Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 64 references

For fixed mass and bulk metals, a giant planet's radius is set by total entropy; after a few gigayears the internal metal distribution no longer matters.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-12 02:16 UTC pith:U4I7ZKW3

load-bearing objection Clean first-order proof that radius is fixed by M, bulk Z and total S once entropies converge; gradients only matter while they keep total S divergent. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.03467 v1 pith:U4I7ZKW3 submitted 2026-07-03 astro-ph.EP

The influence of composition gradients on giant planet radii

Henrik Knierim , Ravit Helled This is my paper
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords giant planetsplanetary radiicomposition gradientsthermal evolutionmass-radius relationinterior structureexoplanets
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Giant-planet radii have long been interpreted with simple core-plus-envelope models, yet Jupiter and Saturn show deep composition gradients. This paper asks whether those gradients permanently change a planet's size. Using a first-order analytic argument plus evolutionary simulations, the authors show that merely rearranging the same total heavy-element mass does not by itself change the radius. What does change the radius is the difference in total entropy that the gradients produce while the planet is still cooling. That difference fades after roughly a few billion years: the planet enters an "entropy-convergent" phase in which total entropy no longer remembers the primordial structure, so the radius becomes a function only of mass and bulk metallicity. The result supplies the physical reason the familiar mass–radius–composition relation works for old giants and shows that simplified models are safe only after that threshold. It also proves that adding metals, no matter how they are distributed, cannot permanently inflate a gas giant.

Core claim

The spatial redistribution of a fixed inventory of heavy elements does not inherently alter a gas giant's radius. Observable radius differences arise only from the total-entropy offset that composition gradients create during cooling. Once total entropies of stratified and homogeneous models of equal mass and bulk metallicity converge (typically after a few gigayears), the radius decouples from the internal heavy-element profile Z(m) and is set solely by mass and bulk composition.

What carries the argument

First-order radius perturbation decomposed into thermal, pressure, and composition terms. Because the specific-volume response to composition is nearly uniform, the composition integral vanishes for equal bulk metallicity; when total thermal entropy also matches and its difference keeps constant sign, the remaining terms force the macroscopic radius difference to zero.

Load-bearing premise

The material response of specific volume to composition changes is nearly the same at every depth, so the composition contribution factors cleanly out of the radius integral and cancels for equal total metals.

What would settle it

Measure two gas giants of nearly identical mass, bulk metallicity and age well past a few gigayears but with demonstrably different internal metal distributions (e.g., via gravity or Love numbers); if their radii still differ by more than a few percent after total-entropy convergence, the claim fails.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper argues that for fixed mass and bulk metallicity, a gas giant’s macroscopic radius is set by its total entropy rather than by the internal heavy-element distribution Z(m). Using a first-order perturbation analysis (Sect. 2), the authors show that the direct composition contribution to δR vanishes by construction of equal bulk Z once the specific-volume response ζ is approximately uniform, that a constant-sign thermal-entropy difference plus equal integrated thermal entropy kills the thermal term, and that hydrostatic equilibrium plus Γ1 > 4/3 forces the pressure-driven residual to zero. Numerical MESA/MESPA evolutionary tracks (Fig. 3) confirm that radii diverge at early ages but collapse onto a single R(S) locus once total entropies converge. The authors introduce an “entropy-divergent” versus “entropy-convergent” dichotomy, derive an analytic and empirical decoupling timescale τ_dec of order a few Gyr, and discuss implications for mass–metallicity relations, directly imaged planets, irradiation, and helium rain.

