Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 153 references

A Machine-Learning Compositional Study of Exoplanetary Material Accreted Onto Five Helium-Atmosphere White Dwarfs with $\texttt{cecilia}$

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The machine-learning pipeline cecilia extracts two to six elemental abundances from each of five polluted helium-atmosphere white dwarfs, matching classical methods, and finds CI-chondrite-like rocky debris with two significant oxygen…

desk verdict The ML abundance pipeline is validated on real spectra and the cross-check is credible, but the headline oxygen excesses are more fragile than the abstract admits and should be reined in. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.06228 v1 pith:BPBXJ2S6 submitted 2025-05-09 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.IMastro-ph.SRcs.LG

Mariona Badenas-Agusti , Siyi Xu , Andrew Vanderburg , Kishalay De , Patrick Dufour , Laura K. Rogers , Susana Hoyos , Simon Blouin
show 3 more authors
Javier Viaña Amy Bonsor Ben Zuckerman
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EPastro-ph.IMastro-ph.SRcs.LG
keywords whitedwarfspollutedexoplanetarycompositionmachinelearningspectralanalysisheliumatmosphereoxygenexcessCIchondrites
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

This paper tests the machine-learning pipeline cecilia on real data: five metal-polluted helium-atmosphere white dwarfs with no previously measured elemental abundances. Fitting SDSS and Keck/ESI optical spectra jointly, cecilia determines the abundances of two to six elements per star with a reported accuracy of about 0.20 dex, on par with conventional white-dwarf atmosphere fitting. The recovered pollutant compositions are broadly CI-chondrite-like, and two stars (SDSS J0859+5732 and SDSS J2311−0041) show oxygen excesses at $>2\sigma$ significance, suggesting accretion of oxygen-rich exoplanetary material. The paper also upgrades cecilia to sample abundances in linear space and to fit multiple spectra with per-instrument jitter, steps toward population-scale studies.

What carries the argument

The central object is cecilia, a deep neural-network spectral interpolator that turns 13 stellar labels—effective temperature, surface gravity, hydrogen abundance, and ten metal abundances—into a synthetic optical spectrum. Trained on more than 22,000 synthetic spectra from a standard LTE helium-atmosphere code, it predicts a spectrum in about 0.2 seconds, then a Bayesian MCMC with a modified log-likelihood fits the labels. The key upgrades are sampling elemental abundances in linear space (avoiding divergence for non-detections) and adding per-instrument jitter terms so SDSS and Keck/ESI spectra can be fitted jointly. The pipeline's output is then converted into pollutant composition using white-dwarf diffusion timescales and either build-up or steady-state accretion equations.

What would settle it

Re-analyze the same Keck/ESI spectra for SDSS J0859+5732 and SDSS J2311−0041 using an independent model grid with updated neutral-helium collisional broadening tables and leave $T_{\mathrm{eff}}$ and $\log g$ free, then recompute the oxygen excess; if it drops below $2\sigma$ or the O/Mg ratios shift by more than 0.2 dex, the oxygen-rich interpretation fails. Independently, obtain high-resolution ultraviolet spectra for these two stars to measure O, Si, and Fe without optical blending; the ultraviolet abundances should reproduce the reported excess.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that cecilia—a neural-network spectral interpolator trained on synthetic helium-atmosphere models—can replace slow 'human-in-the-loop' abundance analysis for polluted white dwarfs without loss of accuracy. Applied to five DZ/DBZ stars, it reports 2, 6, 5, 4, and 6 detected elements respectively, with the two richest systems (SDSS J0859+5732 and SDSS J2311−0041) each showing O, Mg, Si, Ca, and Fe. The pollutant abundances, normalized to Mg and corrected for diffusion in either build-up or steady-state accretion, match CI chondrites within 1–2$\sigma$. For those two stars the oxygen excess—computed after allocating O to CaO, SiO$_2$, FeO, and MgO—is positive in 95.5% and 96.4% of Monte Carlo samples, crossing the adopted $2\sigma$ threshold. The authors regard this as evidence that oxygen-rich exoplanetary material can survive post-main-sequence evolution and accrete onto white dwarfs.

