Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 75 references

Chemical evolution of an evaporating lava pool

T0 review · 2 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Pith's one-line read A lava pool losing mass to space or its nightside while being refilled from the mantle evolves to a steady state in which the escaping atmosphere matches the incoming melt; dust tails then trace rocky interiors.

desk verdict A clean steady-state model of lava pool evolution, but the paper's own true polar wander caveat undercuts the claim that catastrophic evaporators have reached the evolved state. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.13686 v1 pith:6QYRD5NX submitted 2024-11-20 astro-ph.EP

classification astro-ph.EP
keywords lavaplanetssilicateatmospherescatastrophicallyevaporatingrockyexoplanetcompositionfractionalvaporisationatmosphericescapeday-to-nightsidewindspoolchemistry
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 models a thin, well-mixed lava pool that loses mass, either entirely to space or sideways to the nightside, while being continuously refilled by melting from the mantle. It shows that after roughly 10-100 pool masses of material are removed, the pool-atmosphere system reaches a steady state in which the escaping atmosphere has the same composition as the melt entering the pool, even though the pool itself remains strongly fractionated. The authors argue that the known catastrophically evaporating planets sit in this evolved state, so the dust tails trailing them should directly reflect mantle composition. They also find that day-to-nightside winds can drive the same evolution for planets of at least one Earth mass, and that the resulting low-pressure atmospheres may explain why some hot rocky planets show no detectable atmosphere.

What carries the argument

The engine is a mass-balance equation for each element in a constant-mass pool, $dN_i/dt = -a_i + b X_{i,m}$, where $a_i$ is evaporative loss and $b X_{i,m}$ is replenishment from the mantle. At the steady state, $a_i = b X_{i,m}$, so the material leaving the pool has the same composition as the material entering it. The full model evaluates the loss term with an equilibrium-chemistry code that computes the vapour composition and oxygen fugacity above a melt of a given composition, and it assumes coupled escape so that species are not further fractionated in the outflow. A simplified model with linear volatility and equal atomic masses reproduces the same attractor and supplies the intuitive timescale: the least-volatile species must be reprocessed enough times for the pool to become dominated by it, which takes roughly 10-100 pool masses.

What would settle it

A spectroscopic measurement of the dust tail of a known catastrophically evaporating planet that found a volatility-fractionated composition (for example, strong sodium or potassium enrichment rather than a mantle-like mix) would falsify the steady-state claim, as would evidence that nightside condensate returns to the dayside pool in amounts comparable to the day-to-nightside wind.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that fractional vaporisation does not keep imprinting volatility on the escaping gas forever. Because mass lost from the pool is balanced by mass melted in from the mantle, the system has a fixed point at which the evaporating atmosphere's composition equals the mantle melt's composition, while the pool's own composition is very different. The paper demonstrates this steady state in both a simplified linear model and a full equilibrium-chemistry model for three mantle compositions (Bulk Silicate Earth, oceanic crust, and a coreless iron-rich composition), showing convergence within about 10-100 pools worth of mass loss. It then quantifies how easily planets reach that state: catastrophically evaporating planets lose enough mass to be there, and day-to-nightside winds are so efficient that even higher-mass planets are likely to be evolved. A consequence is that the dust tails of catastrophically evaporating planets and the emission spectra of lava-planet atmospheres are best interpreted as reading the melt input from the mantle, not the volatile-ordered sequence of an unevolved pool.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that material carried from the dayside pool to the nightside never returns to the pool on evolutionary timescales; if nightside condensate cycles back, the net mass loss driving pool evolution is smaller, and the claim that high-mass planets are evolved weakens.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Dust tails of catastrophically evaporating planets should trace the composition of the material melted into the lava pool from the mantle, rather than a volatility-fractionated sequence, because those planets are likely in the evolved steady state.
  • A mass loss of only about 0.1% of a planet's total mass can remove 100 pool masses, so pool evolution to the steady state does not require the planet to be nearly destroyed.
  • Day-to-nightside winds can move far more material than escape to space, so evolved lava-pool atmospheres may be common on planets of at least one Earth mass, not just on low-mass catastrophically evaporating planets.
  • Evolved atmospheres are predicted to be low-pressure, meaning non-detections of atmospheres on hot rocky exoplanets do not by themselves imply the absence of an atmosphere.
  • If the melt entering the pool is enriched in incompatible elements (crust-like), the steady-state atmosphere and dust composition shift toward more aluminium, sodium and iron, giving an observational handle on partial-melting processes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The steady state acts as an attractor that erases the initial surface composition of a lava planet, so any observation of an evolved lava planet reads the melt input from depth, not the original crust; this makes lava planets complementary to white dwarf pollution studies for probing rocky interiors.
  • Survey strategy for hot rocky exoplanets should anticipate weak or absent silicate emission features on evolved planets and prioritise the species that survive at low pressure, such as SiO and SiO2, rather than assuming a thick, volatile-rich atmosphere.
  • Because the paper's estimates allow multiple planet masses to accumulate on the nightside, a fully three-dimensional model including nightside condensation and return flow is a natural next step; if such flow is substantial, the high-mass-planet conclusion would need revision.
  • A direct observational test is to measure the dust-tail composition of a catastrophically evaporating planet, especially the Al2O3 (corundum) fraction, which would distinguish iron enrichment from core formation, from deep-mantle stratification, and from fractional melting.
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

