Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 136 references

Atmospheric Signatures of Common Envelope Evolution in White Dwarf Planets

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Common envelope evolution can leave a detectable atmospheric signature on white dwarf planets.

desk verdict Plausible CEE atmospheric signature, but the headline 9% rests on a whole-planet mixing assumption and an internal C/O inconsistency; still deserves refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.28717 v1 pith:IMB3ER3E submitted 2026-07-30 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.SR

Sydney Jenkins , Andrew Vanderburg , James Mang , Juliette Becker , Caroline V. Morley , Melinda Soares-Furtado , Ricardo Yarza This is my paper
classification astro-ph.EPastro-ph.SR
keywords whitedwarfplanetscommonenvelopeevolutionBondi-Hoyle-LyttletonaccretionatmosphericsignaturesWD1856bJWSTthermalemissionopacitywindows
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper asks whether a giant planet that plunges into its dying host star and survives can retain a chemical memory of that ordeal. Using stellar models of an engulfed planet spiraling through an AGB star, it calculates how much hydrogen and helium the planet would accrete, then simulates the planet's emission spectrum. The central finding is that the accreted material dilutes the planet's metals, deepening the atmosphere's opacity windows and increasing thermal emission — by up to 9% for a cool planet like WD 1856 b in the most extreme case, and by 0.1–3.6% for more conservative accretion efficiencies. If real, atmospheric spectroscopy would give astronomers a rare observational way to distinguish common envelope evolution from high-eccentricity migration as the origin of close-in white dwarf planets.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is Bondi-Hoyle-Lyttleton accretion (BHLA), the standard point-particle prescription for how fast a body moving through a gas accretes mass, combined with MESA stellar models that track the planet's inspiral into the AGB envelope and PICASO atmospheric models that turn the resulting composition into emission spectra. The accretion rate depends on the planet's mass, the local gas density and sound speed, and an efficiency factor epsilon that absorbs all unmodeled physics; the paper varies epsilon from 0.01 to 1.0 and allows up to 10 times the Eddington limit.

What would settle it

Point JWST NIRSpec PRISM at WD 1856 b for 10 hours and measure the 4.10–5.05 micron flux. The extreme CEE model predicts an excess of about 7.8e-21 W/m2 (a 9% increase in planet emission, 0.03% in the combined white dwarf plus planet spectrum) while the low-efficiency model predicts under 1%; a detection of the full excess, or a tight upper bound below it, would respectively confirm or rule out the favorable CEE scenario. A similar measurement at longer wavelengths with MIRI would test the predicted redward enhancement.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms: a planet engulfed by its expanding AGB host can accrete a substantial fraction of its own mass via Bondi-Hoyle-Lyttleton accretion — up to 48% for a 3 Jupiter-mass planet at full efficiency, and more than doubling its mass if super-Eddington accretion is allowed. Because the accreted stellar envelope material is hydrogen/helium-rich, it lowers the planet's bulk metallicity. Simulated emission spectra show that this dilution deepens the 4.10–5.05 micron opacity window and raises thermal emission by up to 9.0% relative to a non-accreting twin; at lower accretion efficiencies the increase is 0.1–3.6%. The signature grows with planet temperature, and the paper argues th

Load-bearing premise

The entire quantitative prediction rests on the uncalibrated accretion efficiency epsilon and on treating the planet as a point mass, even though the paper's own analysis notes that BHLA is known to overestimate accretion and that heating, winds, magnetic fields, and shocks — all absorbed into epsilon — could reduce or halt accretion.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Planets that survive common envelope evolution may be systematically hydrogen/helium-enriched and metal-poor compared with their natal composition.
  • CEE leaves a distinctive brightening in mid-infrared opacity windows, most clearly at 4–5 micron and at wavelengths longer than about 10 micron, that could be searched for with JWST.
  • The signal strengthens steeply with planet temperature, so hotter white-dwarf planets are far better targets than cool ones like WD 1856 b.
  • If detected, the signature would discriminate CEE from high-eccentricity migration, which leaves no such accreted composition.
  • In the lowest-accretion-efficiency case the signature vanishes (0.1% or less), meaning non-detections constrain the efficiency of accretion during CEE.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If no CEE brightening is seen in a large sample of forbidden-zone planets, the likely conclusion is not that CEE never happens but that accretion efficiency is low or planetary heating halts accretion early; either way the result would tighten the allowed epsilon range.
  • The same dilution mechanism should operate in brown dwarfs and giant planets that survive common envelope phases around other post-main-sequence stars, so atmospheric metallicity measurements of such objects could act as a fossil record of their engulfment history.
  • A CEE-accreted planet might masquerade as an intrinsically low-metallicity giant planet; comparing C/O ratios with the white dwarf's own pollution abundance could break the degeneracy.
  • Because the predicted effect is strongest in the Rayleigh-Jeans tail, time-resolved or phase-resolved mid-infrared spectroscopy of transiting white-dwarf planets could detect the enhancement without waiting for high spectral resolution.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper proposes that giant planets engulfed during AGB common envelope evolution (CEE) can accrete hydrogen/helium-rich stellar envelope material via Bondi-Hoyle-Lyttleton accretion, thereby lowering their atmospheric metallicity and producing a characteristic thermal emission signature. The authors use MESA inspiral models with a point-mass planet and an accretion efficiency ε in [0.01, 1], finding accreted masses up to 48% of the initial mass in the Eddington-limited case and larger in super-Eddington cases. They propagate the resulting bulk compositional changes into PICASO emission spectra for a 3 M_Jup planet in the WD 1856 system, predicting up to a 9.0% enhancement in the 4.1–5.05 μm window for the most extreme case, falling to 0.1–3.6% for lower ε. They argue that such signatures may be observable with JWST for hotter or more favorable targets.

