Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 53 references

Residual habitable-zone dust, even at solar-system levels, can cut molecular absorption depths in Earth-twin spectra by up to 50%.

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 · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 02:24 UTC pith:O4YKNNUA

load-bearing objection Solid, useful parameter study that turns an old qualitative worry about exozodi into concrete REC thresholds for HWO; the headline numbers are plausible but rest on a simplified smooth-continuum residual model that real subtraction residuals may not satisfy. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.14329 v1 pith:O4YKNNUA submitted 2026-07-15 astro-ph.EP

The exozodi spectral effect: Residual habitable zone dust may bias exoEarth characterization

Miles H. Currie , Christopher C. Stark , Eleonora Alei , Aki Roberge This is my paper
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords exozodiacal dusthabitable zonedirect imagingatmospheric retrievalexoEarth characterizationmolecular band depthspost-processing factorspace telescope
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.

The paper establishes that exozodiacal dust—warm dust in a star's habitable zone—is not merely a source of extra photon noise for direct imaging of Earth-like exoplanets; if imperfectly subtracted, it adds a smooth, cloud-like continuum to the extracted spectrum that flattens every molecular absorption feature. At a dust level equal to the solar system's zodiacal dust (1 zodi), the apparent depth of visible-wavelength absorption bands falls by up to 50%, and the effect worsens at longer wavelengths because the point-spread function gathers more dust light. To measure molecular abundances without bias, the residual dust-to-planet flux ratio in the V band must be suppressed below roughly one part per thousand; a binary detection of a species relaxes this requirement by an order of magnitude, especially at higher spectral resolution. The paper makes a concrete, mission-relevant argument: exozodi subtraction is not optional for a future Earth-characterization observatory, but a first-order requirement. The result also quantifies which dust colors are friendlier (blue) and which are hostile (gray/red) to spectral characterization.

Core claim

Residual exozodi acts as an additive continuum that flattens all molecular absorption bands; the effect worsens with wavelength (because the point-spread function collects more dust light) and with red/gray dust color. Simulating a 10-pc Earth twin in a future space observatory, 1 zodi of dust reduces visible O2 and H2O band depths by up to 50% and nearly erases the 1.6-µm CO2 band. Retrievals return O2 and H2O abundances biased low once the residual dust-to-planet flux ratio exceeds 10^-3. The stated requirement: keep residual exozodi below 10^-3 of the planet's V-band flux for abundance work; a binary detection relaxes this by an order of magnitude.

What carries the argument

The paper's central quantity is the residual exozodi contamination (REC) ratio, (F'_ez/F_p)_V—the ratio of exozodi flux left in the photometric aperture after post-processing to the planet's own V-band flux. It ties together every requirement: a given REC ratio corresponds to a required post-processing factor (PPF_ez) that divides the raw exozodi-to-planet flux ratio. The second key ingredient is the wavelength-dependent exozodi flux itself, which grows with λ because the point-spread function (and thus photometric aperture) scales as λ/D, so the same dust level contaminates longer wavelengths more. These two objects—the scalar PPF_ez and the aperture-integrated, color-dependent exozodi flux

Load-bearing premise

The whole quantitative requirement rests on modeling imperfect exozodi subtraction as a single scalar post-processing factor that leaves a smooth, wavelength-independent-in-shape continuum; if real residuals are spectrally structured or spatially clumped, the bias could be worse than predicted.

What would settle it

Re-run the retrieval pipeline on synthetic spectra where the residual exozodi is injected as a spectrally varying (e.g., correlated with the planet's absorption bands) or spatially clumped component at the same residual-to-planet flux ratio; if the abundance bias is significantly larger than the paper's smooth-continuum prediction, the 10^-3 requirement is not conservative.