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. This paper presents a simplified model of the chemical evolution of a lava pool on a hot rocky exoplanet, in which the pool loses mass by evaporation to space or to the nightside and is simultaneously replenished by melting from the underlying mantle. Under the constant-pool-mass assumption, the model shows that after roughly 10-100 pool masses have been removed, the system converges to a steady state in which the composition of the escaping atmosphere equals that of the material melted into the pool from the mantle, while the melt itself becomes strongly dominated by refractory species. The authors then couple this to estimates of pool depth and mass-loss rates to argue that catastrophically evaporating planets (M < 0.1 Earth masses, T_ss = 2000-2300 K) are likely to be in this evolved state, implying that their observed dust tails directly trace mantle composition. They further argue that day-to-nightside winds can transport enough material to make even multi-Earth-mass planets evolve to the same state. The paper concludes with implications for emission spectroscopy and non-detections.

Significance. The central steady-state result is cleanly formulated and the numerical convergence is demonstrated with a controlled step-size study (Appendix B). The model uses no fitted parameters; the only free inputs are the thermodynamic code's step size and the pool-depth factor. If the application to real planets were fully established, the paper would provide a direct link between observed dust-tail compositions and rocky exoplanet interiors, which is a genuinely valuable observational diagnostic. The timescale argument that only a small fraction of the planet's mass needs to be lost (Figure 10) is also compelling. However, the observational application rests on two assumptions that the manuscript itself flags as unmodeled: the absence of a return flow path in the day-to-nightside transport, and the possibility of true polar wander intermittently resetting the pool composition. These are not mathematical defects in the steady-state derivation but they currently leave the main application claim unsupported in exactly the parameter regime of interest.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 5.2-5.3] The claim that all catastrophically evaporating planets sit in an evolved regime is not reconciled with the statement in Section 5.3 that, for low-mass or high-temperature planets, true polar wander (Kang et al. 2023) will periodically reset the pool evolution. Catastrophically evaporating planets are defined in Section 5.2 as having masses < 0.1 Earth masses and substellar temperatures 2000-2300 K, which is precisely the low-mass, high-temperature regime where true polar wander is expected. If the true-polar-wander reset timescale is shorter than the time needed to remove 10-100 pool masses, the pool returns to a fresh volatile-rich composition before reaching the steady state shown in Figure 6, and the outflow composition is set by volatility rather than by the mantle input. The paper does not compare these timescales, so the abstract's statement that dust tails likely trace mantle composition is not established for the targets of interest. The authors should either bound the reset timescale or explicitly restrict the evolved-state conclusion to the parameter space in which reset is slow.
  2. [Section 5.3, Eq. (22)] The day-to-nightside mass transport estimate in Eq. (22) treats the transported material as a permanent loss from the pool, with no return flow. Figures 11 and 12 indicate that, at the high temperatures considered, the cumulative transported mass can exceed several planet masses, and the text acknowledges that 'mass must somehow circulate back through the planet' before deferring this to future work. If nightside material condenses and returns to the pool on a timescale shorter than the pool-evolution timescale, the net mass loss that drives evolution is far smaller than the quoted transport, weakening the conclusion that planets of a few Earth masses have highly evolved pools. Without a model or a quantitative bound for the return path, the high-mass extension of the main claim is not supported.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Section 2.1, Figure 2] The y-axis label '1 - escape factor' combined with the text's use of 'escape factor' is easy to misread; consider labeling the axis with '1 - x' or 'degree of fractionation'.
  2. [Section 3.2] The description of the pseudo-steady-state acceleration could benefit from a single explicit update equation showing how the step size is chosen when a species is pinned to its steady-state value.
  3. [Data availability] The statement that code will be shared 'on reasonable request' is weaker than current reproducibility standards; a versioned public repository would improve confidence in the numerical results.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No material circularity: the steady-state composition match is a definitional consistency check, while the convergence, timescale, and evolved-state claims rest on independent numerical modeling.