Significance. The proposed observational discriminant between CEE and high-eccentricity migration for close-in white-dwarf planets is timely and original. The mass-accretion calculation is transparent: it uses a published MESA framework, explicitly sweeps ε rather than fitting it to the target signal, and labels BHLA as an upper bound. The released inlists and use of open-source PICASO are strengths. The qualitative direction of the predicted signal — H/He dilution deepens opacity windows and boosts thermal emission — is robust and falsifiable. However, the quantitative magnitude depends on an unmodeled internal mixing depth and on an internally inconsistent initial C/O ratio, and for the fiducial cool WD 1856 b case the predicted flux change is below the quoted JWST precision. These issues are local and fixable, but they are central to the paper's headline claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.2, Table 2] The quoted 'atmospheric' mass fractions are computed as whole-planet mass-weighted averages, not photospheric abundances. For the ε=1.0 row, (0.0066 + 0.48×0.0016)/(1 + 0.48) = 0.0050 reproduces X_C exactly, and similar arithmetic reproduces X_N and X_O. Emission spectra, however, form in the photosphere, a tiny outer mass column. Whether accreted H/He-rich gas remains in a thin outer layer (stronger metal dilution, larger signal), mixes through the convective envelope (roughly the Table 2 case), or is transported into the deep interior (weaker signal) is not modeled. This is an order-of-magnitude uncertainty independent of ε, and it is not swept anywhere in the paper. Please state the assumed mixing depth and test sensitivity, e.g., by varying the mass of the mixed outer layer.
  2. [§4.2] The initial composition is internally inconsistent. The text states 'C/O = 1.0 (solar)', but the listed X_C = 0.0066 and X_O = 0.0184 imply a number ratio (0.0066/12)/(0.0184/16) = 0.48; solar C/O is about 0.55 (Asplund et al. 2009). The C/O ratio directly controls the CO/NH3/H2O balance and the depth of opacity windows in the PICASO models, so the predicted spectral features and the claim that CEE can be distinguished from HEM depend on which C/O was actually used. Please correct the text or table, rerun with a self-consistent C/O, and show that the differential CEE versus non-CEE signal is robust to this choice.
  3. [§5.3, Table 3] For the fiducial 186 K WD 1856 b case, the largest predicted planet-flux change is ΔF_p = 7.8×10^-21 W m^-2 (ε=1.0+), while the stated 10-hour NIRSpec PRISM precision is 2.0×10^-20 W m^-2. The 9% headline is a planet-only fractional change, not the observed combined-system change. As written, the abstract and conclusion can be read as implying WD 1856 b itself shows the 9% effect; the paper should explicitly state that this cool-planet case is below the quoted JWST sensitivity and that the observable claim rests on hotter or otherwise more favorable targets.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§3.6] 'Jean's parameter' should be 'Jeans parameter'.
  2. [Figure 1 caption] 'may effect the accretion process' should be 'may affect the accretion process'.
  3. [Table 2] The heading says 'in the planet's atmosphere', but the calculation is a whole-planet mass-weighted average. Relabel as bulk mass fractions or explicitly describe the assumed mixing prescription.
  4. [Eq. (11)] The EUV band 1–1200 Å is given in wavelength, but the integral is written over frequency. Make the conversion explicit, e.g., ν ∈ [c/1200 Å, c/1 Å] with the appropriate vacuum-wavelength convention.
  5. [§5.3] 'Macdonald et al. in press' should be cited consistently as MacDonald et al. and flagged as a personal communication/in press in the reference list.
  6. [§2.4] The Zenodo link for the MESA inlists is useful; consider also citing the PICASO v4.0 Zenodo DOI, since that code underlies the central spectral prediction.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the CEE atmospheric signature is a forward model output from explicit parameter sweeps.

full rationale

The derivation chain is: MESA stellar structure plus Bondi-Hoyle-Lyttleton accretion with an efficiency epsilon swept over a stated range (Sec. 2.3-2.4) gives accreted mass (Table 1); a mass-weighted dilution of C,N,O gives atmospheric abundances (Table 2); PICASO radiative transfer then gives emission spectra and the quoted 0.1-9.0% changes (Table 3, Figs. 4-5). No parameter is fitted to the target emission; epsilon is swept, not tuned, and the spectral result is a genuine model output. The paper's self-citations (Yarza et al. 2023 for planetary survival and BHLA wind-tunnel validation; Becker et al. 2025 for an EUV fraction integral; PICASO code papers) are peer-reviewed, code-released, or externally falsifiable supports, not uniqueness theorems or ansatz-smuggling chains. The admitted limitations — point-mass planet, unmodeled heating/winds/magnetic fields/shocks folded into epsilon, and the assumption that accreted material is uniformly mixed over the whole planet — are real modeling uncertainties but do not reduce the prediction to its input. The apparent inconsistency between the stated C/O = 1.0 and the tabulated X_C/X_O is a correctness/baseline issue, not evidence of circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on a single dominant free parameter (epsilon) plus several conventional stellar-model choices. No new physical entities are introduced. The most consequential unstated premise is that the planet survives envelope ejection and that accreted material mixes into the observable atmosphere.