Significance. If the central thermodynamic claim holds, it supplies a clean physical origin for the mass–radius–composition relation and a concrete criterion for when simplified layered models remain legitimate for giant exoplanets. The analytic derivation is transparent and largely parameter-free once equal bulk Z and total S are imposed; the numerical corroboration (radii collapsing when plotted against total entropy) is a strong, falsifiable check. The work also places a thermodynamic bound on permanent radius inflation by metals. These results are of direct interest to both Solar-System and exoplanet communities and justify the continued use of simple interior models for the oldest observed giants while flagging the need for composition-gradient treatments near the ~1–few Gyr transition.

major comments (2)
  1. Sect. 2, Eq. (6) and Appendix A: the cancellation of the composition term rests on ζ being sufficiently uniform that it factors out of the mass integral. Appendix A shows a residual (δR/R)_Z of order 1 % for the adopted EoS and half-rock/half-water mixture, with a comparable and often opposite homology residual in the pressure term. This is adequate for the present claim, but the manuscript should state more explicitly that the result is EoS-dependent and that strongly non-uniform deep H–He–metal chemistry could leave a non-vanishing first-order composition contribution. A short additional test with an alternate metal mixture or tabulated ζ(m) would strengthen the load-bearing idealization without altering the paper’s scope.
  2. Sect. 3.1 and Eq. (13): the empirical decoupling timescale is obtained from a power-law fit to a finite grid (Mp = 0.3–3 MJ, Z = 0.1–0.5, opacity factors 0.01–10). The formal uncertainties in Table C.1 are tiny, yet the text correctly notes that theoretical uncertainties (opacities, convection treatment, initial entropy profiles) are larger. The paper should either (i) quote a more realistic uncertainty band on τ_dec or (ii) present Eq. (13) strictly as an order-of-magnitude estimator and avoid using it as a sharp observational classifier in Fig. 4 without that caveat.
minor comments (5)
  1. Fig. 3 caption and surrounding text: the right-hand panel (R vs total entropy) is the key numerical validation; it would help the reader if the caption explicitly stated that the tracks are for identical bulk Z and that the collapse demonstrates the analytic claim of Sect. 2.
  2. Appendix B: the logistic form for Z(m) is a practical compromise, but the text should note that it cannot produce multi-step or inverted gradients that some formation models predict; a one-sentence caveat is sufficient.
  3. Sect. 4 / Fig. 4: the PlanetS sample comparison is useful, but the two limiting (Z, κ) cases produce quite different “coupled/potentially coupled/decoupled” fractions. A brief statement of how sensitive the population statistics are to the opacity scale would improve clarity.
  4. Typographical: “10 9 yr” and similar constructions appear with missing superscripts in several places (e.g., abstract, Sect. 3.1); these should be standardized to 10^9 yr throughout.
  5. References: the self-citation density is high but methodologically justified; no action required beyond ensuring that the key prior results (Knierim & Helled 2024, 2025) are cited at the first technical use rather than only in the introduction.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Central radius–entropy identity is a self-contained first-order thermodynamic argument; only minor secondary empiricism and method self-citations, not load-bearing circularity.

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Sect. 3.1, Eq. (13); Appendix C]
    "By fitting a power law to the epoch where the radius discrepancy between the stratified and homogeneous models drops to 1% for planetary masses between 0.3 and 3 MJ, we derive the decoupling relation τ_dec ≈ 1.93×10^9 yr (Z/0.1)^−0.46 (κ/30.6 cm^2 g^−1)^0.22 (Mp/1 MJ)^0.71"

    τ_dec is extracted by fitting the authors’ own simulation grid (when |δR|/R falls to 1%), then used in Sect. 4 to classify observed exoplanets as coupled/decoupled. This is a secondary empirical scaling, not the central thermodynamic claim; the analytic order-of-magnitude τ_dec ~ 10^9 yr is independent. Mild fitted-input pattern only for the population application, not for the radius–entropy identity.