full rationale

The central steady-state result is built on the mass-balance ODE (Eq. 3): at dNi/dt = 0 the evaporation loss term equals the mantle-replenishment term, so the escaping-vapour composition necessarily equals the input mantle composition. The paper itself states this is "because this must be the case to maintain a steady state" (Section 2.3), i.e., it is a consistency condition of the model, not a fitted prediction. The nontrivial content, that the system actually converges and does so within roughly 10-100 pool masses, is produced by numerical integration with thermodynamics from LavAtmos/MELTS and is not assumed. The subsequent claim that catastrophic evaporators are in the evolved state is an independent estimate combining pool-depth scalings (Kite et al. 2016) with mass-loss and interior models (Booth et al. 2023; Curry et al. 2024). The latter are self-citations, but they are used as physical tools, not as an authority that settles the target conclusion, and no parameters are fitted to the dust-tail compositions; the tail comparison (Campos Estrada et al. 2024) is external evidence. The acknowledged true-polar-wander reset in Section 5.3 is a real limitation that could weaken the evolved-state claim for low-mass, high-temperature planets, and it is flagged by the authors, but it is a physical-consistency concern, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model relies on standard assumptions about lava pool mixing, coupled escape, and equilibrium chemistry. The two free parameters are numerical control values and the depth factor from Kite et al. The most fragile assumption for the high-mass conclusion is the absence of return flow from the nightside.