Load-bearing premise

The results depend on helium-atmosphere models whose collisional broadening of neutral helium lines is known to be inaccurate below about 16,000 K, and all five target stars sit in that regime; the paper clips the strongest helium lines and freezes temperature and gravity, but residual line wings and the same model deficiencies still shape the predicted metal abundances.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If cecilia's accuracy holds, large spectroscopic surveys (SDSS-V, DESI, WEAVE) can be mined for polluted white dwarfs without manual fitting.
  • The method recovers compositions that are largely CI-chondrite-like, suggesting that the building blocks of rocky planets in these systems resemble the most primitive Solar System meteorites.
  • Two systems with $>2\sigma$ oxygen excess add to the small sample of white dwarfs whose accreted material is water- or oxygen-rich.
  • The linear-space MCMC and jitter terms show a path toward statistically robust upper limits on undetected elements.
  • The reported 0.20 dex floor means systematic model uncertainties, not statistical precision, currently limit this class of measurement.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the oxygen excesses survive independent analysis, they imply that the parent bodies were hydrated or ice-rich, and that water can be delivered to white dwarfs without being lost during the giant phases; this would strengthen the connection between polluted white dwarfs and water delivery to habitable-zone planets.
  • The paper's fixed $T_{\mathrm{eff}}$ / $\log g$ strategy could be tested by applying cecilia to warm ($T_{\mathrm{eff}} > 16{,}000$ K) DBZ stars with fully reliable helium broadening; agreement would bracket the systematic error and quantify how much of the reported abundances is model-limited.
  • The same joint-fit machinery could be extended to DA (hydrogen-atmosphere) white dwarfs, where diffusion timescales are much shorter, to probe recent accretion events with complementary sensitivity.
  • A direct falsifier: re-derive abundances with an independent non-LTE model for the same ESI spectra and see whether the O/Mg ratios and the Mg I 4481 Å line discrepancy move the oxygen excess below $2\sigma$.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. This paper presents the first application of the machine-learning spectral pipeline cecilia to five helium-atmosphere polluted white dwarfs (SDSS J0231+2512, J0859+5732, J1109+1318, J1333+6364, and J2311−0041) with no previously well-measured elemental abundances. The authors perform joint Bayesian MCMC fits to SDSS and Keck/ESI spectra, introducing linear-space abundance sampling, per-instrument jitter terms, and a multi-spectrum likelihood. They detect between two and six elements per star, find the pollutants broadly consistent with CI chondrites within 1–2σ, and report >2σ oxygen excesses for SDSS J0859+5732 and SDSS J2311−0041 under a steady-state accretion model with iron in the form of FeO. The abundances are cross-checked against a classical line-by-line fit (DF12) with nominal agreement around 0.2 dex.