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

If this is right

  • Any direct-imaging mission that aims to measure molecular abundances in Earth-twin atmospheres must demonstrate exozodi post-processing to a residual-to-planet flux ratio below 10^-3 in the V band, a requirement independent of the system's dust level.
  • Molecules with absorption bands at longer wavelengths (e.g., CO2 near 1.6 µm) will be far more degraded than short-wavelength species, so survey designs should either prioritize shorter-wavelength bands or develop long-wavelength exozodi subtraction.
  • Residual exozodi creates a degeneracy with clouds: without subtraction to about one tenth of the planet's flux, cloud fraction and even planet radius retrievals become biased, potentially mischaracterizing a clear atmosphere as cloudy.
  • If only a binary detection is wanted (e.g., is H2O present?), the post-processing requirement relaxes by an order of magnitude, and increasing spectral resolution from R=140 to R~1000 can relax it by a further ~30×, trading exposure time against subtraction difficulty.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The scalar post-processing factor model treats residuals as a smooth continuum; real subtraction residuals are likely spectrally correlated or spatially clumped near the planet, which could make the bias larger than the paper's requirement suggests—an inference, not a claim of the paper.
  • Because the threshold is defined in the V band, applying these numbers to a mission that does not observe V-band, or to targets with very different dust colors, requires re-running the analysis rather than a simple rescaling.
  • The paper's method—injecting synthetic exozodi into simulated spectra and retrieving—could be applied to existing debris-disk scattered-light data to empirically validate the continuum-flattening effect before any new mission flies.
  • Target selection for a future Earth-characterization survey should weight exozodi density and color as heavily as stellar distance; systems with blue dust and low zodis are disproportionately favorable.

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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies how residual exozodiacal dust contaminates direct spectra of habitable-zone Earth analogs observed with a Habitable Worlds Observatory-like instrument. The authors construct exozodi spectral models (gray, red, blue, and solar-system-like), add them as an unsubtracted/partially subtracted continuum to synthetic Earth spectra, and quantify the resulting reduction in molecular band depths. They then run atmospheric retrievals on synthetic HWO data with residual exozodi-to-planet flux ratios (REC ratios) from 0 to 1, and derive post-processing requirements: REC ratios below ~1e-2 preserve band depths to 1%, and below ~1e-3 are needed for unbiased abundance retrievals; binary detection relaxes the requirement by about an order of magnitude, especially at higher spectral resolution.

Significance. If the central conclusions hold, the paper identifies a first-order systematic bias for exoEarth characterization with HWO: even solar-system-level exozodi, if imperfectly subtracted, can significantly flatten molecular absorption features and bias retrieved abundances. The core physical mechanism—adding a smooth continuum to a spectrum reduces apparent absorption depth—is robust and does not depend on retrieval details. The work has concrete strengths: it uses the public pyEDITH exposure time calculator, includes zero-exozodi baseline retrievals, considers multiple dust colors and clear/cloudy atmospheres, and provides quantitative, falsifiable requirements. The main risk is that the quantitative thresholds rest on a specific parameterization of the residual exozodi as a smooth, positively-valued scalar multiple of the unsubtracted exozodi spectrum.

