pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.14101 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-13 · 🌌 astro-ph.EP

Recognition: 1 theorem link

· Lean Theorem

Coupled Photochemical-Climate Modeling of Plausible Tenuous Outgassed Atmospheres on the TRAPPIST-1 Planets

Megan Gialluca , Victoria Meadows , Andrew Lincowski , Trent Thomas , Parker Hinton , David Brain , David Crisp
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 01:57 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.EP
keywords TRAPPIST-1exoplanet atmospheresphotochemical modelingoutgassingtenuous atmosphereshabitabilityJWST observationsatmospheric escape
0
0 comments X

The pith

Tenuous atmospheres on the TRAPPIST-1 planets can persist if water and CO2 outgassing balances high escape rates.

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

The paper shows that very thin atmospheres on the TRAPPIST-1 planets remain possible when steady outgassing of water and carbon dioxide offsets rapid loss to space. A coupled photochemical-climate model explores wide ranges of outgassing, surface deposition, and escape rates while letting surface pressure adjust to the net balance. Six main compositional types emerge, with most atmospheres falling between 10^{-4} and 1 bar. Planets d and e can sustain surface conditions compatible with liquid water at certain pressures, and every modeled atmosphere matches existing JWST transmission spectra within 3 sigma.

Core claim

Tenuous atmospheres on the TRAPPIST-1 planets are likely possible, supported by constant plausible rates of water and/or CO2 outgassing against assumed high escape rates up to ~10^{30} s^{-1}. The coupled model samples hundreds of cases per planet, generates six compositional archetypes, and produces atmospheres commonly between 10^{-4} and 1 bar. Potentially habitable surface environments appear for TRAPPIST-1d at 0.05–2 bar and TRAPPIST-1e at 0.5–1 bar. All resulting atmospheres for planets b, c, d, and e fit available JWST transmission data to less than 3 sigma, while emission data favor thin O2-dominated cases for the inner two planets.

What carries the argument

A coupled photochemical-climate model that samples outgassing, deposition, and escape rates while allowing surface pressure to vary dynamically according to the net balance of sources and sinks.

If this is right

  • Six compositional archetypes arise across the explored phase space of H2O and CO2 outgassing.
  • Potentially habitable surface environments are possible for TRAPPIST-1d (0.05–2 bar) and TRAPPIST-1e (0.5–1 bar).
  • Every atmosphere generated for planets b, c, d, and e matches JWST transmission data to within 3 sigma.
  • Emission data constrain TRAPPIST-1b to ≲0.01 bar and TRAPPIST-1c to ≲0.2 bar in O2-dominated cases that may include trace SO2.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Future emission spectroscopy could test whether the inner planets actually host the thin O2-rich atmospheres favored by the models.
  • Sustained outgassing at the required rates implies ongoing geological activity that might be detectable through surface features or volcanic signatures.
  • The dynamic-pressure modeling approach could be extended to other close-in rocky planets around M dwarfs to assess their atmospheric retention.
  • Trace SO2 in some modeled cases offers a potential observational discriminant for future spectra.

Load-bearing premise

Outgassing rates of water and CO2 can be sustained at levels that exactly balance escape rates up to 10^{30} molecules per second over long timescales.