free parameters (6)
  • Bondi-Hoyle-Lyttleton accretion efficiency epsilon = swept 0.01-1.0; 1.0+ for super-Eddington
    Absorbs all unmodeled complications (shocks, magnetic fields, turbulence, heating); the paper's quantitative results scale almost linearly with it.
  • Initial stellar mass = 2 M_sun
    Progenitor mass chosen to match WD 1856; affects the envelope density and inspiral timescale.
  • Mixing length parameter alpha_MLT = 2.0
    Standard but uncalibrated choice that affects the AGB envelope structure and hence the accretion environment.
  • Mass-loss scaling factors = Reimers 0.5, Bloecker 0.1
    Affect the AGB envelope mass and density profile; values are conventional rather than derived.
  • Initial planet metallicity and C/O = [M/H]=+0.3, C/O=1.0
    Assumed atmospheric composition; controls the contrast between the planet and the accreted stellar material.
  • Super-Eddington cap = 10x Eddington limit in 1.0+ runs
    Allows non-uniform accretion; drives the largest mass-accretion cases, including the brown-dwarf-mass outcomes.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption BHLA assumptions: uniform, static, pressureless medium with no magnetic fields
    Section 2.3 states these assumptions; the paper later discusses deviations but folds them into epsilon.
  • domain assumption Planet is a point mass with no atmospheric heating, inflation, or evaporation
    Sections 3.6 and 5.4 acknowledge that these effects could terminate accretion early and are not modeled.
  • domain assumption The planet survives envelope ejection
    Section 2.1 states that energy injection for envelope ejection is not included in the stellar model; survival is assumed rather than demonstrated.
  • domain assumption Roche-lobe and ram-pressure destruction criteria determine when accretion stops
    Equations (1) and (2) are standard prescriptions but are applied here without verification for the planet-in-AGB geometry.
  • domain assumption Accreted material is uniformly mixed through the observable atmosphere
    Section 4.2 dilutes the full C/N/O mass fractions by the bulk accreted mass; stratification or loss of an outer layer would erase the signal.
  • domain assumption Chemical equilibrium and uniform P-T offsets in PICASO capture the spectral effect
    Section 4.2 uses equilibrium chemistry and a uniform temperature offset; non-equilibrium chemistry, clouds, or a different P-T profile could change the emission signature.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Atmospheric Signatures of Common Envelope Evolution in White Dwarf Planets." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IMB3ER3E

@misc{pith2026260728717,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Atmospheric Signatures of Common Envelope Evolution in White Dwarf Planets},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IMB3ER3E}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.28717}
}
abstract

The majority of confirmed exoplanets orbit within 1 au of a main-sequence (MS) star. When their stellar hosts evolve off the MS, many of these planets will be engulfed and destroyed, creating empty "forbidden" zones around the stars as they evolve to their final state as a white dwarf (WD). However, several confirmed and candidate WD planets have been found within this forbidden zone. Two formation scenarios have been proposed to explain the existence of these close-in planets: high-eccentricity migration and common envelope evolution (CEE). There are currently few observational tests to distinguish between these pathways. In this study, we investigate whether CEE could leave a detectable atmospheric signature. Using Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA) models, we simulate an engulfed planet inspiraling into an AGB star, and allow the planet to accrete mass via Bondi-Hoyle-Lyttleton accretion. Assuming a range of planet masses (1$-$13 M$_{\mathrm{Jup}}$) and accretion efficiencies (0.01$-$1.0), we find that the planet can accrete up to 48% of its initial mass in the most extreme Eddington-limited scenario. Because this accreted material is enriched in hydrogen and helium, we expect it to decrease the planet's bulk metallicity. Using simulated emission spectra, we find that CEE can increase thermal emission by up to 9.0% for a cool planet such as WD 1856 b. For lower accretion efficiencies (0.01$-$0.5), thermal emission increases between 0.1$-$3.6%. This signature may be observable in the most favorable cases, providing a potential new probe for investigating the dynamical history of close-in planets around WDs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.28717 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Potential complications that may effect the accretion process (see §3). The vertical gray line in all figures corresponds to the orbital separation of WD 1856 b. Top: Comparison of the planets’ orbital velocity 𝑣orb, the planets’ escape velocities 𝑣esc, the thermal velocity 𝑣th of the surrounding medium, and the thermal velocity of the shock front 𝑣th,shock as a function of the radial position within the stellar env… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Left: Orbital separations of inspiralling planets over time. Right: Mass accreted onto planets over time. For each initial planet mass, we show results for 𝜀 ∈ [0.01, 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 1.0], with an increasing efficiency denoted by an increasing opacity. We also allow the accretion to increase up to 10× the Eddington limit, denoted by the dotted lines. Accretion stops when 𝑅𝐵 < 𝑅Jup (see §2.3). 2.4. Simulation Descript… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Fractional increase in mass as a function of accretion efficiency 𝜀. Each line in an interpolation of the fractional increase for a given initial mass, calculated using monotonic cubic splines. For many values of 𝜀, the planet experiences a significant increase in mass. The 3 MJup planet exhibits the largest increase for 𝜀 = 1.0, with Δ𝑀/𝑀 = 0.48. convective envelope. We therefore conclude that the wake will have su… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Top Left: Absolute change in emission of a hypothetical 3 MJup planet in the WD 1856 system (𝑑 = 24.8 pc). We show results for 𝜀 ∈ [0.01, 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 1.0], with an increasing efficiency denoted by an increasing opacity and a spectral resolution of 200. We also inclu…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Absolute change in emission of a 3 MJup planet that has undergone CEE relative to a planet that has not. We show the total flux in the 4.10−5.05 𝜇m opacity window as a function of the planet’s effective temperature, assuming the hypothetical planet is at a distance of …

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

136 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2019, ApJL, 885, L29, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab5062

    Aoyama, Y., & Ikoma, M. 2019, ApJL, 885, L29, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab5062

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab5062 2019

  2. [2]