major comments (2)
  1. [§2.3.2, Eqs. (4)–(5); §3.3.3] The headline requirements (REC < 1e-3 for abundance retrieval, Fig. 6 and §5) are derived entirely from modeling the subtraction residual as C_nf,ez = C_ez/PPF_ez, a deterministic, non-negative scalar fraction of the pre-subtraction exozodi spectrum, combined linearly with the stellar leakage noise floor. Real subtraction residuals from PSF/model mismatch, clumpy dust, or chromatic errors need not be a scalar multiple of the unsubtracted exozodi; they can be spectrally structured, spatially correlated, and sign-varying. If the residual is redder than the assumed model, the V-band REC ratio understates the bias on CO2/H2O at longer wavelengths and the required PPF_ez is underestimated; if the retrieval can marginalize over a continuum or exozodi parameter (as the paper itself leaves to future work in §3.3.3), a smooth residual may be largely absorbed and the 1e-3 requirement may be too st
  2. [§3.3.1, Fig. 6; §3.3.3] The 1% band-depth preservation tolerance is adopted as a proxy for unbiased abundance measurement, with the validation in §3.3.3 limited to noting that retrieval degradation begins near the same REC ratio where band depths start to change. This is an indirect validation. A 1% band-depth change is neither clearly necessary nor clearly sufficient for unbiased abundances: a retrieval that marginalizes over a continuum offset may tolerate larger band-depth changes, while a correlated residual could bias abundances even when the band depth is preserved to <1%. The paper should directly quantify the mapping between band-depth error and abundance bias, for example by plotting retrieved log(f_O2), log(f_H2O) bias against REC ratio in the same figure as the band-depth curves, or by reporting the REC ratio at which the retrieved abundance departs from the truth by a specified factor.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§2.1] The definition of one 'zodi' as the V-band face-on brightness of solar-system zodiacal dust is fine, but the conversion from N_ez to observed flux in Fig. 1 and Fig. 6 depends on inclination (stated as 60° for Fig. 1) and aperture size. The text should state explicitly that the N_ez–PPF_ez contours in Fig. 6 assume the same 60° inclination and 0.7λ/D aperture, since these choices affect the quantitative PPF_ez requirements.
  2. [§3.2, Fig. 5] The CO2 panel in Fig. 5 has a very small y-axis range (0–7.5%) and the text says the CO2 band is 'challenging' to detect. This is fine, but the reader would benefit from a statement of the absolute band depth rather than only the percentage reduction, because a 50% reduction of a 5% band is less observationally significant than a 50% reduction of a 40% band.
  3. [§3.3.3] The retrieval setup uses the default rfast priors, which include a wide cloud parameter space. The paper reports that at REC=1e-2 the retrieval interprets the residual exozodi as a smaller planet with higher cloud fraction, but it would be useful to state whether the true planet radius and cloud fraction remain within the 1σ posterior at that REC value; this would strengthen the discussion of degeneracies.
  4. [general] The notation F'ez/Fp is used interchangeably with (F'ez/Fp)_V; please define the latter explicitly before the first use in §3.1 and use it consistently. Also, the two Alei et al. 2026 references in the bibliography appear to have near-identical author lists; please verify that they are distinct works and are cited appropriately.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the derivation is a self-contained forward-model exercise; REC thresholds are model outputs, not fitted inputs reused as predictions.

full rationale

This paper's derivation chain is forward modeling with no fitted parameter recycled as a prediction. Exozodi spectral models (gray, red, blue, and solar-system 'zodi') come from external empirical inputs (Leinert et al. 1998; Ren et al. 2023; Debes et al. 2008), and exozodi density is an assumed model parameter (N_ez), not a fitted value. Residual exozodi is parameterized as a scalar post-processing factor (Eq. 4: Cnf,ez = Cez/PPFez), and the band-depth curves (Fig. 5), REC requirements (Fig. 6), and the F'_ez/Fp = 1e-3 retrieval threshold are computed from synthetic spectra plus an independent retrieval code (rfast/emcee); the retrieved posteriors are emergent outputs. Dilution of absorption depth by an additive continuum is arithmetic given the model, but the paper presents it as a quantitative consequence rather than as a statistically fitted 'prediction,' and the headline requirements are thresholds read off those forward-model outputs. Self-citations (Currie et al. 2023; Stark et al. 2019, 2024; Alei et al. 2026 pyEDITH) provide context or describe publicly available tools with the relevant equations reproduced in the text, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work to force the choice of model. The load-bearing assumptions - a scalar PPF_ez residual and no exozodi parameter in the retrieval - are explicitly flagged limitations (Sec. 2.3.2 discusses model mismatch; Sec. 3.3.3 states 'We leave these approaches open to future studies'), so if real subtraction residuals are spectrally structured the quantitative thresholds could change; that is a model-robustness concern, not circularity. Per the hard rules, no Eq. X = Eq. Y reduction or fitted-input-called-prediction can be exhibited, so the honest finding is no significant circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The central contribution is a parameter study; the main inputs are scenario choices and model assumptions. The free parameters are hand-chosen tolerances and instrument/scenario settings, not quantities fitted to the target result.