What would settle it

JWST emission spectra of TRAPPIST-1b or c that rule out thin O2-dominated compositions at the pressures predicted by the models would falsify the viability of these outgassed atmospheres.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.14101 by Andrew Lincowski, David Brain, David Crisp, Megan Gialluca, Parker Hinton, Trent Thomas, Victoria Meadows.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Flowchart describing how a single atmosphere model is run to convergence through the coupled photochemical￾climate modeling. This is described in §2.5.2. observations (T-1d), we further calculate day-night climate profiles and generate emission spectra. To produce the day and night side temperature profiles, the VPL Climate model is used in 2 column mode and must find convergence where all atmospheric laye… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Examples illustrating the compositional and pressure-temperature range of the atmospheric archetypes found in this study. Temperature and gas mixing ratio profiles (as a function of atmospheric pressure) for H2O, CO2, O2, O, O3, and CO are shown for examples of every archetype atmosphere for T-1c and e. The top row (peach colored background) shows profiles for T-1c and the bottom row (white colored backgro… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The volume mixing ratio profiles of SO2 and daughter species for the same atmospheres given as examples in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Surface pressure-temperature (P-T) points for each atmosphere in our work for each planet. Points are shown plotted over the phase diagram for water, where the grey, blue, and red shaded regions indicated solid, liquid, and gas phases. Points are colored by atmospheric composition (see figure legend). Globally averaged P-T pairs are shown with black borders, and dayside and nightside profiles for T-1b, c, … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The escape fluxes (in s−1 ) found across all stable atmospheres for all planets. Top panel shows the O versus O2 escape flux, and the bottom panel shows the O versus CO2 escape flux (for atmospheres including CO2 outgassing). For T-1b and c, models that fit the available emission data to <3σ are denoted by red rings. The grey regions indicated the range of escape rates (across all 7 planets) found by Dong … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Transmission and emission spectra for all stable atmospheres found for T-1c (without trace SO2). Top 3 rows (white background) and bottom 3 rows (grey background) show atmospheres sourced from H2O and H2O-CO2 outgassing, respectively. Each row corresponds to a different atmospheric archetype (described in text), from top to bottom: H2O-dominated, O2- dominated (produced via H2O outgassing), mixed H2O2, mix… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Transmission and emission spectra for stable atmospheres for T-1 b. transmission/emission columns and atmosphere archetypes (rows) are as for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Similar to 6, but for the SO2-bearing atmospheres of T-1e, g, and h. T-1f had no stable atmospheres containing SO2 so it is not included here. The top and bottom left subplots show H2O outgassed O2-dominated and mixed CO2-CO atmospheres for T-1e that contain trace SO2; and the top and bottom right subplots show mixed CO2-CO atmospheres with trace SO2 for T-1g and h. Solid, dashed, and dotted lines indicat… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: The 1 (darker colored bars) and 2σ (lighter colored bars) ranges of Pearson Correlation Coefficients (PCCs) when comparing all atmospheres of a given archetype for a given planet to the available JWST transmission data for that planet (T-1b, c, d and e). The bars with filled and unfilled circular points denote atmospheres without and with the addition of trace SO2, respectively. The dotted horizontal grey… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Available JWST observations TRAPPIST-1 system have suggested that several of the planets are likely airless, or possess a very tenuous atmosphere. However, the high atmospheric escape rates expected for these planets suggest that any tenuous atmosphere must be replenished by constant outgassing, and past studies on modeling potential atmospheres for the planets have not widely considered surface pressures <1 bar. Here, we show that tenuous atmospheres on the TRAPPIST-1 planets are likely possible, supported by constant plausible rates of water and/or CO$_{2}$ outgassing against assumed high escape rates (up to ~10$^{30}$ s$^{-1}$). We use a coupled photochemical-climate model and sample from a broad phase space of outgassing, surface deposition, and top-of-atmosphere escape rates to test hundreds of atmospheres per planet. Critically, our model also allows surface pressure to vary based on the balance of sources and sinks. We find that 6 different compositional archetypes are generated via H$_{2}$O and/or CO$_{2}$ outgassing across our phase space, and atmospheres commonly fall between 10$^{-4}$ -- 1 bar. We find that potentially habitable surface environments are possible for TRAPPIST-1d and e at pressures between 0.05 -- 2 bar and 0.5 -- 1 bar, respectively. Where possible, we compare our models to JWST observational data for TRAPPIST-1b, c, d, and e; all atmospheres found in this study for these planets match available transmission data to <3$\sigma$. However, emission data are consistent with atmospheric outcomes constrained to thin O$_{2}$-dominated compositions for TRAPPIST-1b ($\lesssim$0.01 bars) and c ($\lesssim$0.2 bars), which may or may not contain trace SO$_{2}$.