full rationale

The load-bearing claim—that at fixed mass M and bulk metallicity Z the macroscopic radius is fixed by total entropy S, so that after entropy convergence the radius decouples from Z(m)—is derived in Sect. 2 from the volume integral, the total differential of specific volume, hydrostatic equilibrium under a homology approximation, and the fact that ∫δZ dm = 0 by equal bulk Z. The composition term vanishes only under the additional idealization that ζ is nearly mass-uniform (tested to ~1% residual in Appendix A); that is an assumption, not a circular definition of the target radius. The thermal and pressure branches then force δR → 0 when total thermal entropies match and Γ1 > 4/3. Numerical MESA tracks (Fig. 3) independently corroborate that R(t) tracks diverge then converge while R(S) collapses. Self-citations (Knierim & Helled 2024/2025; Knierim et al. 2026) supply the evolution code, potential-entropy language, and helium-rain algorithm; they do not supply the identity being proved. The only mild circularity-adjacent element is the empirical τ_dec power law (Eq. 13), which is fitted to the authors’ own grid and then applied to PlanetS ages—secondary and clearly labeled empirical, not a first-principles prediction of the central claim. Score 1 reflects that minor secondary fit plus ordinary method self-citation, not reduction of the main result to its inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 6 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central vanishing of δR at fixed total entropy rests on standard hydrostatics and thermodynamics plus a few domain idealizations (uniform ζ, homology, constant-sign thermal entropy offset, chosen EoS and metal mixture). The secondary decoupling-age formula adds fitted power-law coefficients and reference opacity. No new particles or forces are introduced; ‘entropy-divergent/convergent phases’ and ‘decoupling age’ are named regimes, not independent physical entities.

free parameters (4)
  • τ_dec power-law coefficients (normalization, Z, κ, Mp exponents) = 1.93e9 yr; exponents −0.46, 0.22, 0.71
    Eq. (13) is a log-log fit to the authors’ MESA grid (Appendix C, Table C.1); the 1% radius-convergence definition and reference κ=30.6 cm² g⁻¹ at 10⁷ yr are choices that set the numerical prefactor.
  • H–He demixing temperature offset = +325 K
    Appendix F shifts the Schöttler & Redmer phase diagram by +325 K to match Jupiter’s atmospheric helium; this controls when helium rain inflates late-time radii.
  • Initial entropy profile parameters (s_core, s_env, α_s) = s_core⊙≈8, s_env⊙≈10 kB mu⁻¹, α_s=0.6 (1 MJ)
    Appendix B sets power-law primordial entropies (e.g. 8 and 10 kB/mu for 1 MJ) scaled across mass; these are hand-chosen to resemble Cumming et al. (2018) and affect early divergent-phase radii.
  • Metal mixture (half rock, half water) and reference opacity scale = 50/50 rock–water; κ_ref=30.6 cm² g⁻¹
    Z is represented as 50/50 rock–water; opacity is scaled by f_κ in the grid. Both enter cooling rates and the empirical τ_dec.
axioms (6)
  • standard math Hydrostatic equilibrium and the first-order specific-volume differential in s, P, Z (Sect. 2, Eqs. 2–5).
    Standard continuum thermodynamics; not proved in the paper but textbook.
  • domain assumption Homology approximation δr/r = δR/R used to close the pressure perturbation (Eq. 7).
    Exact only for self-similar polytropes; residual checked numerically in Appendix A.
  • domain assumption ζ (compositional specific-volume response) is sufficiently uniform in mass that it factors out of the radius integral.
    Stated in Sect. 2 and Appendix A; required for (δR/R)_Z ≡ 0. Discussion notes exotic compounds could break it.
  • domain assumption Thermal entropy difference δs_Z maintains constant sign once outer envelopes lose primordial memory on a Kelvin–Helmholtz time.
    Used to force vanishing thermal radius term when integrated thermal entropies match (Fig. 1 sketch).
  • domain assumption Chabrier & Debras (2021) H–He EoS, Guillot (2010) semi-gray atmosphere, and MESA mixing/convection treatment adequately represent cooling.
    Standard tools in the subfield; absolute radii and τ_dec inherit their systematics (Sect. 5).
  • standard math Stable gas giants have Γ1 > 4/3, so the only physical solution of the pressure-term identity is δR=0.
    Classical Chandrasekhar stability bound invoked in Sect. 2.
invented entities (1)
  • Entropy-divergent and entropy-convergent evolutionary regimes / decoupling age τ_dec independent evidence
    purpose: Name the two phases in which composition gradients do or do not affect radius via total-entropy divergence, and quantify the transition.
    These are labels for dynamical regimes derived from the thermodynamics, not new physical substances. Independent handle is the predicted age after which same-M, same-Z planets share radii regardless of Z(m).