    2010, ApJ, 714, 1, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/714/1/1

    Arras, P., & Socrates, A. 2010, ApJ, 714, 1, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/714/1/1

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/714/1/1 2010

  3. [3]

    J., & Scott, P

    Asplund, M., Grevesse, N., Sauval, A. J., & Scott, P. 2009, ARA&A,47,481,doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222

    arXiv 2009

  4. [4]

    A., & Bate, M

    Ayliffe, B. A., & Bate, M. R. 2009, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 393, 49–64, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14184.x

    arXiv 2009

  5. [5]

    2026, PICASO Release 4.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/ZENODO.18777608

    Batalha, N., Mang, J., Wogan, N., et al. 2026, PICASO Release 4.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/ZENODO.18777608

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.18777608 2026

  6. [6]

    E., Marley, M

    Batalha, N. E., Marley, M. S., Lewis, N. K., & Fortney, J. J. 2019, ApJ, 878, 70, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1b51

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab1b51 2019

  7. [7]

    2025, ApJ, 985, 87, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adccc4

    Batygin, K. 2025, ApJ, 985, 87, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adccc4

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adccc4 2025

  8. [8]

    Batygin, K., & Stevenson, D. J. 2010, ApJL, 714, L238, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/714/2/L238

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/714/2/l238 2010

Show all 136 references
  1. [9]

    Becker, J., Vanderburg, A., & Livesey, J. R. 2025, ApJ, 979, 99, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ada149 Belloni,D.,&Schreiber,M.R.2019,MonthlyNoticesoftheRoyal Astronomical Society, 492, 1523–1529, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3601

    2025 doi

  2. [10]

    K., Follette, K

    Betti, S. K., Follette, K. B., Ward-Duong, K., et al. 2022, ApJL, 935, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac85ef

    2022 doi

  3. [11]

    V., et al

    Beuermann, K., Dreizler, S., Hessman, F. V., et al. 2013, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 558, A96, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322241

    2013 doi

  4. [12]

    W., Beaulieu, J

    Blackman, J. W., Beaulieu, J. P., Bennett, D. P., et al. 2021, Nature, 598, 272–275, doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03869-6

    2021 doi

  5. [13]

    1995, A&A, 297, 727

    Bloecker, T. 1995, A&A, 297, 727

    1995

  6. [14]

    1952, MNRAS, 112, 195, doi: 10.1093/mnras/112.2.195

    Bondi, H. 1952, MNRAS, 112, 195, doi: 10.1093/mnras/112.2.195

    1952 doi

  7. [15]

    1944, MNRAS, 104, 273, doi: 10.1093/mnras/104.5.273

    Bondi, H., & Hoyle, F. 1944, MNRAS, 104, 273, doi: 10.1093/mnras/104.5.273

    1944 doi

  8. [16]

    P., Butler, R

    Boss, A. P., Butler, R. P., Hubbard, W. B., et al. 2005, Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union, 1, 183–186, doi: 10.1017/S1743921306004509

    2005 doi

  9. [17]

    Burrows, A., Hubeny, I., Budaj, J., & Hubbard, W. B. 2007, ApJ, 661, 502, doi: 10.1086/514326

    2007 doi

  10. [18]

    B., et al

    Burrows, A., Marley, M., Hubbard, W. B., et al. 1997, ApJ, 491, 856, doi: 10.1086/305002

    1997 doi

  11. [19]

    Giant planet engulfment by evolved giant stars: light curves, asteroseismology, and survivability

    Cantiello, M., & O’Connor, C. 2023, MESA extension to reproduce models in "Giant planet engulfment by evolved giant stars: light curves, asteroseismology, and survivability", Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/ZENODO.7692745

    2023 doi

  12. [20]

    L., Belardi, C., Parsons, S

    Casewell, S. L., Belardi, C., Parsons, S. G., et al. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 497, 3571–3580, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1608

    2020 doi

  13. [21]

    W., Shkolnik, E

    Cauley, P. W., Shkolnik, E. L., Llama, J., & Lanza, A. 2019, in AAS/Division for Extreme Solar Systems Abstracts, Vol. 51, AAS/Division for Extreme Solar Systems Abstracts, 319.09

    2019

  14. [22]

    G., Nordhaus, J., & Wilson, E

    Chamandy, L., Blackman, E. G., Nordhaus, J., & Wilson, E. 2021, MNRAS, 502, L110, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slab017

    2021 doi

  15. [23]

    G., et al

    Chamandy, L., Frank, A., Blackman, E. G., et al. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 480, 1898–1911, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1950

    2018 doi

  16. [24]

    2024, ApJL, 966, L27, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad3bb4

    Chen, H., Huang, Y., Zhu, W., et al. 2024, ApJL, 966, L27, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad3bb4

    2024 doi

  17. [25]

    2022, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 925, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac4ca9

    Chen, Z., & Bai, X. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 925, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac4ca9

    2022 doi

  18. [26]

    Connerney, J. E. P. 1993, J. Geophys. Res., 98, 18659, doi: 10.1029/93JE00980

    1993 doi

  19. [27]

    Connerney, J. E. P., Kotsiaros, S., Oliversen, R. J., et al. 2018, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 2590, doi: 10.1002/2018GL077312 Cortés, J., & Kipping, D. 2019, MNRAS, 488, 1695, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1300

    2018 doi

  20. [28]

    P., Marcy, G

    Cumming, A., Butler, R. P., Marcy, G. W., et al. 2008, PASP, 120, 531, doi: 10.1086/588487 D’Angelo, G., & Bodenheimer, P. 2013, ApJ, 778, 77, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/778/1/77