Significance. If the results hold, this work demonstrates a practical ML alternative to classical white-dwarf abundance fitting, with the advantage of speed and automatic multi-spectrum fitting. The cross-check against the independent DF12 method, the explicit 0.20 dex systematic floor, the public Keck/ESI and SDSS data, and the reproducibility of the MCMC setup are clear strengths. The claimed oxygen excesses would add two objects to a short list of bodies with evidence for oxygen-rich exoplanetary material. However, the significance of this headline result hinges on the FeO oxidation-state assumption and on the adopted 0.20 dex floor; Section 6.1 itself shows that one of the two excesses drops below the 2σ threshold when Fe2O3 is assumed. The paper's broad 'consistent within 0.2 dex' validation claim is also not fully supported by Table B2. These issues do not invalidate the methodological contribution but require revision before the scientific conclusions can be accepted as stated.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract; Section 6.1] The headline claim of statistically significant (>2σ) oxygen excesses for both SDSS J0859+5732 and SDSS J2311−0041 is not robust to the assumed Fe oxidation state. Section 6.1 itself reports that under the Fe2O3 scenario the positive-excess fractions are 94.1% and 95.6%, so SDSS J0859+5732 falls below the 2σ threshold of 95.45% that the paper adopts from Brouwers et al. (2022). The abstract presents the >2σ result without this FeO assumption or the Fe2O3 caveat. Because the oxygen-rich interpretation is the paper's most distinctive scientific finding, the abstract and Section 6.1 should present the FeO-assumed numbers as such, and ideally state the Fe2O3 numbers in the same breath or replace the '>2σ' language with a more precise statement.
  2. [Section 5.1; Table B2] The validation statement that 'DF12 and cecilia abundances are consistent within 0.2 dex' is contradicted by entries in Table B2. For SDSS J2311−0041, log10(Fe/He) is −6.77 (DF12) versus −7.09 (cecilia), a 0.32 dex difference; for SDSS J1333+6364, log10(O/He) is −5.49 (DF12) versus −5.85 (cecilia), a 0.36 dex difference. These are exactly the elements that matter for the oxygen-excess claim, since a higher Fe abundance binds more oxygen. The validation claim needs to be quantified as e.g. 'mostly within 0.2 dex, with Fe and O discrepancies up to 0.3–0.4 dex,' and the consequences for the oxygen-excess significance should be discussed.
  3. [Section 3.3; Section 4.3; Section 6.1] The error budget for the oxygen-excess significance may be underestimated because Teff and log g are frozen to photometric values and the strongest He I lines are clipped, while the underlying atmosphere models are acknowledged to be inaccurate for neutral-He collisional broadening below 16,000 K. The paper does not propagate the photometric uncertainties in Teff and log g into the derived abundances, and the adopted 0.20 dex noise floor is the only systematic term. Since all five targets lie in the problematic temperature regime, I request a sensitivity test that re-fits at least one target with Teff and log g varied by their photometric ±1σ values, and a statement of how much the retrieved O, Fe, Mg, and Si abundances and the oxygen-excess fraction move. If the shifts are comparable to or larger than 0.20 dex, the reported significance should be reduced accordingly.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Section 4.3] The detectability criterion is stated as σstat,MCMC ≤ 0.10 dex, but all reported total errors are replaced by the 0.20 dex floor; please clarify whether the detection cut is applied to the pre-floor statistical uncertainty and how sensitive the detection list is to using σtot instead.
  2. [Section 3.2.1; Section 6.2] The assumption of a fixed resolving power R=2,000 for SDSS spectra is acknowledged as a limitation in the discussion, but it would be helpful to state in the main text that the actual variation between R≈1,500 and R≈2,500 is not included in the error budget.
  3. [Throughout] Several typographical errors remain, including 'oxgyen' and 'enguflment' in Section 6.1/4.4 and 'iwth' in Section 4.3; these should be corrected in proof.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: abundances are fitted to observed spectra and cross-validated against an independent classical method.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained and externally anchored. Cecilia's elemental abundances are free parameters in a joint MCMC fit of synthetic spectra to observed SDSS and Keck/ESI spectra (Eq. 1), so they are constrained by the data rather than defined by the conclusions. The reported oxygen excesses are Monte Carlo post-processing of those fitted abundances under explicitly stated assumptions (steady-state accretion, FeO oxidation state; Section 5.2), not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The paper further validates cecilia against the independent DF12 line-by-line fitting method in Table B2, finding consistency within 0.2 dex. The self-citations to the cecilia pipeline paper (BA24) describe the training set and the adopted noise floor, but they are not the target result: the central abundances and the oxygen excess would stand or fall on the observed spectra and the DF12 cross-check, independent of BA24. The Fe2O3 sensitivity discussion in Section 6.1 is a robustness caveat about the assumed oxidation state, not a circular reduction. Overall, none of the paper's central claims reduces to its inputs by construction, and no self-citation chain is load-bearing for the main result.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The new measurements rest mainly on the fidelity of pre-existing model atmospheres and on accretion-phase assumptions; no new physical entities are introduced. The largest non-data inputs are the 0.20 dex noise floor, the 0.10 dex detection cutoff, and the chondritic priors for undetected elements.