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 21085 in / 3917 out tokens · 35615 ms · 2026-07-12T02:16:23.617922+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The radius of a giant planet is a key physical property. It encapsulates the outcome of its mass, composition, and thermal state, serving as a critical link between observations and the theory of planetary interiors. While traditional interior models assume distinct core-envelope structures, recent gravity measurements of Jupiter and Saturn reveal complex interiors with deep composition gradients. Here, we combine an analytic framework with numerical evolution simulations to elucidate how internal structures with composition gradients affect the planetary radius. We demonstrate that the spatial redistribution of heavy elements does not inherently alter the planetary size; rather, it is the resulting difference in total entropy over time that drives observable radius variations. We show that this mechanism naturally establishes two distinct evolutionary regimes. During the first few gigayears of evolution, composition gradients trap thermal energy deep within the interior, significantly affecting the planetary evolution and internal structure. However, as the planet cools and contracts, this ``thermal memory'' fades and the total entropy no longer depends on the primordial conditions. Consequently, the planetary radius decouples from the internal distribution of heavy elements, becoming solely a function of the total mass and bulk composition. Our results present the physical origin of the mass-radius-composition relation and suggest that the use of simplified interior models for giant exoplanets is legitimate only after the planet has surpassed this evolutionary threshold. Our analysis establishes a thermodynamic constraint on the planetary structure: while composition gradients can temporarily modulate cooling, they cannot permanently sustain radius inflation, as the addition of heavy elements, regardless of their distribution, inevitably leads to planetary contraction.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.03467 by Henrik Knierim, Ravit Helled.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A sketch of the thermal entropy, s Z , as a function of mass. The dashed and dash-dotted lines represent two models cooling from an identical initial s Z profile (solid curve), but with dif￾ferent composition profiles. The shaded area highlights that the resulting difference, δs Z , maintains a constant sign. stituting Eq. (7) into Eq. (3) yields  δR R  P = 1 4πR 3 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p0… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Composition (top) and specific entropy (bottom) profiles [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Planetary radius as a function of time (left) and total entropy (right) for models with di [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Decoupling timescale τdec versus stellar age t⋆ for giant exoplanets (0.5 MJ to 2.0 MJ) from the PlanetS catalog (Parc et al. 2024). The panels show how parameter choices affect the timescale of the transition: rapid (right) and delayed (left) transition. Planets are categorized into “coupled”, “potentially coupled”, and “decoupled”, depending on whether the host star’s age estimate (including uncertaintie… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The three families of curves correspond to the planetary [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages · 16 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Jupiter's formation and its primordial internal structure

    Jupiter s Formation and Its Primordial Internal Structure. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/836/2/227 , archivePrefix =. 1701.01719 , primaryClass =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3847/1538-4357/836/2/227

  2. [2]

    The fuzziness of giant planets' cores

    The Fuzziness of Giant Planets Cores. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa6d08 , archivePrefix =. 1704.01299 , primaryClass =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa6d08 2041

  3. [3]

    2025 , bdsk-url-1 =

    David Stevenson , date-added =. 2025 , bdsk-url-1 =

    2025

  4. [4]

    , keywords =

    Revising the Giant Planet Mass─Metallicity Relation: Deciphering the Formation Sequence of Giant Planets. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae0cbf , archivePrefix =. 2509.20428 , primaryClass =

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae0cbf

  5. [5]

    , keywords =

    Retrieving interior properties of hot Jupiters with Love numbers and atmospheric measurements. , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/staf814 , archivePrefix =. 2505.10304 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/staf814

  6. [6]

    , keywords =

    Giant exoplanet composition: The impact of the hydrogen helium equation of state and interior structure. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452783 , archivePrefix =. 2410.21382 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452783

  7. [7]

    Howard, S. and M. Evolution of Jupiter and Saturn with helium rain , journal =. 2024 , volume =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450629 , url =

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450629 2024

  8. [8]

    Jupiter Evolutionary Models Incorporating Stably Stratified Regions

    Jupiter Evolutionary Models Incorporating Stably Stratified Regions. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ada030 , archivePrefix =. 2410.12899 , primaryClass =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ada030

  9. [9]

