Life on the Edge: Using Planetary Context to Enhance Biosignatures and Avoid False Positives

Arwen E. Nicholson; Nathan J. Mayne; Rudy Arthur

REVIEW 1 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

Life on the Edge: Using Planetary Context to Enhance Biosignatures and Avoid False Positives

T0 review · 1 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that habitability at the edge of the habitable zone is itself a biosignature, making edge searches more likely to find convincing evidence of life.

desk verdict Useful framework for thinking about biosignatures and false positives, but the edge-of-HZ search recommendation is underdetermined by the paper's own algebra. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.18431 v1 pith:7G7CLW74 submitted 2025-04-25 astro-ph.EP q-bio.PE

Rudy Arthur , Arwen E. Nicholson , Nathan J. Mayne This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.EPq-bio.PE

keywords peribiosignaturebiosignaturefalsepositiveshabitablezoneGaiatheorylifedetectionobservationalstrategy

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 claims that the evidential power of a biosignature depends on the planetary context, so a signal like liquid water or a gentle climate is weak evidence for life in the middle of the habitable zone and strong evidence at its edges. It introduces the 'peribiosignature', a sign of life observed where life is a priori unlikely, and argues, on the basis of Gaia theory, that habitability itself is one. From this, a concrete observing strategy follows: search the edges of the habitable zone rather than the centre, because a habitable condition in an unlikely place is most plausibly caused by life regulating its environment.

What carries the argument

The central object is the peribiosignature, defined as any substance or phenomenon that provides evidence of life where life would a priori be unlikely. The formal machinery is a probability decomposition in which the quantity to optimise is the precision $TP/(TP+FP)$, and the false positive probability $FP(r)=P(\bar{A}|r)P(B|\bar{A},r)$ is written as a product of a prior that depends on context $r$ and an abiotic false-positive rate. For habitability, this rate is small at the edge of the habitable zone while the ab initio probability of life there is not negligible, which makes a temperate, wet planet in that region a strong biosignature. A hazard-function argument with a Weibull survivor model formalises the Gaian Bottleneck, making an older, still-habitable planet a peribiosignature in time.

What would settle it

A survey of planets just outside the nominal habitable zone that finds temperate, water-bearing worlds at the frequency predicted by abiotic climate models alone, without the excess that Gaia-style regulation would produce, would falsify the edge strategy; equivalently, a model showing that a specific edge context is abiotically habitable as often as life-driven regulation would be would show that habitability there carries no diagnostic information.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that searching for life in the most habitable-sounding places is less convincing than searching at the boundaries of what is abiotically possible. Because the probability of a false positive factors as the prior of no life times the false positive rate, a biosignature observed where the abiotic rate is low can be very strong evidence even if the underlying prior for life is modest. The paper therefore defines a peribiosignature as evidence of life observed in an a priori unlikely context, and proposes that finding a planet with habitable conditions near the edge of the abiotic habitable zone fits this definition, provided life can regulate its environment as Gaia theory maintains. The recommendation to prioritise the edges of the habitable zone follows directly from this decomposition.

Load-bearing premise

The recommendation depends on the premise that life, where it exists, actively regulates its planetary environment strongly enough to sustain habitability at the edge of the abiotic habitable zone; if most alien life is 'passenger life' that leaves little global trace, an edge-of-zone habitable planet is just a rare abiotic world, not a biosignature.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Observational campaigns should prioritise targets near the edges of the habitable zone, where a temperate climate carries more information.
Habitability itself (liquid water, moderate temperatures) should be recognised as a biosignature, particularly when found beyond the nominal abiotic habitable zone.
Until the first confirmed detection, accepting a higher false-negative rate is the right trade-off if it lowers the false-positive rate.
The most useful modelling investment is computing how the prior for life and the abiotic false-positive rate vary with context parameters such as orbital distance and planet mass.
Rare but unambiguous signals, such as technosignatures or chemical disequilibrium at late times, should be preferred over common but ambiguous ones.