    2008 doi

  21. [29]

    H., & Sigurdsson, S

    Debes, J. H., & Sigurdsson, S. 2002, ApJ, 572, 556, doi: 10.1086/340291

    2002 doi

  22. [30]

    2013, ApJL, 776, L25, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/776/2/L25

    Demory, B.-O., de Wit, J., Lewis, N., et al. 2013, ApJL, 776, L25, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/776/2/L25

    2013 doi

  23. [31]

    2020, ApJ, 905, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc339

    Dennihy, E., Xu, S., Lai, S., et al. 2020, ApJ, 905, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc339

    2020 doi

  24. [32]

    Eggleton, P. P. 1983, ApJ, 268, 368, doi: 10.1086/160960

    1983 doi

  25. [33]

    V., Kulikov, Y

    Erkaev, N. V., Kulikov, Y. N., Lammer, H., et al. 2007, A&A, 472, 329, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20066929

    2007 doi

  26. [34]

    2009, ApJ, 694, 805, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/694/2/805

    Farihi, J., Jura, M., & Zuckerman, B. 2009, ApJ, 694, 805, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/694/2/805

    2009 doi

  27. [35]

    G., & Gänsicke, B

    Farihi, J., Parsons, S. G., & Gänsicke, B. T. 2016, A Circumbinary Debris Disk in a Polluted White Dwarf System. https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.05259

    2016 arXiv

  28. [36]

    2019, ApJ, 874, 81, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab0300

    Emsenhuber, A. 2019, ApJ, 874, 81, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab0300

    2019 doi

  29. [37]

    J., Rosenthal, L

    Fulton, B. J., Rosenthal, L. J., Hirsch, L. A., et al. 2021, ApJS, 255, 14, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abfcc1

    2021 doi

  30. [38]

    2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 683, A4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348383

    Gagnier, D., & Pejcha, O. 2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 683, A4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348383

    2024 doi

  31. [39]

    2024, ApJL, 966, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad3ae3 Gänsicke, B

    Gallo, E., Caldiroli, A., Spinelli, R., et al. 2024, ApJL, 966, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad3ae3 Gänsicke, B. T., Marsh, T. R., & Southworth, J. 2007, MNRAS, 380, L35, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2007.00343.x Gänsicke, B. T., Marsh, T. R., Southworth, J., &

    2024

  32. [40]

    2006, Science, 314, 1908, doi: 10.1126/science.1135033 Gänsicke, B

    Rebassa-Mansergas, A. 2006, Science, 314, 1908, doi: 10.1126/science.1135033 Gänsicke, B. T., Schreiber, M. R., Toloza, O., et al. 2019, Nature, 576, 61, doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1789-8 14Jenkins et al. Gänsicke, B. T., Aungwerojwit, A., Marsh, T. R., et al. 2016, ApJL, 818, L7...

    2006 doi

  33. [41]

    2022, MNRAS, 511, 5994, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac463

    Guidarelli, G., Nordhaus, J., Carroll-Nellenback, J., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 511, 5994, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac463

    2022 doi

  34. [42]

    Y., Bohn, A

    Haffert, S. Y., Bohn, A. J., de Boer, J., et al. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 749, doi: 10.1038/s41550-019-0780-5

    2019 doi

  35. [43]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    2020 doi

  36. [44]

    2020, The AstronomicalJournal,159,222,doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab811e

    Hashimoto, J., Aoyama, Y., Konishi, M., et al. 2020, The AstronomicalJournal,159,222,doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab811e

    2020 doi

  37. [45]

    2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed

    Helled, R., Bodenheimer, P., Podolak, M., et al. 2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed. H. Beuther, R. S. Klessen, C. P. Dullemond, & T. Henning, 643–665, doi: 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816531240-ch028

    2014 doi

  38. [46]

    Z., et al

    Hon, M., Huber, D., Rui, N. Z., et al. 2023, Nature, 618, 917, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06029-0

    2023 doi

  39. [47]

    Hoyle, F., & Lyttleton, R. A. 1939, Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 35, 405, doi: 10.1017/S0305004100021150

    1939 doi

  40. [48]

    2012, ApJ, 757, 47, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/47

    Huang, X., & Cumming, A. 2012, ApJ, 757, 47, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/47

    2012 doi

  41. [49]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    2007 doi

  42. [50]

    2013, A&A Rv, 21, 59, doi: 10.1007/s00159-013-0059-2

    Ivanova, N., Justham, S., Chen, X., et al. 2013, A&A Rv, 21, 59, doi: 10.1007/s00159-013-0059-2

    2013 doi

  43. [51]

    A., et al

    Jenkins, S., Vanderburg, A., Limbach, M. A., et al. 2025, Probing the Dynamical History of a White Dwarf Planet, JWST Proposal. Cycle 4, ID. #9157

    2025

  44. [52]

    Jia, S., & Spruit, H. C. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 864, 169, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aad77c

    2018 doi

  45. [53]

    2003, ApJL, 584, L91, doi: 10.1086/374036

    Jura, M. 2003, ApJL, 584, L91, doi: 10.1086/374036

    2003 doi

  46. [54]

    T., & Farihi, J

    Koester, D., Gänsicke, B. T., & Farihi, J. 2014, A&A, 566, A34, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423691

    2014 doi

  47. [55]

    2025, Bulgarian Astronomical Journal, 42, 35, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2407.17421

    Konstantinova-Antova, R., Georgiev, S., Lèbre, A., et al. 2025, Bulgarian Astronomical Journal, 42, 35, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2407.17421

    2025 doi arXiv

  48. [56]