    , keywords =

    How internal structure shapes the metallicity of giant exoplanets. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202557645 , archivePrefix =. 2510.08280 , primaryClass =

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202557645

  10. [10]

    doi:10.1007/978-3-642-30304-3 , adsurl =

    Stellar Structure and Evolution. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-30304-3 , adsurl =

    doi:10.1007/978-3-642-30304-3

  11. [11]

    The Primordial Entropy of Jupiter

    The primordial entropy of Jupiter. , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1000 , archivePrefix =. 1804.06019 , primaryClass =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1000

  12. [12]

    , keywords =

    On the radiative equilibrium of irradiated planetary atmospheres. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200913396 , archivePrefix =. 1006.4702 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200913396

  13. [13]

    , keywords =

    Giant planet evolution with MESA. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556537 , archivePrefix =. 2510.23678 , primaryClass =

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556537

  14. [14]

    APPLE: An Evolution Code for Modeling Giant Planets

    APPLE: An Evolution Code for Modeling Giant Planets. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad57c3 , archivePrefix =. 2404.14483 , primaryClass =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad57c3

  15. [15]

    Jupiter's evolution with primordial composition gradients

    Jupiter's evolution with primordial composition gradients. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201732522 , archivePrefix =. 1801.08149 , primaryClass =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201732522

  16. [16]

    The Challenge of Forming a Fuzzy Core in Jupiter

    The challenge of forming a fuzzy core in Jupiter. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201937376 , archivePrefix =. 2004.13534 , primaryClass =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201937376 2004

  17. [17]

    Jupiter's Interior with an Inverted Helium Gradient

    Jupiter's Interior with an Inverted Helium Gradient. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/PSJ/adbdb7 , archivePrefix =. 2504.00228 , primaryClass =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3847/psj/adbdb7

  18. [18]

    and Wahl, Sean and Lunine, Jonathan I

    Militzer, Burkhard and Hubbard, William B. and Wahl, Sean and Lunine, Jonathan I. and Galanti, Eli and Kaspi, Yohai and Miguel, Yamila and Guillot, Tristan and Moore, Kimberly M. and Parisi, Marzia and Connerney, John E. P. and Helled, Ravid and Cao, Hao and Mankovich, Christopher and Stevenson, David J. and Park, Ryan S. and Wong, Mike and Atreya, Sushil...

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/ac7ec8 2022

  19. [19]

    The composition of transiting giant extrasolar planets

    The composition of transiting giant extrasolar planets. Physica Scripta Volume T , keywords =. doi:10.1088/0031-8949/2008/T130/014023 , archivePrefix =. 0712.2500 , primaryClass =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/0031-8949/2008/t130/014023 2008

  20. [20]

    , keywords =

    The Heavy-element Masses of Extrasolar Giant Planets, Revealed. , keywords =. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/736/2/L29 , archivePrefix =. 1105.0024 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/2041-8205/736/2/l29 2041

  21. [21]

    The origin of the high metallicity of close-in giant exoplanets: Combined effect of the resonant and aerodynamic shepherding

    The origin of the high metallicity of close-in giant exoplanets. Combined effects of resonant and aerodynamic shepherding. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936700 , archivePrefix =. 1911.02292 , primaryClass =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936700 1911

  22. [22]

    How drifting and evaporating pebbles shape giant planets. I. Heavy element content and atmospheric C/O. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039640 , archivePrefix =. 2105.13267 , primaryClass =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039640

  23. [23]

    Science , keywords =

    Measurement and implications of Saturn's gravity field and ring mass. Science , keywords =. doi:10.1126/science.aat2965 , adsurl =

    doi:10.1126/science.aat2965

  24. [24]

    Comparing Jupiter interior structure models to Juno gravity measurements and the role of a dilute core

    Comparing Jupiter interior structure models to Juno gravity measurements and the role of a dilute core. , keywords =. doi:10.1002/2017GL073160 , archivePrefix =. 1707.01997 , primaryClass =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1002/2017gl073160

  25. [25]

    , keywords =

    The bulk metallicity of giant planets around M stars. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452442 , archivePrefix =. 2411.16197 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452442