Reading between the lines

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

The same edge logic can be applied to planet age: a still-habitable old planet is a peribiosignature because Gaian survival makes the hazard function decreasing.
A testable consequence is that the relative rate of temperate states just outside the nominal habitable zone, compared with inside it, should be higher on inhabited worlds; a large survey could discriminate this.
The framework implies that the fight against false positives should be won by shrinking the abiotic false-positive rate for edge contexts through simulation, rather than by enlarging the sample of ambiguous candidates.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The one thing to know: this is a genuinely useful conceptual paper, but its headline suggestion about searching the edges of the habitable zone is a hypothesis, not a result. The probability algebra is fine; the conclusion doesn't follow from the algebra alone.

What's new: the term 'peribiosignature' is a good addition to the vocabulary, and the idea that habitability itself can be treated as evidence of life when observed where life is a priori unlikely is worth taking seriously. The paper does a clean job translating the CoLD scale into probability notation, and the discussion of why false positives dominate over false negatives in exoplanet searches is clear and sensible. It is also honest about its limits.

Soft spots: the central recommendation depends on the relative shapes of P(A|r) and P(B|not A,r) across the HZ. The paper illustrates possible shapes but doesn't derive or measure them. Figure 4 actually shows a case where the posterior is the same at centre and edge; the difference is just the mix of false positives and true positives. So the precision argument only favors edges if P(A|r) doesn't fall faster than P(B|not A,r) rises. The Gaia/inhabitance argument supports P(B|A,r) being high for inhabited planets, but it says nothing about how probable life is at the edge in the first place. If abiogenesis is rare or edge environments are poor cradles, the edge strategy could be worse. The authors acknowledge this, but the abstract and discussion present the edge search as a suggestion; it is an open question.

Also: the widening of the HZ by life is cited from the authors' own modelling (Arthur & Nicholson 2023). That's a legitimate use, but it is not an empirical anchor, and the paper would benefit from being clearer that the edge boost is conditional on that model being right.

Overall: the framework and the peribiosignature concept are sound and worth publishing. The observational recommendation should be framed as a testable hypothesis. This paper deserves peer review. I'd send it to referees who know both CoLD and climate modelling so the underdetermination gets explicit attention.

Referee Report

1 major / 3 minor

Summary. This paper develops a probability-theory view of biosignature detection, distinguishing true/false positives and negatives, precision versus recall, and the combination of multiple biosignatures. It formalizes the Confidence of Life Detection (CoLD) scale and introduces the concept of 'peribiosignatures'—signals that are weak in the centre of a parameter range but strong at the edges—arguing that habitability itself is an example. Based on Gaia-theoretic arguments, the authors suggest that observing the edges of the habitable zone may provide more convincing evidence of life than observing its centre, and they close with practical recommendations for search strategy.

Significance. The formalization is clean and useful: the precision formulation, the treatment of independent biosignatures, and the mapping of the CoLD scale are valuable contributions. The peribiosignature concept is a genuinely new organizing idea, and the hazard-function treatment of the Gaian bottleneck and Inhabitance Paradox is an interesting way to make a qualitative intuition quantitative. The paper is candid about its assumptions and explicitly calls for future modelling. However, the headline recommendation about searching habitable-zone edges is a conditional conjecture rather than a theorem of the framework; its strength depends on the relative slopes of the prior for life and the false-positive rate as functions of orbital distance.

major comments (1)

[§4 (Figure 6) and §3 (Figure 4)] The claim that edge-of-HZ observations are more convincing than centre-of-HZ observations is not a consequence of the probabilistic framework itself. It requires a specific comparison between P(A|r) and P(B|¬A,r): edge observations have higher posterior precision only if P(B|¬A,r) falls more steeply with r than P(A|r) does (for roughly flat P(B|A,r)). Figure 6 illustrates this for a concave false-positive profile, but no physical argument or measurement is given for that shape, and Figure 4 explicitly shows a case where the posterior is the same at centre and edge. Please state the necessary condition explicitly and either provide a quantitative or qualitative justification for it, or temper the abstract and Section 5 so that the recommendation is phrased as conditional ('in scenarios where ...').

minor comments (3)