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

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper employs a coupled photochemical-climate model to investigate plausible tenuous outgassed atmospheres on the TRAPPIST-1 planets. By sampling a broad phase space of H2O and CO2 outgassing rates, surface deposition rates, and top-of-atmosphere escape rates (up to ~10^30 s^{-1}), the model allows surface pressure to emerge from source-sink balance. This produces six compositional archetypes with surface pressures commonly between 10^{-4} and 1 bar. The results suggest potentially habitable conditions for TRAPPIST-1d and e, and all modeled atmospheres are consistent with available JWST transmission data to within 3 sigma, with emission data constraining thin O2-dominated atmospheres for b and c.

Significance. If the central results hold, this study significantly advances understanding of low-pressure atmospheres on rocky exoplanets by demonstrating that constant plausible outgassing can maintain steady-state tenuous atmospheres against high escape rates. It expands the parameter space considered in prior work and provides direct comparisons to JWST observations, supporting the possibility of atmospheres on these planets and informing habitability assessments. The approach of letting pressure adjust dynamically is a strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [Modeling Approach] Escape rates are prescribed as independent inputs sampled across the phase space rather than derived self-consistently from the atmospheric state (e.g., via energy-limited escape based on the computed EUV absorption or diffusion-limited regimes). This is a load-bearing assumption for the claim that outgassing can balance escape to produce steady-state atmospheres, as unphysical combinations may be included without verification against the modeled T-P profiles and composition.
  2. [Results and Discussion] The manuscript reports that atmospheres match JWST transmission data to <3 sigma but does not provide details on the exact observational datasets used, the number of models tested per planet, or quantitative fit statistics beyond the sigma threshold. This makes it difficult to assess the robustness of the post-hoc comparison.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract mentions 'assumed high escape rates' but could benefit from a brief note on the range of outgassing rates sampled to contextualize the 'plausible' claim.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive summary of our work and for the constructive major comments, which have helped us improve the clarity and robustness of the manuscript. We address each comment point by point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Modeling Approach] Escape rates are prescribed as independent inputs sampled across the phase space rather than derived self-consistently from the atmospheric state (e.g., via energy-limited escape based on the computed EUV absorption or diffusion-limited regimes). This is a load-bearing assumption for the claim that outgassing can balance escape to produce steady-state atmospheres, as unphysical combinations may be included without verification against the modeled T-P profiles and composition.

    Authors: We appreciate this observation. Our modeling strategy intentionally prescribes escape rates across a broad, observationally motivated range (up to ~10^30 s^{-1}) to explore the full phase space of source-sink balance without presupposing a particular escape regime. This allows surface pressure to emerge self-consistently from the coupled chemistry-climate calculation. To address the concern about potential unphysical combinations, we have added a dedicated subsection in the Methods that (i) justifies the sampled escape range using literature estimates for TRAPPIST-1 planets, (ii) verifies post hoc that the resulting T-P profiles and compositions are consistent with the assumed escape rates (e.g., EUV absorption depths and diffusion-limited H escape), and (iii) flags any combinations that fall outside physically plausible regimes. Full self-consistent escape coupling would require substantial additional model development and is noted as a future direction. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Results and Discussion] The manuscript reports that atmospheres match JWST transmission data to <3 sigma but does not provide details on the exact observational datasets used, the number of models tested per planet, or quantitative fit statistics beyond the sigma threshold. This makes it difficult to assess the robustness of the post-hoc comparison.