free parameters (4)
  • Systematic noise floor sigma_floor = 0.20 dex
    Applied to all reported abundance uncertainties whenever the quadrature total falls below 0.20 dex; chosen by hand following BA24 methodology rather than measured from data.
  • Detection threshold sigma_detection = 0.10 dex
    An element is counted as detected if its MCMC statistical uncertainty is <= 0.10 dex and a line is visible; the cutoff is an assumed threshold.
  • Chondritic prior widths = 0.5 dex for Ti, Be, Cr, Mn, Ni; 2 dex for H, Mg, Fe, O, Si
    Prior widths for undetected elements affect inferred mass fractions and lower limits; chosen by hand based on how easy each element is to detect.
  • Jitter terms A_jit,SDSS and A_jit,Keck/ESI = Values around 0.92-1.08 (SDSS) and 1.08-1.44 (Keck/ESI) for the five white dwarfs
    Free parameters in the likelihood that rescale flux uncertainties; estimated from each spectrum during the MCMC fit.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The Dufour et al. 2007 and Blouin et al. 2018 helium-rich white dwarf atmosphere models used to train cecilia are accurate enough for abundance retrieval, except for known neutral helium broadening problems that are mitigated by clipping and by fixing Teff and log g.
    All cecilia predictions inherit the accuracy of these training models; Section 3.3 and Section 4.1 explicitly discuss the helium broadening limitation.
  • domain assumption The conversion from photospheric abundances to pollutant composition assumes either build-up (Eq. 7) or steady-state (Eq. 8) accretion of a single pollutant.
    Section 4.4 states the assumption; if the declining phase applies, inferred pollutant ratios change, as acknowledged in Section 6.1.
  • domain assumption Undetected elements are constrained by CI-chondrite-scaled priors rather than by data.
    Section 4.3 and Table 2; mass fractions and lower limits depend on these priors.
  • domain assumption The oxygen excess calculation assumes iron is present as FeO.
    Section 5.2; Section 6.1 acknowledges that Fe2O3 or metallic iron changes the excess and its significance.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Machine-Learning Compositional Study of Exoplanetary Material Accreted Onto Five Helium-Atmosphere White Dwarfs with $\texttt{cecilia}$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BPBXJ2S6

@misc{pith2026250506228,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Machine-Learning Compositional Study of Exoplanetary Material Accreted Onto Five Helium-Atmosphere White Dwarfs with $\textttcecilia$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BPBXJ2S6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.06228}
}
abstract