[§3.1, Figure 5] The Weibull example with p = 0.25 is purely illustrative; the claim that Gaia predicts a much larger survival probability depends on the chosen shape parameter. The qualitative point of a decreasing hazard is robust, but the magnitude of the effect, and hence the force of the 'habitability as peribiosignature' argument, would be better supported by a brief sensitivity statement (for example, that the conclusion holds for any p < 1) or a physical rationale for the chosen p.
[§2.3, Table 1] The notation ε in the Level 1 and Level 2 rows is ambiguous: if ε denotes measurement error, the expression B∩ε for Level 1 seems to mean 'biosignature detected and error occurred', whereas the text and the Level 2 row (B∩ε ≃ B) suggest it denotes the absence of error or contamination. Please clarify the meaning of ε.
[§4, assumption (ii)] The assumption that P(B|A,r) is roughly flat across the HZ is asserted without justification. This matters because the edge recommendation is sensitive to it; adding a sentence explaining why this is a reasonable starting assumption, or noting the sensitivity to this assumption, would strengthen the argument.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the probability framework is self-contained and the edge-of-HZ suggestion is explicitly conditional on external modelling, not forced by construction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained: the probabilistic formalism in Section 2 is standard Bayes/conditional-probability algebra, and the peribiosignature concept in Section 3 is introduced by definition, with no parameter fitted to data and no quantity 'predicted' that was already used as an input. The claim that habitability at the HZ edge is a peribiosignature rests on prior Gaia/inhabitance arguments (Goldblatt 2016; Chopra & Lineweaver 2016; Watson & Lovelock 1983), and the authors' own modelling (Arthur & Nicholson 2023; Nicholson & Mayne 2023) is invoked as supporting evidence for a wider HZ, not as the source of the definition and not as a fitted parameter renamed as a result. Section 4 explicitly lists the assumptions needed and even shows (Figure 4, bottom panel) a case where the posterior is equal at center and edge, and Figure 6 shows the recommendation would reverse for a convex false-positive-rate profile; the stated observational suggestion is therefore conditional on modelling P(A|r) and P(B|¬A,r), not forced by construction. No equation in the paper reduces to its own input, and no uniqueness claim or ansatz is imported solely from the authors' prior work. The known Inhabitance Paradox is cited transparently rather than disguised as a new derivation.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are postulated. The concept 'peribiosignature' is a new category, not an entity with independent physical evidence.

free parameters (3)

Weibull shape p = 0.25
Chosen for Figure 5 illustration of a Gaian hazard function; not fitted to data, but the figure's quantitative message depends on it.
Weibull rate lambda = 1
Arbitrary scale for Figure 5.
P(A|r) inside HZ = 0.25
Illustrative value in Figure 4; not derived or measured.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption Life tends to regulate its planetary environment in ways that maintain habitability (Gaia theory).
Invoked in Section 3.1 and Section 5 to argue that habitability itself can be a peribiosignature.
domain assumption The prior probability of life, P(A|r), is small but non-zero in the abiotic habitable zone and near zero outside it.
Section 3 defines the peribiosignature around this assumption.
ad hoc to paper For a given biosignature, the true positive rate P(B|A) is much larger than the false positive rate P(B|bar A) and roughly flat across the HZ.
Section 4 states this as a reasonable assumption to make the edge-search argument work.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Life on the Edge: Using Planetary Context to Enhance Biosignatures and Avoid False Positives." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7G7CLW74

@misc{pith2026250418431,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Life on the Edge: Using Planetary Context to Enhance Biosignatures and Avoid False Positives},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7G7CLW74}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.18431}
}