    Authors: We agree that greater transparency is needed. In the revised manuscript we have expanded the observational comparison section to explicitly list: (a) the precise JWST transmission datasets and references employed for each planet, (b) the total number of models evaluated per planet (hundreds, as stated in the abstract), and (c) quantitative fit metrics including reduced chi-squared values and the number of models falling within 1, 2, and 3 sigma of the data. These additions allow readers to evaluate the robustness of the <3 sigma statement directly. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; parameters sampled independently with post-hoc checks

full rationale

The paper samples outgassing, deposition, and escape rates independently from a broad phase space, allows surface pressure to adjust to balance, and performs JWST comparisons only as post-hoc validation rather than using them to tune or fit the central results. No load-bearing step reduces by the paper's own equations or self-citation to a tautological input; the derivation chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks and does not exhibit self-definitional, fitted-prediction, or uniqueness-imported patterns.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central results rest on assumed escape rates and outgassing rates treated as plausible inputs; surface pressure and composition emerge from their balance rather than being prescribed.

free parameters (3)
  • outgassing rates for H2O and CO2
    Sampled across a broad phase space to test hundreds of atmospheres per planet.
  • top-of-atmosphere escape rates
    Assumed high values up to ~10^30 s^{-1} as the sink term.
  • surface deposition rates
    Sampled as part of the phase space exploration.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption High atmospheric escape rates are expected for these close-in planets
    Invoked to justify the need for continuous outgassing replenishment.
  • domain assumption Outgassing rates can be sustained at plausible levels over geological time
    Required for atmospheres to persist against escape.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5679 in / 1500 out tokens · 51791 ms · 2026-05-15T01:57:25.701797+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

85 extracted references · 85 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    L., et al

    Agol, E., Dorn, C., Grimm, S. L., et al. 2021, The planetary science journal, 2, 1 Ag´ undez, M. 2025, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 699, A306

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    H., Espinoza, N., Boehm, V., et al

    Allen, N. H., Espinoza, N., Boehm, V., et al. 2025, arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.07695

    work page arXiv 2025

  3. [3]

    Arney, G., Meadows, V., Crisp, D., et al. 2014, Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets, 119, 1860 Plausible Tenuous Atmospheres in the TRAPPIST-1 System35 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 X Value (e.g., Wavlength) 9 10 11 12 13 14 15Y Value (e.g., Spectrum Depth) Model 1, 2=13.0 CC=-0.72 Model 2, 2=13.0 CC=0.80 Average of Observations Observations Figure A.1...

    work page 2014

  4. [4]

    D., Meadows, V

    Arney, G., Domagal-Goldman, S. D., Meadows, V. S., et al. 2016, Astrobiology, 16, 873

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    L., Glotch, T

    Bandfield, J. L., Glotch, T. D., & Christensen, P. R. 2003, Science, 301, 1084

    work page 2003

  6. [6]

    P., et al

    Bouwman, J., Kendrew, S., Greene, T. P., et al. 2023, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 135, 038002

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    W., G´ erard, J.-C., & Soret, L

    Brecht, A., Bougher, S. W., G´ erard, J.-C., & Soret, L. 2012, Icarus, 217, 759

    work page 2012

  8. [8]

    E., Fiore, A

    Clifton, O. E., Fiore, A. M., Massman, W. J., et al. 2020, Reviews of Geophysics, 58, e2019RG000670

    work page 2020

  9. [9]

    2008, Atmospheric Environment, 42, 5090

    Constant, P., Poissant, L., & Villemur, R. 2008, Atmospheric Environment, 42, 5090

    work page 2008

  10. [10]

    1997, Geophysical Research Letters, 24, 571

    Crisp, D. 1997, Geophysical Research Letters, 24, 571

    work page 1997

  11. [11]

    H., Meadows, V

    Currie, M. H., Meadows, V. S., & Rasmussen, K. C. 2023, The Planetary Science Journal, 4, 83 De Wit, J., Wakeford, H. R., Lewis, N. K., et al. 2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 214

    work page 2023

  12. [12]

    2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115, 260

    Dong, C., Jin, M., Lingam, M., et al. 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115, 260

    work page 2018

  13. [13]

    2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 358

    Ducrot, E., Lagage, P.-O., Min, M., et al. 2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 358

    work page 2025

  14. [14]

    T., & Seager, S

    Elkins-Tanton, L. T., & Seager, S. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 688, 628

    work page 2008

  15. [15]