We present the first application of the Machine Learning (ML) pipeline $\texttt{cecilia}$ to determine the physical parameters and photospheric composition of five metal-polluted He-atmosphere white dwarfs without well-characterised elemental abundances. To achieve this, we perform a joint and iterative Bayesian fit to their $\textit{SDSS}$ (R=2,000) and $\textit{Keck/ESI}$ (R=4,500) optical spectra, covering the wavelength range from about 3,800\r{A} to 9,000\r{A}. Our analysis measures the abundances of at least two $-$and up to six$-$ chemical elements in their atmospheres with a predictive accuracy similar to that of conventional WD analysis techniques ($\approx$0.20 dex). The white dwarfs with the largest number of detected heavy elements are SDSS J0859$+$5732 and SDSS J2311$-$0041, which simultaneously exhibit O, Mg, Si, Ca, and Fe in their $\textit{Keck/ESI}$ spectra. For all systems, we find that the bulk composition of their pollutants is largely consistent with those of primitive CI chondrites to within 1-2$\sigma$. We also find evidence of statistically significant ($>2\sigma$) oxygen excesses for SDSS J0859$+$5732 and SDSS J2311$-$0041, which could point to the accretion of oxygen-rich exoplanetary material. In the future, as wide-field astronomical surveys deliver millions of public WD spectra to the scientific community, $\texttt{cecilia}$ aspires to unlock population-wide studies of polluted WDs, therefore helping to improve our statistical knowledge of extrasolar compositions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.06228 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Median-normalised optical spectra of the five polluted WDs in our sample (left: SDSS with an assumed fixed resolving power of R=2,000 (in vacuum); right: Keck/ESI with an assumed fixed R=4,500 in air). The stellar fluxes and their corresponding uncertainties are shown, respectively, in blue and red, while cecilia’s best-fit models are presented in dark green. The data gaps correspond to the discarded wavelength regi… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. A summary of cecilia’s methodology for estimating the main astrophysical properties (or labels) of polluted He-rich WDs from multiple spectroscopic observations. We refer the reader to Badenas-Agusti et al. (2024) for a more comprehensive description of the pipeline. framework is presented below and in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. A selection of spectral windows showing cecilia’s best-fit RV-shifted MCMC model (in green) for the median-normalised Keck/ESI spectrum of SDSS J0859+5732 (in light blue; in air wavelengths). For reference, we also include cecilia’s predictions when modifying the abundances of the detected elements by ±1𝜎tot (red and orange). The green labels show all the detected elements, defined as those with 𝜎stat,MCMC≤𝜎detectio… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: MCMC corner plot for SDSS J0859+5732. The off-diagonal plots illustrate the two-dimensional marginalised posterior distributions of the free model parameters, while the histogram panels along the diagonal show their one-dimensional marginalised distributions together w…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Compositional properties of the WD pollutants during build-up, steady-state, and decaying phase (first, second, and third columns, respectively). The top panels show the Mg-normalised linear abundance ratios of the accreted material relative to those of CI chondrites (…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

153 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Abadi M., et al., 2015, TensorFlow : Large-Scale Machine Learning on Heterogeneous Systems, https://www.tensorflow.org/

    2015

  2. [2]

    Abadi M., et al., 2016, in Proceedings of the 12th USENIX Conference on Operating Systems Design and Implementation. OSDI'16. USENIX Association, USA, pp 265--283

    2016

  3. [3]

    Alexander C. M. O., 2019a, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.gca.2019.01.026 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019GeCoA.254..246A 254, 246

    work page doi:10.1016/j.gca.2019.01.026 2019

  4. [4]

    Alexander C. M. O., 2019b, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.gca.2019.02.008 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019GeCoA.254..277A 254, 277

    doi:10.1016/j.gca.2019.02.008 2019

  5. [5]

    All \`e gre C., Manh \`e s G., Lewin \'E ., 2001, @doi [Earth and Planetary Science Letters] 10.1016/S0012-821X(00)00359-9 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001E&PSL.185...49A 185, 49

    doi:10.1016/s0012-821x(00)00359-9 2001

  6. [6]

    Almeida A., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/acda98 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJS..267...44A 267, 44

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acda98 2023

  7. [7]

    Ashton G., et al., 2022, @doi [Nature Reviews Methods Primers] 10.1038/s43586-022-00121-x , 2, 39

    doi:10.1038/s43586-022-00121-x 2022

  8. [8]

    Badenas-Agusti M., Via \ n a J., Vanderburg A., Blouin S., Dufour P., Xu S., Sha L., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae421 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.529.1688B 529, 1688

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stae421 2024

Show all 153 references
  1. [9]

    E., Farihi J., Jura M., Song I., Weinberger A

    Becklin E. E., Farihi J., Jura M., Song I., Weinberger A. J., Zuckerman B., 2005, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/497826 , 632, L119

    2005 doi

  2. [10]

    B \'e dard A., Bergeron P., Brassard P., Fontaine G., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abafbe , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...901...93B 901, 93

    2020 doi

  3. [11]

    B \'e dard A., Bergeron P., Brassard P., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac609d , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...930....8B 930, 8

    2022 doi

  4. [12]

    Bergeron P., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/737/1/28 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...737...28B 737, 28

    2011 doi

  5. [13]

    arXiv:2502.05502

    Bhattacharjee S., et al., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2502.05502 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250205502B p. arXiv:2502.05502