free parameters (4)
  • Band-depth preservation tolerance = 1%
    Section 3.3.1 chooses a 1% band-depth preservation threshold to convert REC ratio into PPF_ez requirements; the choice is arbitrary and shifts the derived contours.
  • Reference S/N setpoints = S/N = 10 and 20 at continuum reference bins
    Exposure times are fixed per channel to reach S/N=10 or 20 at reference bins (Section 2.3.2); this assumption affects the retrievability thresholds.
  • Photometric aperture size = 0.7 lambda/D
    The exozodi flux captured is proportional to aperture size; 0.7 lambda/D is assumed throughout, affecting the REC ratio and all band-depth curves.
  • Cloud fraction for cloudy Earth case = 0.5
    A single 50% cloud fraction is adopted for the cloudy modern Earth model; the effect of other cloud fractions is not explored.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption The HOSTS median exozodi level of ~3 zodis in nearby Sun-like systems is representative.
    Used in Section 1 and Section 4.1 to argue 3 zodis is a typical case and to set Nez values; if the median is wrong, severity changes but not the mechanism.
  • domain assumption rfast radiative transfer spectra and pyEDITH ETC noise model faithfully represent HWO observations of Earth-like planets.
    The synthetic data and retrievals (Sections 2.2-2.3) inherit all assumptions of these codes; no independent validation against real HWO data is possible yet.
  • ad hoc to paper Residual exozodi after post-processing is a deterministic additive continuum, parameterized by PPF_ez and combined linearly with stellar leakage noise floor (Eqs. 4-5).
    This is the paper's own model; it has no empirical validation and drives the quantitative requirements.
  • ad hoc to paper A 1% band-depth preservation tolerance is an appropriate proxy for unbiased molecular abundance measurement.
    Section 3.3.1 chooses this tolerance to derive PPF_ez contours; a different tolerance would shift the required REC ratios.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 17263 in / 16405 out tokens · 152876 ms · 2026-08-02T02:24:47.852900+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