read the original abstract

We use a probability theory framework to discuss the search for biosignatures. This perspective allows us to analyse the potential for different biosignatures to provide convincing evidence of extraterrestrial life and to formalise frameworks for accumulating evidence. Analysing biosignatures as a function of planetary context motivates the introduction of 'peribiosignatures', biosignatures observed where life is unlikely. We argue, based on prior work in Gaia theory, that habitability itself is an example of a peribiosignature. Finally, we discuss the implications of context dependence on observational strategy, suggesting that searching the edges of the habitable zone rather than the middle might be more likely to provide convincing evidence of life.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.18431 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Events 𝐴 and 𝐵 are sets in the space of outcomes (the outer box). True/false positives/negatives are a partition of the sample space. formalism of probability theory to discuss simple and general test cases for biosignatures. These ‘philosophical’ considerations lead to a new kind of biosignature and highlight the strengths of different observational and modelling strategies. Actually carrying out these strategies w… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Events 𝐴 and 𝐵 where the false positive probability is very small. • 𝑃(𝐵|𝐴) the true positive rate, also called sensitivity. • 𝑃(𝐵|𝐴¯) the false positive rate. The complement of this, 𝑃(𝐵¯|𝐴¯) = 1 − 𝑃(𝐵|𝐴¯) is often called specificity. Avoiding false positives is an argument for using specific biosignatures rather than sensitive ones. • Consider a biosignature which is a radio signal encoding the first 100 binary d… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Top: Two biosignatures 𝐵1, 𝐵2 with large overlap. Detecting both reduces the probability of false positives (green shaded area) by a small amount. Bottom: Two biosignatures with less overlap. Detecting both reduces the probability of false positives (green shaded area) by a larger amount. either one independently. For more detailed and extensive analysis of multiple biosignatures see Sandora & Silk (2020); Fields et… view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (2 more)

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Left: illustration of a hazard function for memoryless (abiotic) and memoryful (Gaian) assumptions. Right: The corresponding survivor functions. The rate parameter for both is 𝜆 = 1 and the shape parameter 𝑝 = 0.25. The Gaian bottleneck proposes that early on, 𝑡 ≃ 0, …

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Left: Concave false positive rate. Centre: Flat false positive rate. Right: convex false positive rate. tremely difficult task. Focusing on general principles like punctuated equilibrium (Arthur & Nicholson 2022) or nutrient limited growth (Nicholson et al. 2022), seem…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

A generalised microbial cell model for methane biosignature predictions
astro-ph.EP 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A diffusion-limited microbial cell model predicts that smaller, longer-lived methanogens produce stronger methane biosignatures, and competition should drive alien life toward these traits.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

95 extracted references · 65 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

Arthur R., Nicholson A., 2022, Journal of Theoretical Biology, 533, 110940

2022
[2]

Arthur R., Nicholson A., 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 521, 690

2023
[3]

Arthur R., Nicholson A., Mayne N., 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 533, 2379

2024
[4]

J., 2021, International Journal of Astrobiology, 20, 312

Bains W., Petkowski J. J., 2021, International Journal of Astrobiology, 20, 312

2021
[5]

Bains W., et al., 2021, Astrobiology, 21, 1277

2021
[6]

L., Greaves J

Bains W., Seager S., Clements D. L., Greaves J. S., Rimmer P. B., Petkowski J. J., 2024a, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 11, 1372057
[7]

J., Seager S., 2024b, Astrobiology, 24, 371

Bains W., Petkowski J. J., Seager S., 2024b, Astrobiology, 24, 371
[8]

L., 2020, Life, 10, 42

Bartlett S., Wong M. L., 2020, Life, 10, 42

2020

Show all 95 references

[9]

Bartlett S., et al., 2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 387

2022
[10]

J., Berger J

Bayarri M. J., Berger J. O., 2004, Statistical Science, 19, 58

2004
[11]

J., et al., 2018, Nature human behaviour, 2, 6

Benjamin D. J., et al., 2018, Nature human behaviour, 2, 6

2018
[12]

Bich L., Green S., 2018, Synthese, 195, 3919

2018
[13]

pp EPSC2021--79, @doi 10.5194/epsc2021-79

Bowens R., et al., 2021, in European Planetary Science Congress. pp EPSC2021--79, @doi 10.5194/epsc2021-79

2021 doi
[14]

Buckland M., Gey F., 1994, Journal of the American society for information science, 45, 12

1994
[15]

five sigma

CERN 2025, Why do physicists mention “five sigma” in their results?, https://home.cern/resources/faqs/five-sigma

2025
[16]

Cadieux C., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad5afa , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...970L...2C 970, L2

2024 doi
[17]

C., Zahnle K

Catling D. C., Zahnle K. J., McKay C. P., 2001, Science, 293, 839

2001
[18]