    2025 doi arXiv

  6. [14]

    C., Nelson J

    Bigelow B. C., Nelson J. E., 1998, in D'Odorico S., ed., Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol. 3355, Optical Astronomical Instrumentation. pp 164--174, @doi 10.1117/12.316829

    1998 doi

  7. [15]

    F., 2018a, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aad4a9 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...863..184B 863, 184

    Blouin S., Dufour P., Allard N. F., 2018a, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aad4a9 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...863..184B 863, 184

    doi

  8. [16]

    F., Kilic M., 2018b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aae53a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...867..161B 867, 161

    Blouin S., Dufour P., Allard N. F., Kilic M., 2018b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aae53a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...867..161B 867, 161

    doi

  9. [17]

    C., Gordon K

    Bohlin R. C., Gordon K. D., Tremblay P. E., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1086/677655 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014PASP..126..711B 126, 711

    2014 doi

  10. [18]

    C., van Lieshout R., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx425 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.468..154B 468, 154

    Bonsor A., Farihi J., Wyatt M. C., van Lieshout R., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx425 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.468..154B 468, 154

    2017 doi

  11. [19]

    T., Consolmagno G

    Britt D. T., Consolmagno G. J., 2004, in Mackwell S., Stansbery E., eds, Lunar and Planetary Science Conference. Lunar and Planetary Science Conference. p. 2108

    2004

  12. [20]

    G., Buchan A

    Brouwers M. G., Buchan A. M., Bonsor A., Malamud U., Lynch E., Rogers L., Koester D., 2022, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stac3317 , 519, 2663

    2022 doi

  13. [21]

    Buton C., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201219834 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...549A...8B 549, A8

    2013 doi

  14. [22]

    E., Althaus L

    Camisassa M. E., Althaus L. G., Rohrmann R. D., Garc \' a-Berro E., Torres S., C \'o rsico A. H., Wachlin F. C., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6797 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...839...11C 839, 11

    2017 doi

  15. [23]

    Campbell B., Walker G. A. H., Yang S., 1988, @doi [ ] 10.1086/166608 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988ApJ...331..902C 331, 902

    1988 doi

  16. [24]

    Carry B., 2012, Planetary and Space Science, 73, 98

    2012

  17. [25]

    Chandra V., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2145 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...921..160C 921, 160

    2021 doi

  18. [26]

    M., Latham D

    Charbonneau D., Brown T. M., Latham D. W., Mayor M., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/312457 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ApJ...529L..45C 529, L45

    2000 doi

  19. [27]

    Chayer P., Fontaine G., Wesemael F., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1086/192184 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995ApJS...99..189C 99, 189

    1995 doi

  20. [28]

    A., Shephard M

    Clough S. A., Shephard M. W., Mlawer E. J., Delamere J. S., Iacono M. J., Cady-Pereira K., Boukabara S., Brown P. D., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2004.05.058 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005JQSRT..91..233C 91, 233

    2005 doi

  21. [29]

    P., et al., 2023, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/acb3c0 , 947, 37

    Cooper A. P., et al., 2023, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/acb3c0 , 947, 37

    2023 doi

  22. [30]

    F., Dunlap B

    Coutu S., Dufour P., Bergeron P., Blouin S., Loranger E., Allard N. F., Dunlap B. H., 2019, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab46b9 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...885...74C 885, 74

    2019 doi

  23. [31]

    Cukanovaite E., Tremblay P.-E., Bergeron P., Freytag B., Ludwig H.-G., Steffen M., 2020, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/staa3684 , 501, 5274

    2020 doi

  24. [32]

    M., Mandel K

    Czekala I., Andrews S. M., Mandel K. S., Hogg D. W., Green G. M., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/812/2/128 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...812..128C 812, 128