All exoplanetary systems are expected to host exozodiacal dust, or exozodi, originating from planetesimals. For many stars, exozodi will likely be the largest source of astrophysical noise in direct observations of terrestrial exoplanets. Nearby Sun-like systems likely have $\gtrsim3$x more habitable zone (HZ) dust than our solar system, which must be removed from direct images and spectra to reveal exoplanet signals. The albedo of this micron-sized dust varies smoothly over VIS -- NIR wavelengths, but exozodi can be composed of different materials that can impact its color. If left unsubtracted, exozodiacal light will add cloud-like continuum emission to extracted spectra, potentially biasing characterization studies by reducing the apparent absorption depth of spectral features. To quantify these effects, we simulate exoEarth systems with a range of exozodi densities and compositions, and apply an atmospheric retrieval tool to synthetic Habitable Worlds Observatory (HWO) spectra. We find that exozodi at levels similar to the solar system (i.e., 1 zodi) can reduce the apparent depth of visible wavelength molecular absorption features by up to 50\%, an effect that worsens at longer wavelengths. To measure molecular abundances, significant post-processing may be required to remove exozodi to a fractional residual that tightens with dust density. However, targeting a binary detection result for an absorbing species instead relaxes this requirement by an order of magnitude, especially at higher spectral resolution. Understanding and mitigating the effects of exozodi in extracted exoEarth spectra is critical to characterize HZ exoplanet environments with HWO and ultimately to search for signs of habitability and life.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.14329 by Aki Roberge, Christopher C. Stark, Eleonora Alei, Miles H. Currie.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Models of exozodiacal dust exhibiting gray, red, blue, and solar system zodi-like colors, each shown for 3 zodis of dust viewed at 60◦ from face-on. The top and middle rows are the exozodi contrast and flux per area, respectively. The bottom row shows the total wavelength-dependent exozodi flux captured within a photometric aperture of size 0.7 λ/D for a 7.2 m HWO aperture. The thin light-blue line in the … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: An example of synthetic HWO Earth spectra at 10 pc generated with pyEDITH (upper) and the corresponding S/N values for each wavelength bin (lower). The gray vertical lines separate the spectral channels assumed for this work. Exposure times were fixed such that S/N=10 or S/N=20 is achieved at reference wavelength bins (red squares) for each spectral channel. We placed the reference bins at continuum locati… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Modern Earth spectra for clear (thick lines) and cloudy (fcld = 0.5, thin lines) atmospheres, and the effect of adding 1 zodi of exozodiacal dust (colors) with an assumed 0.7 λ/D photometric aperture. Adding exozodi to these spectra raises the apparent spectral continuum, an effect similarly achieved by adding clouds to the atmosphere. 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 O2 clear +grey EZ +red EZ +blue EZ +zodi EZ H2O CO2 0.7… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Normalized molecular absorption bands for a modern Earth-like exoplanet. The upper and lower rows show clear and cloudy (fcld) sky atmospheres, respectively. The black lines represent spectra where exozodi was perfectly removed (i.e. PPFez = ∞). The colored lines represent the effect of adding 1 zodi of unsubtracted (i.e. PPFez = 1) dust for different exozodi color cases. These spectra are nominally shown … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Molecular absorption depths as a function of residual-exozodi to planet flux ratio. For absorption bands < 1µm, exozodi must be subtracted from the observations to F′ ez/Fp ≲ 10−2 to preserve the full band depth. The exozodi effect is worse at longer wavelengths, and this requirement becomes stricter by nearly two orders of magnitude for the CO2 band for all cases but blue exozodi. Cases with gray, red, or… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Contours in Nzodi–PPFez space showing the maximum F′ ez/Fp required to preserve the absorption band depth to within 1% of its uncontaminated value in the processed data. For all but the blue exozodi case, systems with 3 zodis of dust will require post-processing factors of > 100 for molecules < 1µm, and > 1000 for longer wavelength absorption bands. For systems with more dust, achieving the required PPFez … view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Selected retrieved planetary parameters as a func￾tion of F′ ez/Fp. With increasing F′ ez/Fp, retrieved molecular abundances are lower than the truth, and all parameters be￾come unconstrained due to the increased residual exozodi flux in the data. move exozodi to the ≲ 0.1% level for precise atmospheric retrieval. Previous studies have made the reasonable assumption that other stellar systems have dust pro… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The O2 A-band plotted at different spectral res￾olutions. Increasing spectral resolution also increases the effective absorption band depth relative to the continuum. Higher spectral resolution relaxes REC ratio require￾ments, and may also lower S/N requirements. For ex￾ample, with an S/N=10 detection of the spectral bins, we require the absorption band depth to be > 40% with respect to the continuum to de… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: O2 band depth as a function of (F ′ ez/Fp)V and spectral resolution (upper), and the band depth required for a 3σ detection as a function of spectral bin S/N (lower), assuming S/N is equal across all spectral bins. Increasing spectral resolution is one method to ease exozodi subtraction and S/N requirements for molecular detection. Sun-like systems in the time before HWO launches (e.g. B. Mennesson et al. … view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Corner plot for retrieving properties of a modern Earth twin with 50% clouds at 10 pc away, with an exozodi to planet flux ratio (F ′ ez/Fp)V = 10−2 . The corner plots associated with all five (F ′ ez/Fp)V cases are available in the online journal. Defr`ere, D., Absil, O., Hartog, R. D., Hanot, C., & Stark, C. 2010, A&A, 509, A9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200912973 Defr`ere, D., Stark, C., Cahoy, K., & Beere… 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

53 extracted references · 17 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2021, Pathways to Discovery in Astronomy and Astrophysics for the 2020s (National Academies Press), doi: 10.17226/26141