    1986, A&A, 160, 116

    Kuhfuss, R. 1986, A&A, 160, 116

    1986

  49. [57]

    R., Zorotovic, M., et al

    Lagos, F., Schreiber, M. R., Zorotovic, M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 676, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3703

    2021 doi

  50. [58]

    P., Crida, A., & Morbidelli, A

    Lambrechts, M., Lega, E., Nelson, R. P., Crida, A., & Morbidelli, A. 2019, A&A, 630, A82, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834413

    2019 doi

  51. [59]

    A., Vanderburg, A., Venner, A., et al

    Limbach, M. A., Vanderburg, A., Venner, A., et al. 2024, ApJL, 973, L11, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad74ed

    2024 doi

  52. [60]

    A., Vanderburg, A., MacDonald, R

    Limbach, M. A., Vanderburg, A., MacDonald, R. J., et al. 2025, ApJL, 984, L28, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adc9ad

    2025 doi

  53. [61]

    W., Wu, L., Chen, L., & de Ridder, S

    Livermore, P. W., Wu, L., Chen, L., & de Ridder, S. 2024, MNRAS, 533, 4058, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1928

    2024 doi

  54. [62]

    L., Burgasser, A

    Luhman, K. L., Burgasser, A. J., & Bochanski, J. J. 2011, ApJL, 730, L9, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/730/1/L9

    2011 doi

  55. [63]

    L., Tremblin, P., Birkmann, S

    Luhman, K. L., Tremblin, P., Birkmann, S. M., et al. 2023, ApJL, 949, L36, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acd635

    2023 doi

  56. [64]

    B., Pepper, J

    Lund, M. B., Pepper, J. A., Shporer, A., & Stassun, K. G. 2018, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1809.10900, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1809.10900

    2018 doi arXiv

  57. [65]

    2021, Correlated k coefficients for H2-He atmospheres; 196 spectral windows and 1460 pressure-temperature points, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7542068

    Molliere, P. 2021, Correlated k coefficients for H2-He atmospheres; 196 spectral windows and 1460 pressure-temperature points, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7542068

    2021 doi

  58. [66]

    2025, By the Ashes of Stars: A Chemical Census of a White Dwarf Planet, JWST Proposal

    MacDonald, R., Batalha, N., Blouin, S., et al. 2025, By the Ashes of Stars: A Chemical Census of a White Dwarf Planet, JWST Proposal. Cycle 4, ID. #9033

    2025

  59. [67]

    J., Batalha, N., Foote, T

    MacDonald, R. J., Batalha, N., Foote, T. O., et al. 2021, Under the Lightof aDeadStar: Revealingthe AtmosphericCompositionof a White Dwarf Planet, JWST Proposal. Cycle 1, ID. #2358

    2021

  60. [68]

    N., Kokubo, E., Inutsuka, S.-I., & Matsumoto, T

    Machida, M. N., Kokubo, E., Inutsuka, S.-I., & Matsumoto, T. 2010, MNRAS, 405, 1227, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16527.x

    2010

  61. [69]

    2017, ApJ, 838, 56, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6117

    Ramirez-Ruiz, E. 2017, ApJ, 838, 56, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6117

    2017 doi

  62. [70]

    2015, ApJL, 798, L19, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/798/1/L19

    MacLeod, M., & Ramirez-Ruiz, E. 2015, ApJL, 798, L19, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/798/1/L19

    2015 doi

  63. [71]

    E., Morley, C

    Mang, J., Batalha, N. E., Morley, C. V., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.22468, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2602.22468

    2026 doi

  64. [72]

    2024, ApJ, 964, 70, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1ee9

    Marleau, G.-D., Aoyama, Y., Hashimoto, J., & Zhou, Y. 2024, ApJ, 964, 70, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1ee9

    2024 doi

  65. [73]

    2017, ApJ, 836, 221, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/836/2/221

    Marleau, G.-D., Klahr, H., Kuiper, R., & Mordasini, C. 2017, ApJ, 836, 221, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/836/2/221

    2017 doi

  66. [74]

    2019, ApJ, 881, 144, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab245b

    Marleau, G.-D., Mordasini, C., & Kuiper, R. 2019, ApJ, 881, 144, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab245b

    2019 doi

  67. [75]

    2000, ApJ, 545, 965, doi: 10.1086/317843

    Matt, S., Balick, B., Winglee, R., & Goodson, A. 2000, ApJ, 545, 965, doi: 10.1086/317843

    2000 doi

  68. [76]

    Maxted, P. F. L., Napiwotzki, R., Dobbie, P. D., & Burleigh, M. R. 2006, Nature, 442, 543–545, doi: 10.1038/nature04987

    2006 doi

  69. [77]

    2011, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1109.2497, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1109.2497

    Mayor, M., Marmier, M., Lovis, C., et al. 2011, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1109.2497, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1109.2497

    2011 doi arXiv

  70. [78]

    E., et al

    Melis, C., Klein, B., Doyle, A. E., et al. 2020, ApJ, 905, 56, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abbdfa

    2020 doi

  71. [79]

    2021, ApJL, 915, L34, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac0f7d Miller Bertolami, M

    Merlov, A., Bear, E., & Soker, N. 2021, ApJL, 915, L34, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac0f7d Miller Bertolami, M. M. 2016, A&A, 588, A25, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526577 Muñoz, D. J., & Petrovich, C. 2020, ApJL, 904, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abc564

    2021 doi

  72. [80]

    E., Fortney, J

    Mukherjee, S., Batalha, N. E., Fortney, J. J., & Marley, M. S. 2023, ApJ, 942, 71, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac9f48 Look what you made me accrete15