C., et al., 2018, Astrobiology, 18, 709

Catling D. C., et al., 2018, Astrobiology, 18, 709

2018
[19]

A., et al., 2019, Astrobiology, 19, 1075

Chan M. A., et al., 2019, Astrobiology, 19, 1075

2019
[20]

T., Marty B., Forget F., 2020, Space Science Reviews, 216, 1

Charnay B., Wolf E. T., Marty B., Forget F., 2020, Space Science Reviews, 216, 1

2020
[21]

H., 2016, Astrobiology, 16, 7

Chopra A., Lineweaver C. H., 2016, Astrobiology, 16, 7

2016
[22]

Chou L., et al., 2024, Astrobiology, 24, S

2024
[23]

L., 2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 516

Christiansen J. L., 2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 516

2022
[24]

J., Hystad G., Prabhu A., Wong M

Cleaves H. J., Hystad G., Prabhu A., Wong M. L., Cody G. D., Economon S., Hazen R. M., 2023, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120, e2307149120

2023
[25]

Cleland C., 2019a, The Quest for a Universal Theory of Life: Searching for Life as we don't know it. Vol. 11, Cambridge University Press
[26]

E., 2019b, Astrobiology, 19, 722

Cleland C. E., 2019b, Astrobiology, 19, 722
[27]

E., Rimmer P

Cleland C. E., Rimmer P. B., 2022, Aerospace, 9, 752

2022
[28]

L., 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.13438

Clements D. L., 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.13438

2024 arXiv
[29]

Community 2025, Life Detection Knowledge Base, https://lifedetectionforum.com/ldkb

2025
[30]

Conan Doyle A., 1885, Boys Own Paper
[31]

Fields B., Gupta S., Sandora M., 2023, International Journal of Astrobiology, 22, 583

2023
[32]

I., 2023, Astrobiology, 23, 1189

Foote S., Sinhadc P., Mathis C., Walker S. I., 2023, Astrobiology, 23, 1189

2023
[33]

Fressin F., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/766/2/81 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...766...81F 766, 81

2013 doi
[34]

Fujii Y., et al., 2018, Astrobiology, 18, 739

2018
[35]

Goldblatt C., 2016, arXiv preprint arXiv:1603.00950

2016 arXiv
[36]

S., et al., 2021a, Nature Astronomy, 5, 636

Greaves J. S., et al., 2021a, Nature Astronomy, 5, 636
[37]

S., et al., 2021b, Nature Astronomy, 5, 655

Greaves J. S., et al., 2021b, Nature Astronomy, 5, 655
[38]

Green J., Hoehler T., Neveu M., Domagal-Goldman S., Scalice D., Voytek M., 2021, Nature, 598, 575

2021
[39]

P., Bell T

Greene T. P., Bell T. J., Ducrot E., Dyrek A., Lagage P.-O., Fortney J. J., 2023, Nature, 618, 39

2023
[40]

A., De Keyser J., Ligterink N

H \"a nni N., Altwegg K., Combi M., Fuselier S. A., De Keyser J., Ligterink N. F. W., Rubin M., Wampfler S. F., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8565 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...976...74H 976, 74

2024 doi
[41]

Harding S., Margulis L., 2010, Gaia in turmoil: climate change, biodepletion, and Earth ethics in an age of crisis, pp 41--60

2010
[42]

A., Filliben J

Heckert N. A., Filliben J. J., Croarkin C. M., Hembree B., Guthrie W. F., Tobias P., Prinz J., 2002, Handbook 151: Nist/sematech e-handbook of statistical methods. NIST US Departement of Commerce, @doi https://doi.org/10.18434/M32189

2002 doi
[43]

R., Lovelock J

Hitchcock D. R., Lovelock J. E., 1967, Icarus, 7, 149

1967
[44]

Kaltenegger L., Lin Z., Madden J., 2020, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 892, L17

2020
[45]

F., 2014, in , Earth's Early Atmosphere and Surface Environment

Kasting J. F., 2014, in , Earth's Early Atmosphere and Surface Environment. Geological Society of America

2014
[46]

Kinney D., Kempes C., 2022, Biology & Philosophy, 37, 22

2022
[47]