    National Academies of Sciences. 2021, Pathways to Discovery in Astronomy and Astrophysics for the 2020s (National Academies Press), doi: 10.17226/26141

    doi:10.17226/26141 2021

  2. [2]

    H., & D’Amico, S

    Ahmed, Z., Shaklan, S., Currie, M. H., & D’Amico, S. 2025, JATIS, 11, 042205, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.11.4.042205

    work page doi:10.1117/1.jatis.11.4.042205 2025

  3. [3]

    Mandell, A. M. 2026, RASTI, in prep

    2026

  4. [4]

    M., Currie, M

    Alei, E., Mandell, A. M., Currie, M. H., et al. 2026, The Astronomical Journal, 171, 228

    2026

  5. [5]

    D., & Meadows, V

    Arney, G., Domagal-Goldman, S. D., & Meadows, V. S. 2018, Astrobiology, 18, 311, doi: 10.1089/ast.2017.1666

    arXiv 2018

  6. [6]

    N., Meadows, V

    Arney, G. N., Meadows, V. S., Domagal-Goldman, S. D., et al. 2017, ApJ, 836, 49, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/836/1/49

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/836/1/49 2017

  7. [7]

    A., Weinberger, A

    Arnold, J. A., Weinberger, A. J., Videen, G., & Zubko, E. S. 2019, AJ, 157, 157, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab095e

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab095e 2019

  8. [8]

    A., Bryden, G., Stapelfeldt, K

    Beichman, C. A., Bryden, G., Stapelfeldt, K. R., et al. 2006, ApJ, 652, 1674, doi: 10.1086/508449

    work page doi:10.1086/508449 2006

  9. [9]

    2024, in Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2024: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, Vol

    Belikov, R., Stark, C., Siegler, N., et al. 2024, in Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2024: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, Vol. 13092, SPIE, 1999–2021, doi: 10.1117/12.3020614

    doi:10.1117/12.3020614 2024

  10. [10]

    Juanola-Parramon, R., & Meadows, V. S. 2023, AJ, 166, 197, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acfda7

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/acfda7 2023

  11. [11]

    H., Debes, J., Hasegawa, Y., et al

    Currie, M. H., Debes, J., Hasegawa, Y., et al. 2025, arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.19932

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    2022, AJ, 163, 299, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac6b97

    Damiano, M., & Hu, R. 2022, AJ, 163, 299, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac6b97

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac6b97 2022

  13. [13]

    H., Weinberger, A

    Debes, J. H., Weinberger, A. J., & Song, I. 2008, ApJ, 684, L41, doi: 10.1086/592018 14 Figure 10.Corner plot for retrieving properties of a modern Earth twin with 50% clouds at 10 pc away, with an exozodi to planet flux ratio (F ′ ez/Fp)V = 10−2. The corner plots associated with all five (F ′ ez/Fp)V cases are available in the online journal. Defr` ere, ...

    work page doi:10.1086/592018 2008

  14. [14]

    Oschmann, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 84420M, doi: 10.1117/12.926324

    work page doi:10.1117/12.926324

  15. [15]

    F., Jayaraman, S., Xu, Y

    Dermott, S. F., Jayaraman, S., Xu, Y. L., Gustafson, B. ˚A. S., & Liou, J. C. 1994, Nature, 369, 719, doi: 10.1038/369719a0

    work page doi:10.1038/369719a0 1994

  16. [16]

    S., Debes, J., Mennesson, B., et al

    Douglas, E. S., Debes, J., Mennesson, B., et al. 2022, PASP, 134, 024402, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ac3f7b

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ac3f7b 2022

  17. [17]

    2020, AJ, 159, 177, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab7817 15

    Ertel, S., Defr` ere, D., Hinz, P., et al. 2020, AJ, 159, 177, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab7817 15

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab7817 2020

  18. [18]

    2024, in Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2024: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, Vol