    2023 doi

  73. [81]

    E., Debes, J., Cracraft, M., et al

    Mullally, S. E., Debes, J., Cracraft, M., et al. 2024, ApJL, 962, L32, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad2348

    2024 doi

  74. [82]

    A., Chiang, E

    Murray-Clay, R. A., Chiang, E. I., & Murray, N. 2009, ApJ, 693, 23, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/693/1/23

    2009 doi

  75. [83]

    J., Veras, D., & Villaver, E

    Mustill, A. J., Veras, D., & Villaver, E. 2014, MNRAS, 437, 1404, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1973

    2014 doi

  76. [84]

    J., & Villaver, E

    Mustill, A. J., & Villaver, E. 2012, ApJ, 761, 121, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/761/2/121

    2012 doi

  77. [85]

    Nordhaus, J., & Blackman, E. G. 2006, MNRAS, 370, 2004, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10625.x

    2006

  78. [86]

    Blackman, E. G. 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 108, 3135, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1015005108 O’Connor, C. E., Bildsten, L., Cantiello, M., & Lai, D. 2023, ApJ, 950, 128, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acd2d4 O’Connor, C. E., Liu, B., & Lai, D. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 507, d...

    2011 doi

  79. [87]

    T., Röpke, F

    Ohlmann, S. T., Röpke, F. K., Pakmor, R., Springel, V., & Müller, E. 2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 462, L121–L125, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slw144

    2016 doi

  80. [88]

    A., Röpke, F

    Ondratschek, P. A., Röpke, F. K., Schneider, F. R. N., et al. 2022, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 660, L8, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142478 Öpik, E. J. 1963, Geophysical Journal, 7, 490, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.1963.tb07091.x

    2022 doi

  81. [89]

    2026, in Encyclopedia of Astrophysics, Vol

    Ormel, C. 2026, in Encyclopedia of Astrophysics, Vol. 1, 233–249, doi: 10.1016/B978-0-443-21439-4.00045-6

    2026 doi

  82. [90]

    E., & Alvarez, M

    Owen, J. E., & Alvarez, M. A. 2016, ApJ, 816, 34, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/816/1/34

    2016 doi

  83. [91]

    G., Hermes, J

    Parsons, S. G., Hermes, J. J., Marsh, T. R., et al. 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 471, 976–986, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1610

    2017 doi

  84. [92]

    2020, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 132, 034203, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ab54a2

    Pascoli, G. 2020, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 132, 034203, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ab54a2

    2020 doi

  85. [93]

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

    Paxton, B., Bildsten, L., Dotter, A., et al. 2011, ApJS, 192, 3, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/3

    2011 doi

  86. [94]

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

    Paxton, B., Cantiello, M., Arras, P., et al. 2013, ApJS, 208, 4, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/208/1/4

    2013 doi

  87. [95]

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

    Paxton, B., Marchant, P., Schwab, J., et al. 2015, ApJS, 220, 15, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/15

    2015 doi

  88. [96]

    B., et al

    Paxton, B., Schwab, J., Bauer, E. B., et al. 2018, ApJS, 234, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aaa5a8

    2018 doi

  89. [97]

    2019, ApJS, 243, 10, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab2241

    Paxton, B., Smolec, R., Schwab, J., et al. 2019, ApJS, 243, 10, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab2241

    2019 doi

  90. [98]

    2010, ApJ, 724, 313, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/724/1/313

    Perna, R., Menou, K., & Rauscher, E. 2010, ApJ, 724, 313, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/724/1/313

    2010 doi

  91. [99]

    Á., & Lindegren, L

    Perryman, M., Hartman, J., Bakos, G. Á., & Lindegren, L. 2014, ApJ, 797, 14, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/797/1/14

    2014 doi

  92. [100]

    2012, ApJ, 750, 96, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/750/2/96 Regős, E., & Tout, C

    Rauscher, E., & Menou, K. 2012, ApJ, 750, 96, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/750/2/96 Regős, E., & Tout, C. A. 1995, MNRAS, 273, 146, doi: 10.1093/mnras/273.1.146

    2012 doi

  93. [101]

    1975, Memoires of the Societe Royale des Sciences de Liege, 8, 369

    Reimers, D. 1975, Memoires of the Societe Royale des Sciences de Liege, 8, 369

    1975

  94. [102]

    Reyes-Ruiz, M., & López, J. A. 1999, ApJ, 524, 952, doi: 10.1086/307827

    1999 doi

  95. [103]

    M., & Taam, R

    Ricker, P. M., & Taam, R. E. 2008, ApJL, 672, L41, doi: 10.1086/526343 —. 2012, ApJ, 746, 74, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/746/1/74

    2008 doi

  96. [104]

    C., Viswanath, G., Aoyama, Y., et al

    Ringqvist, S. C., Viswanath, G., Aoyama, Y., et al. 2023, A&A, 669, L12, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245424

    2023 doi

  97. [105]

    T., & Bergfors, C

    Rocchetto, M., Farihi, J., Gänsicke, B. T., & Bergfors, C. 2015, MNRAS, 449, 574, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv282

    2015 doi

  98. [106]

    2019, A&A, 632, A114, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936445

    Sainsbury-Martinez, F., Wang, P., Fromang, S., et al. 2019, A&A, 632, A114, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936445

    2019 doi

  99. [107]

    Schneider, F. R. N., Ohlmann, S. T., Podsiadlowski, P., et al. 2019, Nature, 574, 211, doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1621-5

    2019 doi

  100. [108]

    2019, A&A, 632, A118, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935473

    Schulik, M., Johansen, A., Bitsch, B., & Lega, E. 2019, A&A, 632, A118, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935473