free parameters (2)
  • Numerical step-size and tolerance parameters = xi=0.05, epsilon=2e-4, max absolute change 1e-5
    Control the integration step size and pseudo-steady-state tolerance in Section 3.2. The authors show results are robust to changes in these values, so they are numerical choices rather than physical parameters fitted to data.
  • Pool depth factor = delta_p = 10 delta_T (thermal boundary layer scaling)
    Assumed ratio of total pool depth to thermal boundary layer depth, from Kite et al. (2016), used in Section 5.1. The pool mass scales linearly with this factor, and an order-of-magnitude error would shift the timescale to reach steady state by an order of magnitude.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Atmospheric loss is coupled, with no mass-dependent fractionation.
    Justified in Section 2.1 using escape-factor estimates for high mass-loss rates. If fractionation were strong, the escaping atmosphere would not match the pool vapor composition.
  • domain assumption The lava pool has constant mass, so inflow from the mantle equals outflow through evaporation.
    Stated in Section 2.2. The steady-state result depends on this balance.
  • domain assumption The molten pool is fully mixed, so its composition is spatially uniform.
    Assumed in the overview in Section 2. Partial mixing would allow a buoyant lid or density stratification to alter the surface composition.
  • domain assumption Volatile species (C, N, S) are absent from the system.
    Following Schaefer & Fegley (2009) in Section 2. The model only considers rock-forming elements.
  • domain assumption The atmosphere is in chemical equilibrium with the lava, computed with LavAtmos/MELTS using the law of mass action.
    Section 3.1. The equilibrium assumption is justified by high temperatures, and the oxygen fugacity is not a free parameter but is set self-consistently.
  • domain assumption Pool depth is 10 times the thermal boundary layer, with Tedge = 1673 K.
    Taken from Kite et al. (2016) in Section 5.1. Deep-pool models would increase the mass that must be lost before reaching steady state.
  • domain assumption Material transported to the nightside does not return to the pool on evolutionary timescales.
    Implicit in the day-to-nightside mass loss estimates of Section 5.3; the authors acknowledge in Section 6.2 that mass must circulate back through the planet but defer modeling it to future work.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Chemical evolution of an evaporating lava pool." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6QYRD5NX

@misc{pith2026241113686,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Chemical evolution of an evaporating lava pool},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6QYRD5NX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.13686}
}
read the original abstract

Many known rocky exoplanets are so highly irradiated that their dayside surfaces are molten, and `silicate atmospheres', composed of rock-forming elements, are generated above these lava pools. The compositions of these `lava planet' atmospheres are of great interest because they must be linked to the composition of the underlying rocky interiors. It may be possible to investigate these atmospheres, either by detecting them directly via emission spectroscopy or by observing the dust tails which trail the low mass `catastrophically evaporating planets'. In this work, we develop a simple chemical model of the lava pool--atmosphere system under mass loss, to study its evolution. Mass loss can occur both into space and from the day to the nightside. We show that the system reaches a steady state, where the material in the escaping atmosphere has the same composition as that melted into the lava pool from the mantle. We show that the catastrophically evaporating planets are likely to be in this evolved state. This means that the composition of their dust tails is likely to be a direct trace of the composition of the mantle material that is melted into the lava pool. We further show that, due to the strength of day-to-nightside atmospheric transport, this evolved state may even apply to relatively high-mass planets (>1 Earth Mass). Moreover, the low pressure of evolved atmospheres implies that non-detections may not be due to the total lack of an atmosphere. Both conclusions are important for the interpretation of future observations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.13686 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. 1 - escape factor (x2 calculated using Equation 2) for different species combinations, mass-loss rates and planet masses. Values close to 1 mean the atmosphere fractionates strongly and close to 0 mean it is well coupled (the escape factor is close to 1). For all atmospheres, the temperature is assumed to be 2000 K. Values in the grey xi < 0 region are unphysical (see text). where Φ is the particle flux, the subscri… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Abundances of melt and gas species and the total pres￾sure at the base of the atmosphere in our simplified pool model (subsection 2.3.) The coefficients ˆai correspond to relative volatil￾ities (with a larger value denoting a higher volatility). capes. As with the simplified model above, we take the pool to have a fixed mass. The procedure to evolve the lava pool’s composition for￾ward in time is as follows. Firstly… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Evolution of the total pressures of equilibrium lava at￾mospheres produced by a mantle with different compositions and at different temperatures. Crosses mark when and if the pool be￾comes partially solid. 4.1 Bulk silicate Earth We start by showing the evolution of a mantle with bulk sil￾icate Earth composition (BSE, Palme & O’Neill 2003). This composition is frequently used in the literature as a start￾ing point e… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Evolution of lava pool and vapour compositions for a mantle with BSE composition at a temperature of 2600 K. All melt species are shown. Only vapour species that have a mole fraction above 1% at some point in the atmosphere’s evolution are shown. As in Equation 13, ‘g’…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Demonstration of the convergence to an equilibrium com￾position for a lava pool–atmosphere system for a mantle with BSE composition at a temperature of 2600 K (evolution shown in Fig￾ure 4.) The top panel shows the element mole fractions for all elements in the atmosph…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Evolution of lava pool and vapour compositions for a mantle that has not formed a core at a temperature of 2600 K. All melt species are shown. Only vapour species that have a mole fraction above 1% at some point in the atmosphere’s evolution are shown. abundance of iro…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: shows that iron is more volatile in the form of Fe2O3, as the mass fraction of this in the melt decreases more 4 The solids produced are melilite for BSE and oceanic crust at 2000 K, corundum for BSE at 2300 K, melilite for oceanic crust at 2300 K, and olivine for core…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The amount of mass removed from planets with dif￾ferent initial masses and substellar temperatures at different ages (the top panel corresponds to 1 Gyr and the bottom to 10 Gyrs). Planets lose mass according to the models of Booth et al. (2023). Colours plot mass los…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Comparison of pool and atmospheric masses for planets with lava pools with oceanic crust composition for planets with different substellar temperatures, Tss and planet masses. See text for further calculation details. can have highly evolved lava pools, meaning it is …
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_12.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Density of lava pool residue as material is removed from pools of different initial compositions. Density is calculated using MELTS. All runs are at a temperature of 2600 K. the evolution of the pool’s depth, it will neither change the final state of the pool nor the …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