    Feinberg, L., Ziemer, J., Ansdell, M., et al. 2024, in Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2024: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, Vol. 13092, SPIE, 511–522, doi: 10.1117/12.3018328

    doi:10.1117/12.3018328 2024

  19. [19]

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

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

    doi:10.1086/670067 2013

  20. [20]

    S., & Lustig-Yaeger, J

    Gilbert-Janizek, S., Meadows, V. S., & Lustig-Yaeger, J. 2024, PSJ, 5, 148, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/ad381e

    doi:10.3847/psj/ad381e 2024

  21. [21]

    A., Fechtig, H., & Giese, R

    Grun, E., Zook, H. A., Fechtig, H., & Giese, R. H. 1985, Icarus, 62, 244, doi: 10.1016/0019-1035(85)90121-6

    doi:10.1016/0019-1035(85)90121-6 1985

  22. [22]

    Jackson, A., & Zook, H. A. 1989, Nature, 337, 629, doi: 10.1038/337629a0

    work page doi:10.1038/337629a0 1989

  23. [23]

    2022, AJ, 164, 235, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac97eb

    Juanola-Parramon, R., & Nemati, B. 2022, AJ, 164, 235, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac97eb

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac97eb 2022

  24. [24]

    2025, PSJ, 6, 87, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/adbe7f

    Kelkar, S., Saxena, P., Kopparapu, R., & Monteiro, J. 2025, PSJ, 6, 87, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/adbe7f

    doi:10.3847/psj/adbe7f 2025

  25. [25]

    M., & Wyatt, M

    Kennedy, G. M., & Wyatt, M. C. 2013, MNRAS, 433, 2334, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt900

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stt900 2013

  26. [26]

    V., Defr` ere, D., et al

    Kral, Q., Krivov, A. V., Defr` ere, D., et al. 2017, AstRv, 13, 69, doi: 10.1080/21672857.2017.1353202

    arXiv 2017

  27. [27]

    G., Frissell, M., et al

    Krissansen-Totton, J., Ulses, A. G., Frissell, M., et al. 2025, arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.14771

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  28. [28]

    M., Villanueva, G

    Latouf, N., Mandell, A. M., Villanueva, G. L., et al. 2023, AJ, 166, 129, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acebc3

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/acebc3 2023

  29. [29]

    2012, A&A, 539, A17, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117714

    Lebreton, J., Augereau, J.-C., Thi, W.-F., et al. 2012, A&A, 539, A17, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117714

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201117714 2012

  30. [30]

    K., et al

    Leinert, Ch., Bowyer, S., Haikala, L. K., et al. 1998, A&AS, 127, 1, doi: 10.1051/aas:1998105

    doi:10.1051/aas:1998105 1998

  31. [31]

    2019, JOSS, 4, 1387, doi: 10.21105/joss.01387

    Lustig-Yaeger, J., Robinson, T., & Arney, G. 2019, JOSS, 4, 1387, doi: 10.21105/joss.01387

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.01387 2019

  32. [32]

    2014, ApJ, 797, 119, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/797/2/119

    Mennesson, B., Millan-Gabet, R., Serabyn, E., et al. 2014, ApJ, 797, 119, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/797/2/119

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/797/2/119 2014

  33. [33]

    2019b, arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.02161

    Mennesson, B., Bailey, V., Kasdin, J., et al. 2019b, arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.02161

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1909

  34. [34]

    2024, JATIS, 10, 035004, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.10.3.035004

    Mennesson, B., Belikov, R., Por, E., et al. 2024, JATIS, 10, 035004, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.10.3.035004

    doi:10.1117/1.jatis.10.3.035004 2024

  35. [35]

    2023, in Techniques and Instrumentation for Detection of Exoplanets XI, Vol

    Morgan, R., Savransky, D., Damiano, M., et al. 2023, in Techniques and Instrumentation for Detection of Exoplanets XI, Vol. 12680, SPIE, 518–533, doi: 10.1117/12.2677785

    doi:10.1117/12.2677785 2023

  36. [36]

