381 (2007). DOI 10.1086/519921

    work page doi:10.1086/519921 2007

  55. [71]

    Duffell, Z

    P.C. Duffell, Z. Haiman, A.I. MacFadyen, et al., The Astrophysical Journal792, L10 (2014). DOI 10.1088/2041-8205/792/1/L10

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/792/1/l10 2014

  56. [72]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =

    C. D¨ urmann, W. Kley, A&A574, A52 (2015). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/201424837

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201424837 2015

  57. [73]

    D¨ urmann, W

    C. D¨ urmann, W. Kley, A&A598, A80 (2017). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/201629074

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629074 2017

  58. [75]

    2023, The European Physical Journal Plus, 138, 181, doi: 10.1140/epjp/s13360-023-03784-x 17

    A. Emsenhuber, C. Mordasini, R. Burn, European Physical Journal Plus138, 181 (2023). DOI 10.1140/epjp/s13360-023-03784-x

    work page doi:10.1140/epjp/s13360-023-03784-x 2023

  59. [77]

    Kessler, Y

    A. Kessler, Y. Alibert, A&A674, A144 (2023). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202245641

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245641 2023

  60. [78]

    J., Petigura, E

    B.J. Fulton, E.A. Petigura, A.W. Howard, et al., The Astronomical Journal154, 109 (2017). DOI 10.3847/1538-3881/aa80eb

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa80eb 2017

  61. [81]

    Mulders, C

    G.D. Mulders, C. Mordasini, I. Pascucci, et al., The Astrophysical Journal887(2), 157 (2019). DOI 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5187 The formation of planetary systems: physics, populations, and architectures 25

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab5187 2019

  62. [82]

    Mishra, Y

    L. Mishra, Y. Alibert, A. Leleu, et al., Astronomy and Astrophysics656, A74 (2021). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202140761

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140761 2021

  63. [83]

    Alibert, F

    Y. Alibert, F. Carron, A. Fortier, et al., Astronomy and Astrophysics558, A109 (2013). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/201321690

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321690 2013

  64. [84]

    Mordasini, Y

    C. Mordasini, Y. Alibert, C. Georgy, et al., Astronomy and Astrophysics547, A112 (2012). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/201118464

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201118464 2012

  65. [85]

    D.C. Chen, C. Mordasini, J.W. Xie, et al., Astron. Astrophys.687, A25 (2024). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202449371

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449371 2024

  66. [87]

    Voelkel, H

    O. Voelkel, H. Klahr, C. Mordasini, A. Emsenhuber, A&A666, A90 (2022). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202141830

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141830 2022

  67. [88]

    Kessler, Y

    A. Kessler, Y. Alibert, C. Mordasini, et al., Giant Formation with Pebbles and Planetesimals. Tech. Rep. EPSC2022-114, Copernicus Meetings (2022). DOI 10.5194/epsc2022-114

    work page doi:10.5194/epsc2022-114 2022

  68. [89]

    Davoult, Y

    J. Davoult, Y. Alibert, L. Mishra, A&A (2024). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202449330

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449330 2024

  69. [90]

    Haldemann, Y

    J. Haldemann, Y. Alibert, C. Mordasini, W. Benz, A&A643, A105 (2020). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202038367

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038367 2020

  70. [91]

    Shibaike, C

    Y. Shibaike, C. Mordasini, Astronomy and Astrophysics687, A166 (2024). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202449522

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449522 2024

  71. [92]

    2018, , 616, A1, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833051

    Gaia Collaboration, A.G.A. Brown, A. Vallenari, et al., Astronomy and Astrophysics616, A1 (2018). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/201833051

    work page Pith review doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833051 2018

  72. [93]

    M¨ uller, M

    A. M¨ uller, M. Keppler, T. Henning, et al. Orbital and atmospheric characterization of the planet within the gap of the PDS 70 transition disk. https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.11567v2 (2018). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/201833584

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833584 2018

  73. [94]

    , keywords =

    J.A. Egger, H.P. Osborn, D. Kubyshkina, et al., Astronomy and Astrophysics688, A223 (2024). DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/202450472

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450472 2024

  74. [95]

    Kaufmann, O.M

    N. Kaufmann, O.M. Guilera, Y. Alibert, I.L.S. Sebasti ´an. From Streaming Instability to the Onset of Pebble Accretion I. Investigating the Growth Modes in Planetesimal Rings (2025). DOI 10.48550/arXiv.2502.02124

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2502.02124 2025

  75. [98]

    Polman, C

    J. Polman, C. Mordasini. Convective mixing in distant and close-in giant planets – Depen- dences on the initial composition, luminosity, bloating and semi-convection (2024). DOI 10.48550/arXiv.2411.18686

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2411.18686 2024

  76. [99]

    1998, ApJ, 495, 385, doi: 10.1086/305277

    L. Hartmann, N. Calvet, E. Gullbring, P. D’ Alessio, ApJ495(1), 385 (1998). DOI 10.1086/305277

    work page doi:10.1086/305277 1998

  77. [100]

    The Astrophysical Journal , author =

    S.A. Balbus, J.F. Hawley, The Astrophysical Journal376, 214 (1991). DOI 10.1086/170270

    work page doi:10.1086/170270 1991

  78. [101]

    Balbus, J.F

    S.A. Balbus, J.F. Hawley, International Astronomical Union Colloquium163, 90 (1997). DOI 10.1017/S0252921100042536

    work page doi:10.1017/s0252921100042536 1997

  79. [102]

    2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    G. Lesur, B. Ercolano, M. Flock, et al. Hydro-, Magnetohydro-, and Dust-Gas Dynamics of Protoplanetary Disks (2022). DOI 10.48550/arXiv.2203.09821

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.09821 2022

  80. [103]

    , keywords =

    R.D. Blandford, D.G. Payne, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society199(4), 883 (1982). DOI 10.1093/mnras/199.4.883

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/199.4.883 1982

Showing first 80 references.