75 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    D., Ghiorso M

    Asimow P. D., Ghiorso M. S., 1998, @doi [American Mineralogist] 10.2138/am-1998-9-1022 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998AmMin..83.1127A 83, 1127

  2. [2]

    Wiley International edition, Wiley, https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=94m7QgAACAAJ

    Bird R., Stewart W., Lightfoot E., 2001, Transport Phenomena. Wiley International edition, Wiley, https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=94m7QgAACAAJ

  3. [3]

    445, Astrophysics and Space Science Library

    Bonsor A., Xu S., 2017, in Pessah M., Gressel O., eds, Astrophysics and Space Science Library, Vol. 445, Astrophysics and Space Science Library. p. 229, @doi 10.1007/978-3-319-60609-5_8

  4. [4]

    A., Owen J

    Booth R. A., Owen J. E., Schulik M., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3121 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.518.1761B 518, 1761

  5. [5]

    B., Badro J., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8792 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...936..148B 936, 148

    Boukar \'e C.- \'E ., Cowan N. B., Badro J., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8792 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...936..148B 936, 148

  6. [6]

    Bourrier V., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201833154 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...619A...1B 619, A1

  7. [7]

    Chaotic winds from a dying world: a one-dimensional map for evolving atmospheres

    Bromley J., Chiang E., 2023, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2302.04898 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023arXiv230204898B p. arXiv:2302.04898

  8. [8]

    G., Bonsor A., Malamud U., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3316 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.519.2646B 519, 2646

    Brouwers M. G., Bonsor A., Malamud U., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3316 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.519.2646B 519, 2646

Show all 75 references
  1. [9]

    M., Bonsor A., Shorttle O., Wade J., Harrison J., Noack L., Koester D., 2021, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stab3624 , 510, 3512

    Buchan A. M., Bonsor A., Shorttle O., Wade J., Harrison J., Noack L., Koester D., 2021, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stab3624 , 510, 3512

  2. [10]

    E., Jankovic M

    Campos Estrada B., Owen J. E., Jankovic M. R., Wilson A., Helling C., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae095 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.528.1249C 528, 1249

  3. [11]

    Castan T., Menou K., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/743/2/L36 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...743L..36C 743, L36

  4. [12]

    Cambridge Mathematical Library, Cambridge University Press, https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=y2Yyy798WzIC

    Chapman S., Cowling T., 1990, The Mathematical Theory of Non-uniform Gases: An Account of the Kinetic Theory of Viscosity, Thermal Conduction and Diffusion in Gases. Cambridge Mathematical Library, Cambridge University Press, https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=y2Yyy798WzIC