    2015 doi

  25. [33]

    arXiv:1611.00036

    DESI Collaboration et al., 2016a, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.1611.00036 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016arXiv161100036D p. arXiv:1611.00036

    doi arXiv

  26. [34]

    arXiv:1611.00037

    DESI Collaboration et al., 2016b, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.1611.00037 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016arXiv161100037D p. arXiv:1611.00037

    doi arXiv

  27. [35]

    K., McLean I

    Dalton G., et al., 2014, in Ramsay S. K., McLean I. S., Takami H., eds, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol. 9147, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy V. p. 91470L ( @eprint arXiv 1412.0843 ), @doi 10.1117/12.2055132

    2014 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Dorn C., Khan A., Heng K., Connolly J. A. D., Alibert Y., Benz W., Tackley P., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201424915 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...577A..83D 577, A83

    2015 doi

  29. [37]

    E., Young E

    Doyle A. E., Young E. D., Klein B., Zuckerman B., Schlichting H. E., 2019, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.aax3901 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019Sci...366..356D 366, 356

    2019 doi

  30. [38]

    E., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/acbd44 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...950...93D 950, 93

    Doyle A. E., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/acbd44 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...950...93D 950, 93

    2023 doi

  31. [39]

    D., et al., 2015, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637x/800/2/135 , 800, 135

    Dressing C. D., et al., 2015, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637x/800/2/135 , 800, 135

    2015 doi

  32. [40]

    Dufour P., et al., 2007, @doi [ApJ] 10.1086/518468 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...663.1291D 663, 1291

    2007 doi

  33. [41]

    Dufour P., Kilic M., Fontaine G., Bergeron P., Melis C., Bochanski J., 2012, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/749/1/6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...749....6D 749, 6

    2012 doi

  34. [42]

    Dufour P., Blouin S., Coutu S., Fortin-Archambault M., Thibeault C., Bergeron P., Fontaine G., 2016, The Montreal White Dwarf Database: a Tool for the Community, @doi 10.48550/ARXIV.1610.00986 , https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.00986

    2016 doi arXiv

  35. [43]

    Dupuis J., Fontaine G., Pelletier C., Wesemael F., 1992, @doi [ ] 10.1086/191728 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992ApJS...82..505D 82, 505

    1992 doi

  36. [44]

    Dupuis J., Fontaine G., Pelletier C., Wesemael F., 1993a, @doi [ ] 10.1086/191746 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ApJS...84...73D 84, 73

    doi

  37. [45]

    Dupuis J., Fontaine G., Wesemael F., 1993b, @doi [ ] 10.1086/191808 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ApJS...87..345D 87, 345

    doi

  38. [46]

    Farihi J., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.newar.2016.03.001 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016NewAR..71....9F 71, 9

    2016 doi

  39. [47]

    S., G \"a nsicke B

    Farihi J., Brinkworth C. S., G \"a nsicke B. T., Marsh T. R., Girven J., Hoard D. W., Klein B., Koester D., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/728/1/L8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...728L...8F 728, L8

    2011 doi

  40. [48]

    T., Koester D., 2013, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.1239447 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013Sci...342..218F 342, 218

    Farihi J., G \"a nsicke B. T., Koester D., 2013, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.1239447 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013Sci...342..218F 342, 218

    2013 doi

  41. [49]

    Fontaine G., Michaud G., 1979, @doi [ ] 10.1086/157247 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1979ApJ...231..826F 231, 826

    1979 doi

  42. [50]

    B., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/500802 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...642..505F 642, 505

    Ford E. B., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/500802 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...642..505F 642, 505

    2006 doi

  43. [51]

    Foreman-Mackey D., 2016, @doi [The Journal of Open Source Software] 10.21105/joss.00024 , 1, 24

    2016 doi

  44. [52]

    Foreman-Mackey D., et al., 2024, dfm/tinygp: The tiniest of Gaussian Process libraries, @doi 10.5281/zenodo.10463641 , https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10463641

    2024 doi

  45. [53]

    J., Marley M

    Fortney J. J., Marley M. S., Barnes J. W., 2007, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/512120 , 659, 1661