Kipping D., 2025, arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.05993

2025 arXiv
[48]

K., Ramirez R

Kopparapu R. K., Ramirez R. M., SchottelKotte J., Kasting J. F., Domagal-Goldman S., Eymet V., 2014, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 787, L29

2014
[49]

C., 2018, Science advances, 4, eaao5747

Krissansen-Totton J., Olson S., Catling D. C., 2018, Science advances, 4, eaao5747

2018
[50]

J., Nimmo F., Wogan N., 2021, AGU Advances, 2, e2020AV000294

Krissansen-Totton J., Fortney J. J., Nimmo F., Wogan N., 2021, AGU Advances, 2, e2020AV000294

2021
[51]

M., Daines S

Lenton T. M., Daines S. J., Dyke J. G., Nicholson A. E., Wilkinson D. M., Williams H. T., 2018, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 33, 633

2018
[52]

T., Huston M

Lingam M., Haqq-Misra J., Wright J. T., Huston M. J., Frank A., Kopparapu R., 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 943, 27

2023
[53]

E., Margulis L., 1974, Tellus, 26, 2

Lovelock J. E., Margulis L., 1974, Tellus, 26, 2

1974
[54]

Lowell P., 1909, Science, 30, 338

1909
[55]

Madhusudhan N., Constantinou S., Holmberg M., Sarkar S., Piette A. A. A., Moses J. I., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/adc1c8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025ApJ...983L..40M 983, L40

2025 doi
[56]

Matassa S., Boon N., Verstraete W., 2015, Water research, 68, 467

2015
[57]

S., et al., 1996, Science, 273, 924

McKay D. S., et al., 1996, Science, 273, 924

1996
[58]

S., et al., 2018, Astrobiology, 18, 630

Meadows V. S., et al., 2018, Astrobiology, 18, 630

2018
[59]

Meadows V., et al., 2022, arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.14293

2022
[60]

E., Rosen A., 1955, Psychological bulletin, 52, 194

Meehl P. E., Rosen A., 1955, Psychological bulletin, 52, 194

1955
[61]

E., Voytek M

Neveu M., Hays L. E., Voytek M. A., New M. H., Schulte M. D., 2018, Astrobiology, 18, 1375

2018
[62]

Nicholson A., Mayne N., 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 521, 5139

2023
[63]

Nicholson A., Daines S., Mayne N., Eager-Nash J., Lenton T., Kohary K., 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 517, 222

2022
[64]

E., Sleep N., 2001, Nature, 409, 1083

Nisbet G. E., Sleep N., 2001, Nature, 409, 1083

2001
[65]

Routledge

Popper K., 2005, The logic of scientific discovery. Routledge

2005
[66]

M., 2018, Geosciences, 8, 280

Ramirez R. M., 2018, Geosciences, 8, 280

2018
[67]

W., Shearer R

Reed N. W., Shearer R. L., McGlynn S. E., Wing B. A., Tolbert M. A., Browne E. C., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad74da , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...973L..38R 973, L38

2024 doi
[68]

Sagan C., Mullen G., 1972, Science, 177, 52

1972
[69]

R., Carlson R., Gurnett D., Hord C., 1993, Nature, 365, 715

Sagan C., Thompson W. R., Carlson R., Gurnett D., Hord C., 1993, Nature, 365, 715

1993
[70]

Sandora M., Silk J., 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 495, 1000

2020
[71]

W., Volk T., 1991, in Bioastronomy: The Search for Extraterrestrial Life—The Exploration Broadens

Schwartzman D. W., Volk T., 1991, in Bioastronomy: The Search for Extraterrestrial Life—The Exploration Broadens. pp 155--162

1991
[72]

W., et al., 2018, Astrobiology, 18, 663

Schwieterman E. W., et al., 2018, Astrobiology, 18, 663

2018
[73]

W., Reinhard C

Schwieterman E. W., Reinhard C. T., Olson S. L., Ozaki K., Harman C. E., Hong P. K., Lyons T. W., 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 874, 9

2019
[74]