  5. [13]

    W., 1998, NIST-JANAF thermochemical tables

    Chase M. W., 1998, NIST-JANAF thermochemical tables. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC

  6. [14]

    Crossfield I. J. M., et al., 2022, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Letters] 10.3847/2041-8213/ac886b , 937, L17

  7. [15]

    E., Mohanty S., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae191 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.tmp..190C

    Curry A., Booth R., Owen J. E., Mohanty S., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae191 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.tmp..190C

  8. [16]

    Cycle 1, ID

    Dang L., et al., 2021, A Hell of a Phase Curve: Mapping the Surface and Atmosphere of a Lava Planet K2-141b , JWST Proposal. Cycle 1, ID. \#2347

  9. [17]

    T., Seager S., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/592316 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...688..628E 688, 628

    Elkins-Tanton L. T., Seager S., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/592316 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...688..628E 688, 628

  10. [18]

    T., Parmentier E

    Elkins-Tanton L. T., Parmentier E. M., Hess P. C., 2003, @doi [Meteoritics & Planetary Science] 10.1111/j.1945-5100.2003.tb00013.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003M&PS...38.1753E 38, 1753

  11. [19]

    Fegley B., Cameron A. G. W., 1987, @doi [Earth and Planetary Science Letters] 10.1016/0012-821X(87)90196-8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1987E&PSL..82..207F 82, 207

  12. [20]

    J., Marley M

    Fortney J. J., Marley M. S., Barnes J. W., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/512120 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...659.1661F 659, 1661

  13. [21]

    R., 1991, in Lindsley D

    Frost B. R., 1991, in Lindsley D. H., ed., , Petrologic and Magnetic Significance. De Gruyter, Berlin, Boston, pp 1--10, @doi doi:10.1515/9781501508684-004 , https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501508684-004

  14. [22]

    J., McCammon C

    Frost D. J., McCammon C. A., 2008, @doi [Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences] 10.1146/annurev.earth.36.031207.124322 , 36, 389

  15. [23]

    S., Kress V

    Ghiorso M. S., Kress V. C., 2004, American Journal of Science, 304, 679

  16. [24]

    S., Sack R

    Ghiorso M. S., Sack R. O., 1995, @doi [Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology] 10.1007/BF00307281 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995CoMP..119..197G 119, 197

  17. [25]

    M., Shorttle O., Jordan S., Rudge J

    Guimond C. M., Shorttle O., Jordan S., Rudge J. F., 2023, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stad2486 , 525, 3703

  18. [26]

    R., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020Natur.585..357H 585, 357

    Harris C. R., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020Natur.585..357H 585, 357

  19. [27]

    C., 1983, in Stepleman R

    Hindmarsh A. C., 1983, in Stepleman R. S., ed., Scientific Computing. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 55--64

  20. [28]

    L., Seager S., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/752/1/7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...752....7H 752, 7

    Hu R., Ehlmann B. L., Seager S., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/752/1/7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...752....7H 752, 7

  21. [29]

    Hu R., et al., 2024, @doi [Nature] 10.1038/s41586-024-07432-x

  22. [30]

    M., Pepin R

    Hunten D. M., Pepin R. O., Walker J. C. G., 1987, @doi [ ] 10.1016/0019-1035(87)90022-4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1987Icar...69..532H 69, 532

  23. [31]

    D., 2007, @doi [Computing in Science & Engineering] 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55 , 9, 90

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

  24. [32]

    Ito Y., Ikoma M., Kawahara H., Nagahara H., Kawashima Y., Nakamoto T., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/801/2/144 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...801..144I 801, 144

  25. [33]

    Kang W., Ding F., Wordsworth R., Seager S., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abcaa7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...906...67K 906, 67

  26. [34]

    Kang W., Nimmo F., Ding F., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/acd691 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...949L..20K 949, L20

  27. [35]