  26. [26]

    Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences , keywords =

    Interiors of the Giant Planets. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences , keywords =. doi:10.1146/annurev.ea.10.050182.001353 , adsurl =

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.ea.10.050182.001353

  27. [27]

    , keywords =

    Nonadiabatic Models of Jupiter and Saturn. , keywords =. doi:10.1006/icar.1994.1189 , adsurl =

    work page doi:10.1006/icar.1994.1189 1994

  28. [28]

    The mass-radius relation of exoplanets, revisited

    The mass-radius relation of exoplanets revisited. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348690 , archivePrefix =. 2311.12593 , primaryClass =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348690

  29. [29]

    , title =

    Batygin, Konstantin and Stevenson, David J. , title =. 2013 , month =. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/769/1/L9 , url =

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/769/1/l9 2013

  30. [30]

    Swift, D. C. and Eggert, J. H. and Hicks, D. G. and Hamel, S. and Caspersen, K. and Schwegler, E. and Collins, G. W. and Nettelmann, N. and Ackland, G. J. , title =. 2011 , month =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/744/1/59 , url =

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/744/1/59 2011

  31. [31]

    , keywords =

    The Mass-Metallicity Relation for Giant Planets. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/0004-637X/831/1/64 , archivePrefix =. 1511.07854 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3847/0004-637x/831/1/64

  32. [32]

    , keywords =

    The Mass-Radius Relation for 65 Exoplanets Smaller than 4 Earth Radii. , keywords =. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/783/1/L6 , archivePrefix =. 1312.0936 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/2041-8205/783/1/l6 2041

  33. [33]

    , year = 1969, month = nov, volume =

    The Mass-Radius Relation for Cold Spheres of Low Mass. , year = 1969, month = nov, volume =. doi:10.1086/150240 , adsurl =

    doi:10.1086/150240 1969

  34. [34]

    An introduction to the study of stellar structure

  35. [35]

    , keywords =

    Further constraints on Jupiter's primordial structure. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556984 , archivePrefix =. 2512.03961 , primaryClass =

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556984

  36. [36]

    Unraveling the origin of giant exoplanets: Observational implications of convective mixing

    Unraveling the origin of giant exoplanets: Observational implications of convective mixing. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554506 , archivePrefix =. 2504.12118 , primaryClass =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554506

  37. [37]

    , keywords =

    Convective Mixing in Gas Giant Planets with Primordial Composition Gradients. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad8dd0 , archivePrefix =. 2407.09341 , primaryClass =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad8dd0

  38. [38]

    A correlation between the heavy element content of transiting extrasolar planets and the metallicity of their parent stars

    A correlation between the heavy element content of transiting extrasolar planets and the metallicity of their parent stars. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20065476 , archivePrefix =. astro-ph/0605751 , primaryClass =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20065476

  39. [39]

    , keywords =

    The evolution and internal structure of Neptunes and sub-Neptunes: The importance of thermal conductivity in non-convective regions. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556526 , archivePrefix =. 2509.04564 , primaryClass =

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556526

  40. [40]

    Constraining the origin of giant exoplanets via elemental abundance measurements

    Constraining the origin of giant exoplanets via elemental abundance measurements. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244516 , archivePrefix =. 2209.01240 , primaryClass =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244516

  41. [41]

    The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =

    Modules for. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =. 2011 , note =. doi:10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/3 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/3 2011

  42. [42]

    The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =

    Modules for. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =. 2013 , note =. doi:10.1088/0067-0049/208/1/4 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/208/1/4 2013

  43. [43]

    The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =

    Modules for. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =. 2015 , note =. doi:10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/15 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/15 2015

  44. [44]

    The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =

    Modules for. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =. 2018 , note =. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aaa5a8 , abstract =

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aaa5a8 2018

  45. [45]

    The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =

    Modules for. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =. 2019 , note =. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab2241 , abstract =

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab2241 2019

  46. [46]

    The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =

    Modules for. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =. 2023 , note =. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acae8d , abstract =