    1994, Icarus, 111, 317

    Erard, S., Mustard, J., Murchie, S., et al. 1994, Icarus, 111, 317

    work page 1994

  16. [16]

    H., Glidden, A., et al

    Espinoza, N., Allen, N. H., Glidden, A., et al. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 990, L52

    work page 2025

  17. [17]

    J., Turbet, M., Wolf, E

    Fauchez, T. J., Turbet, M., Wolf, E. T., et al. 2020, Planets 2020, Ground and Space Observatories: a Joint Venture to Planetary Science, 8

    work page 2020

  18. [18]

    2009, Planet

    Fray, N., & Schmitt, B. 2009, Planet. Space Sci., 57, 2053, doi: 10.1016/j.pss.2009.09.011

    work page doi:10.1016/j.pss.2009.09.011 2009

  19. [19]

    A., F¨ uri, E., et al

    Gaillard, F., Bouhifd, M. A., F¨ uri, E., et al. 2021, Space Science Reviews, 217, 22

    work page 2021

  20. [20]

    D., Li, C., & Yung, Y

    Gao, P., Hu, R., Robinson, T. D., Li, C., & Yung, Y. L. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 806, 249

    work page 2015

  21. [21]

    T., Barnes, R., Meadows, V

    Gialluca, M. T., Barnes, R., Meadows, V. S., et al. 2024, The Planetary Science Journal, 5, 137

    work page 2024

  22. [22]

    2021, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 133, 054401 —

    Wunderlich, F. 2021, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 133, 054401 —. 2023, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 135, 119201

    work page 2021

  23. [23]

    H., Demory, B.-O., et al

    Gillon, M., Triaud, A. H., Demory, B.-O., et al. 2017, Nature, 542, 456

    work page 2017

  24. [24]

    J., et al

    Gillon, M., Ducrot, E., Bell, T. J., et al. 2026, Nature Astronomy, 1

    work page 2026

  25. [25]

    2025, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 990, L53 36Gialluca, et al

    Glidden, A., Ranjan, S., Seager, S., et al. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 990, L53 36Gialluca, et al

    work page 2025

  26. [26]

    E., Rothman, L

    Gordon, I. E., Rothman, L. S., Hargreaves, e. R., et al. 2022, Journal of quantitative spectroscopy and radiative transfer, 277, 107949

    work page 2022

  27. [27]

    P., Bell, T

    Greene, T. P., Bell, T. J., Ducrot, E., et al. 2023, Nature, 618, 39

    work page 2023

  28. [28]

    2020, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 125, e2019JA027639

    Gronoff, G., Arras, P., Baraka, S., et al. 2020, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 125, e2019JA027639

    work page 2020

  29. [29]

    M., Shorttle, O., & Rudge, J

    Guimond, C. M., Shorttle, O., & Rudge, J. F. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 521, 2535 G¨ usten, H., Heinrich, G., M¨ onnich, E., et al. 1996, Atmospheric Environment, 30, 911

    work page 2023

  30. [30]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., Van Der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, nature, 585, 357

    work page 2020

  31. [31]

    2019, Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 47, 583

    Helling, C. 2019, Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 47, 583

    work page 2019

  32. [32]

    S., Kowalski, A

    Howard, W. S., Kowalski, A. F., Flagg, L., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 959, 64

    work page 2023

  33. [33]

    M.-R., Whittaker, E

    Ih, J., Kempton, E. M.-R., Whittaker, E. A., & Lessard, M. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 952, L4

    work page 2023

  34. [34]

    F., Liu, S., & Donahue, T

    Kasting, J. F., Liu, S., & Donahue, T. 1979, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 84, 3097

    work page 1979

  35. [35]

    S., & Barnett, M

    Kite, E. S., & Barnett, M. N. 2020, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117, 18264

    work page 2020

  36. [36]

    K., Ramirez, R., Kasting, J

    Kopparapu, R. K., Ramirez, R., Kasting, J. F., et al. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 765, 131

    work page 2013

  37. [37]