    F., Eggler D

    Kasting J. F., Eggler D. H., Raeburn S. P., 1993, @doi [Journal of Geology] 10.1086/648219 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993JG....101..245K 101, 245

  28. [36]

    B., Behn M

    Kelemen P. B., Behn M. D., 2016, @doi [Nature Geoscience] 10.1038/ngeo2662 , 9, 197

  29. [37]

    S., Fegley Bruce J., Schaefer L., Gaidos E., 2016, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/0004-637X/828/2/80 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...828...80K 828, 80

    Kite E. S., Fegley Bruce J., Schaefer L., Gaidos E., 2016, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/0004-637X/828/2/80 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...828...80K 828, 80

  30. [38]

    3: Treatise on Geochemistry

    Klein E., 2005, The Crust, Vol. 3: Treatise on Geochemistry

  31. [39]

    Kreidberg L., et al., 2019, @doi [Nature] 10.1038/s41586-019-1497-4 , 573, 87

  32. [40]

    F., Chassefi \`e re E., Johnson R

    Lammer H., Kasting J. F., Chassefi \`e re E., Johnson R. E., Kulikov Y. N., Tian F., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1007/s11214-008-9413-5 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008SSRv..139..399L 139, 399

  33. [41]

    L \'e ger A., et al., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200911933 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...506..287L 506, 287

  34. [42]

    L \'e ger A., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.icarus.2011.02.004 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011Icar..213....1L 213, 1

  35. [43]

    K., Nakajima M., Fischer R

    Lichtenberg T., Schaefer L. K., Nakajima M., Fischer R. A., 2023, in Inutsuka S., Aikawa Y., Muto T., Tomida K., Tamura M., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII. p. 907 ( @eprint arXiv 2203.10023 ), @doi 10.48550/arXiv...

  36. [44]

    Luger R., Barnes R., 2015, @doi [Astrobiology] 10.1089/ast.2014.1231 , 15, 119

  37. [45]

    Y., Richardson S

    McSween H. Y., Richardson S. M., Uhle M. E., 2003, Geochemistry: Pathways and Processes, 2 edn. Columbia University Press, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7312/mcsw12440

  38. [46]

    Miguel Y., Kaltenegger L., Fegley B., Schaefer L., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/742/2/L19 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...742L..19M 742, L19

  39. [47]

    D., Janzen A

    Neufeld P. D., Janzen A. R., Aziz R. A., 2003, @doi [The Journal of Chemical Physics] 10.1063/1.1678363 , 57, 1100

  40. [48]

    G., Cowan N

    Nguyen T. G., Cowan N. B., Banerjee A., Moores J. E., 2020, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/staa2487 , 499, 4605

  41. [49]

    Palme H., O'Neill H. S. C., 2003, @doi [Treatise on Geochemistry] 10.1016/B0-08-043751-6/02177-0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003TrGeo...2....1P 2, 568

  42. [50]

    Perez-Becker D., Chiang E., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt895 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.433.2294P 433, 2294

  43. [51]

    Piette A. A. A., Gao P., Brugman K., Shahar A., Lichtenberg T., Miozzi F., Driscoll P., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/acdef2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...954...29P 954, 29

  44. [52]

    Rappaport S., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/752/1/1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...752....1R 752, 1

  45. [53]

    Rappaport S., Barclay T., DeVore J., Rowe J., Sanchis-Ojeda R., Still M., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/784/1/40 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...784...40R 784, 40

  46. [54]

    Sanchis-Ojeda R., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/812/2/112 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...812..112S 812, 112

  47. [55]

    Schaefer L., Fegley B., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/703/2/L113 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...703L.113S 703, L113

  48. [56]

    A., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad1251 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.523..286S 523, 286

    Schulik M., Booth R. A., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad1251 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.523..286S 523, 286

  49. [57]

    Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 91--119, @doi https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-044452748-6.00141-3 , https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780444527486001413