    I., Metchev, S

    Patel, R. I., Metchev, S. A., & Heinze, A. 2014, ApJS, 212, 10, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/212/1/10

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/212/1/10 2014

  37. [37]

    T., Franz, B

    Reach, W. T., Franz, B. A., Weiland, J. L., et al. 1995, Nature, 374, 521, doi: 10.1038/374521a0

    work page doi:10.1038/374521a0 1995

  38. [38]

    F., Pueyo, L

    Redmond, S. F., Pueyo, L. A., Por, E. H., et al. 2024, JATIS, 10, 049003, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.10.4.049003

    work page doi:10.1117/1.jatis.10.4.049003 2024

  39. [39]

    B., Rebollido, I., Choquet, ´E., et al

    Ren, B. B., Rebollido, I., Choquet, ´E., et al. 2023, A&A, 672, A114, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245458

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245458 2023

  40. [40]

    H., Millan-Gabet, R., et al

    Roberge, A., Chen, C. H., Millan-Gabet, R., et al. 2012, PASP, 124, 799, doi: 10.1086/667218

    doi:10.1086/667218 2012

  41. [41]

    D., & Salvador, A

    Robinson, T. D., & Salvador, A. 2023, PSJ, 4, 10, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/acac9a

    doi:10.3847/psj/acac9a 2023

  42. [42]

    D., Stapelfeldt, K

    Robinson, T. D., Stapelfeldt, K. R., & Marley, M. S. 2016, PASP, 128, 025003, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/128/960/025003

    doi:10.1088/1538-3873/128/960/025003 2016

  43. [43]

    W., & Leung, M

    Schwieterman, E. W., & Leung, M. 2024, Rev. Mineral. Geochem., 90, 465, doi: 10.2138/rmg.2024.90.13

    doi:10.2138/rmg.2024.90.13 2024

  44. [44]

    Stark, C. C. 2019, JATIS, 5, 024009, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.5.2.024009

    doi:10.1117/1.jatis.5.2.024009 2019

  45. [45]

    C., & Kuchner, M

    Stark, C. C., & Kuchner, M. J. 2008, ApJ, 686, 637, doi: 10.1086/591442

    work page doi:10.1086/591442 2008

  46. [46]

    C., & Kuchner, M

    Stark, C. C., & Kuchner, M. J. 2009, ApJ, 707, 543, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/707/1/543

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/707/1/543 2009

  47. [47]

    C., Kuchner, M

    Stark, C. C., Kuchner, M. J., & Lincowski, A. 2015, ApJ, 801, 128, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/801/2/128

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/801/2/128 2015

  48. [48]

    C., Roberge, A., Mandell, A., & Robinson, T

    Stark, C. C., Roberge, A., Mandell, A., & Robinson, T. D. 2014a, ApJ, 795, 122, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/795/2/122

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/795/2/122

  49. [49]

    C., Schneider, G., Weinberger, A

    Stark, C. C., Schneider, G., Weinberger, A. J., et al. 2014b, ApJ, 789, 58, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/789/1/58

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/789/1/58

  50. [50]

    C., Mennesson, B., Bryson, S., et al

    Stark, C. C., Mennesson, B., Bryson, S., et al. 2024, JATIS, 10, 034006, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.10.3.034006

    doi:10.1117/1.jatis.10.3.034006 2024

  51. [51]

    W., Stark, C

    Tuchow, N. W., Stark, C. C., & Mamajek, E. 2024, AJ, 167, 139, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad25ec

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad25ec 2024

  52. [52]

    C., Pearce, T

    Wyatt, M. C., Pearce, T. D., Pawellek, N., et al. 2025, PASP, 137, 101001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ae087b

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ae087b 2025

  53. [53]

    V., Robinson, T

    Young, A. V., Robinson, T. D., Krissansen-Totton, J., et al. 2024, Nature Astron., 8, 101, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-02145-z

    doi:10.1038/s41550-023-02145-z 2024