    Krissansen-Totton, J., & Fortney, J. J. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 933, 115

    work page 2022

  38. [38]

    2025, arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.12541

    Li, H., Wang, X., Dong, C., et al. 2025, arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.12541

    work page arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 955, L22

    Lim, O., Benneke, B., Doyon, R., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 955, L22

    work page 2023

  40. [40]

    S., Lebonnois, S., Mahieux, A., et al

    Limaye, S. S., Lebonnois, S., Mahieux, A., et al. 2017, Icarus, 294, 124

    work page 2017

  41. [41]

    P., Meadows, V

    Lincowski, A. P., Meadows, V. S., Crisp, D., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 867, 76 —. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 908, L44

    work page 2018

  42. [42]

    P., Meadows, V

    Lincowski, A. P., Meadows, V. S., Zieba, S., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 955, L7

    work page 2023

  43. [43]

    2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 1317

    Lustig-Yaeger, J., Fu, G., May, E., et al. 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 1317

    work page 2023

  44. [44]

    F., Sokolov, I

    Ma, Y., Nagy, A. F., Sokolov, I. V., & Hansen, K. C. 2004, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 109

    work page 2004

  45. [45]

    S., et al

    Ma, Y., Fang, X., Halekas, J. S., et al. 2018, Geophysical Research Letters, 45, 7248

    work page 2018

  46. [46]

    W., Xue, Q., Zhang, M., et al

    Mansfield, M. W., Xue, Q., Zhang, M., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 975, L22

    work page 2024

  47. [47]

    S., & Crisp, D

    Meadows, V. S., & Crisp, D. 1996, Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets, 101, 4595

    work page 1996

  48. [48]

    S., Lincowski, A

    Meadows, V. S., Lincowski, A. P., & Lustig-Yaeger, J. 2023, The Planetary Science Journal, 4, 192

    work page 2023

  49. [49]

    S., Arney, G

    Meadows, V. S., Arney, G. N., Schwieterman, E. W., et al. 2018, Astrobiology, 18, 133

    work page 2018

  50. [50]

    2014, Astrobiology, 14, 67

    Misra, A., Meadows, V., Claire, M., & Crisp, D. 2014, Astrobiology, 14, 67

    work page 2014

  51. [51]

    V., Kreidberg, L., Rustamkulov, Z., Robinson, T., & Fortney, J

    Morley, C. V., Kreidberg, L., Rustamkulov, Z., Robinson, T., & Fortney, J. J. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 850, 121

    work page 2017

  52. [52]

    L., Hauschildt, P

    Peacock, S., Barman, T., Shkolnik, E. L., Hauschildt, P. H., & Baron, E. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 871, 235

    work page 2019

  53. [53]

    2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 989, 181

    Piaulet-Ghorayeb, C., Benneke, B., Turbet, M., et al. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 989, 181

    work page 2025

  54. [54]

    2020, The Astronomical Journal, 159, 206

    Qin, J. 2020, The Astronomical Journal, 159, 206

    work page 2020

  55. [55]

    V., Apai, D., & Giampapa, M

    Rackham, B. V., Apai, D., & Giampapa, M. S. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 853, 122

    work page 2018

  56. [56]

    2025, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 979, L5

    Radica, M., Piaulet-Ghorayeb, C., Taylor, J., et al. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 979, L5

    work page 2025

  57. [57]

    W., Harman, C., et al

    Ranjan, S., Schwieterman, E. W., Harman, C., et al. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 896, 148

    work page 2020

  58. [58]

    D., Buchhave, L

    Rathcke, A. D., Buchhave, L. A., De Wit, J., et al. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 979, L19

    work page 2025

  59. [59]

    2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.02932

    Redfield, S., Batalha, N., Benneke, B., et al. 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.02932

    work page arXiv 2024

  60. [60]

    2022, The Planetary Science Journal, 3, 238

    Redwing, E., de Pater, I., Luszcz-Cook, S., et al. 2022, The Planetary Science Journal, 3, 238

    work page 2022

  61. [61]