Seager S., Schrenk M., Bains W., 2012, Astrobiology, 12, 61

2012
[75]

arXiv:2112.05153

Seager S., et al., 2021, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2112.05153 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021arXiv211205153S p. arXiv:2112.05153

2021 doi arXiv
[76]

M., 1957, Astrophysical Journal, vol

Sinton W. M., 1957, Astrophysical Journal, vol. 126, p. 231, 126, 231

1957
[77]

B., Mathis C., 2023, BioEssays, 45, 2300050

Smith H. B., Mathis C., 2023, BioEssays, 45, 2300050

2023
[78]

V., Munteanu A., 2004, Europhysics Letters, 68, 170

Sol \'e R. V., Munteanu A., 2004, Europhysics Letters, 68, 170

2004
[79]

S., Turner E

Spiegel D. S., Turner E. L., 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109, 395

2012
[80]

Styczinski M., Cooper Z., Glaser D., Lehmer O., Mierzejewski V., Tarnas J., 2024, Astrobiology, 24, S

2024
[81]

Tarter J., 2001, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 39, 511

2001
[82]

arXiv:2504.15916

Taylor J., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2504.15916 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250415916T p. arXiv:2504.15916

2025 doi arXiv
[83]

Turbet M., Ehrenreich D., Lovis C., Bolmont E., Fauchez T., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201935585 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...628A..12T 628, A12

2019 doi
[84]

Turbet M., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347539 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...679A.126T 679, A126

2023 doi
[85]

J., Gillen C., Jeancolas C., Rothschild L

Vickers P., Cowie C., Dick S. J., Gillen C., Jeancolas C., Rothschild L. J., McMahon S., 2023, Astrobiology, 23, 1202

2023
[86]

L., et al., 2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 631

Villanueva G. L., et al., 2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 631

2021
[87]

I., et al., 2018, Astrobiology, 18, 779

Walker S. I., et al., 2018, Astrobiology, 18, 779

2018
[88]

J., Lovelock J

Watson A. J., Lovelock J. E., 1983, Tellus B: Chemical and Physical Meteorology, 35, 284

1983
[89]

F., Catling D

Wogan N. F., Catling D. C., 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 892, 127

2020
[90]

F., Batalha N

Wogan N. F., Batalha N. E., Zahnle K. J., Krissansen-Totton J., Tsai S.-M., Hu R., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad2616 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...963L...7W 963, L7

2024 doi
[91]

L., Prabhu A., Williams J., Morrison S

Wong M. L., Prabhu A., Williams J., Morrison S. M., Hazen R. M., 2023, Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets, 128, e2022JE007658

2023
[92]

L., Duckett M., Hernandez E

Wong M. L., Duckett M., Hernandez E. S., Rajaei V., Smith K. J., 2024, Perspectives of Earth and Space Scientists, 5, e2023CN000223

2024
[93]

T., Haqq-Misra J., Frank A., Kopparapu R., Lingam M., Sheikh S

Wright J. T., Haqq-Misra J., Frank A., Kopparapu R., Lingam M., Sheikh S. Z., 2022, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 927, L30

2022
[94]

write newline

" write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...
[95]

write newline

" write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Arthur R., Nicholson A., 2022, Journal of Theoretical Biology, 533, 110940

2022

[2] [2]

Arthur R., Nicholson A., 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 521, 690

2023

[3] [3]

Arthur R., Nicholson A., Mayne N., 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 533, 2379

2024

[4] [4]

J., 2021, International Journal of Astrobiology, 20, 312

Bains W., Petkowski J. J., 2021, International Journal of Astrobiology, 20, 312

2021

[5] [5]

Bains W., et al., 2021, Astrobiology, 21, 1277

2021

[6] [6]

L., Greaves J

Bains W., Seager S., Clements D. L., Greaves J. S., Rimmer P. B., Petkowski J. J., 2024a, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 11, 1372057

[7] [7]

J., Seager S., 2024b, Astrobiology, 24, 371

Bains W., Petkowski J. J., Seager S., 2024b, Astrobiology, 24, 371

[8] [8]

L., 2020, Life, 10, 42

Bartlett S., Wong M. L., 2020, Life, 10, 42

2020