    2019 doi

  101. [109]

    1998, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference

    Soker, N. 1998, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference

    1998

  102. [110]

    154, Cool Stars, Stellar Systems, and the Sun, ed

    Series, Vol. 154, Cool Stars, Stellar Systems, and the Sun, ed. R. A. Donahue & J. A. Bookbinder, 1901, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9706257

    1901 doi arXiv

  103. [111]

    S., Burrows, A., & Milsom, J

    Spiegel, D. S., Burrows, A., & Milsom, J. A. 2011, ApJ, 727, 57, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/727/1/57

    2011 doi

  104. [112]

    S., & Madhusudhan, N

    Spiegel, D. S., & Madhusudhan, N. 2012, ApJ, 756, 132, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/756/2/132

    2012 doi

  105. [113]

    D., et al

    Spiewak, R., Bailes, M., Barr, E. D., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 469, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3157

    2018 doi

  106. [114]

    R., Saglia, R

    Steele, P. R., Saglia, R. P., Burleigh, M. R., et al. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 429, 3492–3500, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts620

    2013 doi

  107. [115]

    B., Désert, J.-M., Line, M

    Stevenson, K. B., Désert, J.-M., Line, M. R., et al. 2014, Science, 346, 838, doi: 10.1126/science.1256758

    2014 doi

  108. [116]

    B., Line, M

    Stevenson, K. B., Line, M. R., Bean, J. L., et al. 2017, AJ, 153, 68, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/153/2/68 Szulágyi, J., & Mordasini, C. 2017, MNRAS, 465, L64, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slw212

    2017 doi

  109. [117]

    2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 858, doi: 10.1038/s41550-019-0807-y

    Tamanini, N., & Danielski, C. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 858, doi: 10.1038/s41550-019-0807-y

    2019 doi

  110. [118]

    E., Arzoumanian, Z., & Taylor, J

    Thorsett, S. E., Arzoumanian, Z., & Taylor, J. H. 1993, ApJL, 412, L33, doi: 10.1086/186933

    1993 doi

  111. [119]

    J., et al

    Tremblin, P., Chabrier, G., Mayne, N. J., et al. 2017, ApJ, 841, 30, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6e57 vanRoestel,J.,Kupfer,T.,Bell,K.J.,etal.2021,TheAstrophysical Journal Letters, 919, L26, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac22b7

    2017 doi

  112. [120]

    A., Rappaport, S., et al

    Vanderburg, A., Johnson, J. A., Rappaport, S., et al. 2015, Nature, 526, 546, doi: 10.1038/nature15527

    2015 doi

  113. [121]

    A., Xu, S., et al

    Vanderburg, A., Rappaport, S. A., Xu, S., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 363, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2713-y 16Jenkins et al

    2020 doi

  114. [122]

    A., & Di Criscienzo, M

    Ventura, P., Stanghellini, L., Dell’Agli, F., García-Hernández, D. A., & Di Criscienzo, M. 2015, MNRAS, 452, 3679, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1590

    2015 doi

  115. [123]

    A., & Dell’Agli, F

    Ventura, P., Stanghellini, L., Di Criscienzo, M., García-Hernández, D. A., & Dell’Agli, F. 2016, MNRAS, 460, 3940, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1254

    2016 doi

  116. [124]

    2019, MNRAS, 489, 2941, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2339 —

    Veras, D., & Fuller, J. 2019, MNRAS, 489, 2941, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2339 —. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 6059, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa309

    2019 doi

  117. [125]

    V., et al

    Veras, D., Efroimsky, M., Makarov, V. V., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 486, 3831, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz965

    2019 doi

  118. [126]

    2007, ApJ, 661, 1192, doi: 10.1086/516746

    Villaver, E., & Livio, M. 2007, ApJ, 661, 1192, doi: 10.1086/516746

    2007 doi

  119. [127]

    W., et al

    Vleeschower, L., Corongiu, A., Stappers, B. W., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 1436, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae816

    2024 doi

  120. [128]

    2019, Magnetic fields of AGB and post-AGB stars

    Vlemmings, W. 2019, Magnetic fields of AGB and post-AGB stars. https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.05353

    2019 arXiv

  121. [129]

    Wolszczan, A., & Frail, D. A. 1992, Nature, 355, 145, doi: 10.1038/355145a0

    1992 doi

  122. [130]

    K., & Thorngren, D

    Yadav, R. K., & Thorngren, D. P. 2017, ApJL, 849, L12, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa93fd

    2017 doi

  123. [131]

    B., Murguia-Berthier, A., et al

    Yarza, R., Razo-López, N. B., Murguia-Berthier, A., et al. 2023, ApJ, 954, 176, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acbdfc

    2023 doi

  124. [132]

    N., & Zhu, Z

    Youdin, A. N., & Zhu, Z. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.13214, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.13214

    2025 doi arXiv

  125. [133]

    2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 1575–1582, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02375-9

    Zhang, K., Zang, W., El-Badry, K., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 1575–1582, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02375-9

    2024 doi

  126. [134]

    2012, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 537, A120, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117691

    Zorec, J., & Royer, F. 2012, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 537, A120, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117691

    2012 doi

  127. [135]

    Zuckerman, B., & Becklin, E. E. 1987, Nature, 330, 138, doi: 10.1038/330138a0

    1987 doi

  128. [136]

    2010, ApJ, 722, 725, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/722/1/725

    Zuckerman, B., Melis, C., Klein, B., Koester, D., & Jura, M. 2010, ApJ, 722, 725, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/722/1/725

    2010 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.