    Solomatov V., 2007, in Schubert G., ed., , Treatise on Geophysics. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 91--119, @doi https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-044452748-6.00141-3 , https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780444527486001413

  50. [58]

    J., Bonsor A., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2401.08767 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240108767V p

    Veras D., Mustill A. J., Bonsor A., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2401.08767 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240108767V p. arXiv:2401.08767

  51. [59]

    Virtanen P., et al., 2020, @doi [Nature Methods] 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 , https://rdcu.be/b08Wh 17, 261

  52. [60]

    pp 56 -- 61, @doi 10.25080/Majora-92bf1922-00a

    W es M c K inney 2010, in S t\'efan van der W alt J arrod M illman eds, P roceedings of the 9th P ython in S cience C onference. pp 56 -- 61, @doi 10.25080/Majora-92bf1922-00a

  53. [61]

    S., J \"a ggi N., Sossi P

    Wolf A. S., J \"a ggi N., Sossi P. A., Bower D. J., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/acbcc7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...947...64W 947, 64

  54. [62]

    T., et al., 2023, Measuring the Interior Composition of a Terrestrial Planet , JWST Proposal

    Wright J. T., et al., 2023, Measuring the Interior Composition of a Terrestrial Planet , JWST Proposal. Cycle 2, ID. \#3315

  55. [63]

    L., Wen J.-S., Pinto J

    Yung Y. L., Wen J.-S., Pinto J. P., Allen M., Pierce K. K., Paulson S., 1988, @doi [ ] 10.1016/0019-1035(88)90147-9 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988Icar...76..146Y 76, 146

  56. [64]

    J., Kasting J

    Zahnle K. J., Kasting J. F., 1986, @doi [Icarus] https://doi.org/10.1016/0019-1035(86)90051-5 , 68, 462

  57. [65]

    F., Pollack J

    Zahnle K., Kasting J. F., Pollack J. B., 1990, @doi [ ] 10.1016/0019-1035(90)90050-J , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1990Icar...84..502Z 84, 502

  58. [66]

    J., 1983, @doi [physica status solidi (a)] https://doi.org/10.1002/pssa.2210780226 , 78, 595

    Zhen S., Davies G. J., 1983, @doi [physica status solidi (a)] https://doi.org/10.1002/pssa.2210780226 , 78, 595

  59. [67]

    Zilinskas M., van Buchem, C. P. A. Miguel, Y. Louca, A. Lupu, R. Zieba, S. van Westrenen, W. 2022, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/202142984 , 661, A126

  60. [68]

    Zilinskas M., Miguel Y., van Buchem C. P. A., Snellen I. A. G., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202245521 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...671A.138Z 671, A138

  61. [69]

    Zuckerman B., Melis C., Klein B., Koester D., Jura M., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/722/1/725 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...722..725Z 722, 725

  62. [70]

    pandas development team T., 2022, pandas-dev/pandas: Pandas, @doi 10.5281/zenodo.7344967 , https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7344967

  63. [71]

    van Buchem C. P. A., Miguel Y., Zilinskas M., van Westrenen W., 2023, @doi [Meteoritics & Planetary Science] 10.1111/maps.13994 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023M&PS...58.1149V 58, 1149

  64. [72]

    A., 2018, in Deeg H

    van Lieshout R., Rappaport S. A., 2018, in Deeg H. J., Belmonte J. A., eds, , Handbook of Exoplanets. Springer, Cham, p. 1527, @doi 10.1007/978-3-319-55333-7_15

  65. [73]

    van Lieshout R., Min M., Dominik C., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201424876 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...572A..76V 572, A76

  66. [74]

    van Lieshout R., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201629250 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A&A...596A..32V 596, A32

  67. [75]

    P., Gaidos E., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/736/1/L15 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...736L..15V 736, L15

    van Summeren J., Conrad C. P., Gaidos E., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/736/1/L15 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...736L..15V 736, L15

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.