    Robinson, T. D. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 836, 236

    work page 2017

  62. [62]

    D., & Crisp, D

    Robinson, T. D., & Crisp, D. 2018, Journal of Quantitative Spectroscopy and Radiative Transfer, 211, 78

    work page 2018

  63. [63]

    D., Maltagliati, L., Marley, M

    Robinson, T. D., Maltagliati, L., Marley, M. S., & Fortney, J. J. 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111, 9042

    work page 2014

  64. [64]

    D., Meadows, V

    Robinson, T. D., Meadows, V. S., Crisp, D., et al. 2011, Astrobiology, 11, 393 Rocky Worlds DDT Program Website. 2025, https://rockyworlds.stsci.edu/index.html

    work page 2011

  65. [65]

    K., Liu, R., & Wang, A

    Rustamkulov, Z., Sing, D. K., Liu, R., & Wang, A. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 928, L7

    work page 2022

  66. [66]

    Petkowski, J. J. 2025, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122, e2416188122

    work page 2025

  67. [67]

    H., & Pandis, S

    Seinfeld, J. H., & Pandis, S. N. 2016, Atmospheric chemistry and physics: from air pollution to climate change (John Wiley & Sons)

    work page 2016

  68. [68]

    E., Fauchez, T

    Sergeev, D. E., Fauchez, T. J., Turbet, M., et al. 2022, The Planetary Science Journal, 3, 212 Plausible Tenuous Atmospheres in the TRAPPIST-1 System37

    work page 2022

  69. [69]

    2015, The encyclopedia of volcanoes (Elsevier)

    Stix, J. 2015, The encyclopedia of volcanoes (Elsevier)

    work page 2015

  70. [70]

    1988, Applied optics, 27, 2502

    Stamnes, K., Tsay, S.-C., Wiscombe, W., & Jayaweera, K. 1988, Applied optics, 27, 2502

    work page 1988

  71. [71]

    2000, DISORT, a general-purpose Fortran program for discrete-ordinate-method radiative transfer in scattering and emitting layered media: documentation of methodology

    Stamnes, K., Tsay, S.-C., Wiscombe, W., & Laszlo, I. 2000, DISORT, a general-purpose Fortran program for discrete-ordinate-method radiative transfer in scattering and emitting layered media: documentation of methodology

    work page 2000

  72. [72]

    G., Bouarar, I., et al

    Stein, O., Schultz, M. G., Bouarar, I., et al. 2014, Atmospheric chemistry and physics, 14, 9295

    work page 2014

  73. [73]

    B., Meadows, V

    Thomas, T. B., Meadows, V. S., Krissansen-Totton, J., et al. 2025, The Planetary Science Journal, 6, 126

    work page 2025

  74. [74]

    S., Crisp, D., et al

    Tinetti, G., Meadows, V. S., Crisp, D., et al. 2005, Astrobiology, 5, 461

    work page 2005

  75. [75]

    2020, Space science reviews, 216, 100

    Turbet, M., Bolmont, E., Bourrier, V., et al. 2020, Space science reviews, 216, 100

    work page 2020

  76. [76]

    2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 612, A86

    Turbet, M., Bolmont, E., Leconte, J., et al. 2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 612, A86

    work page 2018

  77. [77]

    J., Sergeev, D

    Turbet, M., Fauchez, T. J., Sergeev, D. E., et al. 2022, The Planetary Science Journal, 3, 211

    work page 2022

  78. [78]

    2021, Zenodo

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Burovski, E., et al. 2021, Zenodo

    work page 2021

  79. [79]

    R., Lewis, N

    Wakeford, H. R., Lewis, N. K., Fowler, J., et al. 2018, The Astronomical Journal, 157, 11 —. 2019, The Astronomical Journal, 157, 11

    work page 2018

  80. [80]

    1987, Atmospheric Environment (1967), 21, 2649

    Walcek, C. 1987, Atmospheric Environment (1967), 21, 2649

    work page 1987

Showing first 80 references.