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acae8d 2023

  47. [47]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Volume 434, Issue 4, p.3283-3292 , author =

    The effect of composition on the evolution of giant and intermediate-mass planets , issn =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Volume 434, Issue 4, p.3283-3292 , author =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1248 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1248

  48. [48]

    From super-

    Parc, Léna and Bouchy, François and Venturini, Julia and Dorn, Caroline and Helled, Ravit , month = aug, year =. From super-. Astronomy & Astrophysics , publisher =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449911 , abstract =

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449911

  49. [49]

    Stevenson, D. J. and Salpeter, E. E. , month = oct, year =. The dynamics and helium distribution in hydrogen-helium fluid planets. , volume =. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , publisher =. doi:10.1086/190479 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1086/190479

  50. [50]

    Icarus, Volume 164, Issue 1, p

    Phase separation in giant planets: inhomogeneous evolution of. Icarus, Volume 164, Issue 1, p. 228-243. , author =. doi:10.1016/S0019-1035(03)00130-1 , abstract =

    doi:10.1016/s0019-1035(03)00130-1

  51. [51]

    Simultaneous

    Sur, Ankan and Tejada Arevalo, Roberto and Su, Yubo and Burrows, Adam , month = feb, year =. Simultaneous. The Astrophysical Journal Letters , publisher =. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adad62 , abstract =

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adad62 2041

  52. [52]

    AGU Advances , author =

    The. AGU Advances , author =. 2024 , keywords =. doi:10.1029/2024AV001171 , abstract =

    doi:10.1029/2024av001171 2024

  53. [53]

    Chabrier, Gilles and Debras, Florian , month = aug, year =. A. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abfc48 , abstract =

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abfc48

  54. [54]

    and Burrows, Adam , month = jan, year =

    Spiegel, David S. and Burrows, Adam , month = jan, year =. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/745/2/174 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/745/2/174

  55. [55]

    , month = oct, year =

    Mordasini, C. , month = oct, year =. Luminosity of young. Astronomy & Astrophysics , publisher =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321617 , abstract =

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321617

  56. [56]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Volume 507, Issue 2, pp.2094-2102 , author =

    Synthetic evolution tracks of giant planets , issn =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Volume 507, Issue 2, pp.2094-2102 , author =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2250 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2250 2094

  57. [57]

    and Fortney, Jonathan J

    Marley, Mark S. and Fortney, Jonathan J. and Hubickyj, Olenka and Bodenheimer, Peter and Lissauer, Jack J. , month = jan, year =. On the. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.1086/509759 , abstract =

    doi:10.1086/509759

  58. [58]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , author =

    Constraining the initial entropy of directly detected exoplanets , volume =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , author =. 2014 , pages =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1967 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1967 2014

  59. [59]

    Fortney, J. J. and Marley, M. S. and Saumon, D. and Lodders, K. , month = aug, year =. Synthetic. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.1086/589942 , abstract =

    doi:10.1086/589942

  60. [60]

    and Chabrier, G

    Baraffe, I. and Chabrier, G. and Allard, F. and Hauschildt, P. H. , month = feb, year =. Evolutionary models for low-mass stars and brown dwarfs:. Astronomy & Astrophysics , publisher =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20011638 , abstract =

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20011638

  61. [61]

    and Marley, M

    Burrows, A. and Marley, M. and Hubbard, W. B. and Lunine, J. I. and Guillot, T. and Saumon, D. and Freedman, R. and Sudarsky, D. and Sharp, C. , month = dec, year =. A. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.1086/305002 , abstract =

    doi:10.1086/305002

  62. [62]

    Next-generation

    Sur, Ankan and Arevalo, Roberto Tejada and Burrows, Adam and Chen, Yi-Xian , month = feb, year =. Next-generation. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae3a85 , abstract =

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae3a85

  63. [63]

    The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =

    Berardo, David and Cumming, Andrew and Marleau, Gabriel-Dominique , month = jan, year =. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/149 , abstract =

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/149

  64. [64]

    Schöttler, Manuel and Redmer, Ronald , month = mar, year =. Ab. Physical Review Letters , publisher =. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.115703 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.120.115703