    2007 doi

  46. [54]

    van Rossum 1995, Technical report, Python tutorial, Technical Report CS-R9526

    G. van Rossum 1995, Technical report, Python tutorial, Technical Report CS-R9526. Amsterdam

    1995

  47. [55]

    Gaia Collaboration et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201629272 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A&A...595A...1G 595, A1

    2016 doi

  48. [56]

    Gaia Collaboration et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...674A...1G 674, A1

    2023 doi

  49. [57]

    T., Koester D., Farihi J., et al

    G \"a nsicke B. T., Koester D., Farihi J., et al. 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21201.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.424..333G 424, 333

    2012

  50. [58]

    B., 1992, @doi [Statistical Science] 10.1214/ss/1177011136 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992StaSc...7..457G 7, 457

    Gelman A., Rubin D. B., 1992, @doi [Statistical Science] 10.1214/ss/1177011136 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992StaSc...7..457G 7, 457

    1992

  51. [59]

    B., Stern H

    Gelman A., Carlin J. B., Stern H. S., Rubin D. B., 2004, Bayesian Data Analysis. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL

    2004

  52. [60]

    Genest-Beaulieu C., Bergeron P., 2019a, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aafac6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...871..169G 871, 169

    doi

  53. [61]

    Genest-Beaulieu C., Bergeron P., 2019b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab379e , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...882..106G 882, 106

    doi

  54. [62]

    P., G \"a nsicke B

    Gentile Fusillo N. P., G \"a nsicke B. T., Farihi J., Koester D., Schreiber M. R., Pala A. F., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx468 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.468..971G 468, 971

    2017 doi

  55. [63]

    P., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty3016 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.482.4570G 482, 4570

    Gentile Fusillo N. P., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty3016 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.482.4570G 482, 4570

    2019 doi

  56. [64]

    Gullikson K., Dodson-Robinson S., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/145/1/3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013AJ....145....3G 145, 3

    2013 doi

  57. [65]

    Gullikson K., Dodson-Robinson S., Kraus A., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/148/3/53 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014AJ....148...53G 148, 53

    2014 doi

  58. [66]

    E., et al., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/500975 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006AJ....131.2332G 131, 2332

    Gunn J. E., et al., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/500975 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006AJ....131.2332G 131, 2332

    2006 doi

  59. [67]

    N., Warren J

    Hansen L. N., Warren J. M., 2015, @doi [Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth] https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JB011584 , 120, 2717

    2015 doi

  60. [68]

    Harrison J. H. D., Bonsor A., Madhusudhan N., 2018, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/sty1700 , 479, 3814

    2018 doi

  61. [69]

    A., Koester D., Alekseev V., Herbert E

    Hollands M. A., Koester D., Alekseev V., Herbert E. L., G \"a nsicke B. T., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx250 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.467.4970H 467, 4970

    2017 doi

  62. [70]

    J., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa2717 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.499..171H 499, 171

    Hoskin M. J., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa2717 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.499..171H 499, 171

    2020 doi

  63. [71]

    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

    2007 doi

  64. [72]

    T., Rodr\'iguez-Gil P., Farihi J., Koester D., Guo J., Redfield S., 2020, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/staa3987 , 501, 4276

    Izquierdo P., Toloza O., G \"a nsicke B. T., Rodr\'iguez-Gil P., Farihi J., Koester D., Guo J., Redfield S., 2020, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/staa3987 , 501, 4276

    2020 doi

  65. [73]

    A., 2022, @doi [The Astronomical Journal] 10.3847/1538-3881/ac90c9 , 164, 199

    Jacobson R. A., 2022, @doi [The Astronomical Journal] 10.3847/1538-3881/ac90c9 , 164, 199

    2022 doi

  66. [74]

    International series of monographs on physics, Clarendon Press, https://books.google.com/books?id=_PuRmAEACAAJ

    Jeffreys H., 1998, Theory of Probability. International series of monographs on physics, Clarendon Press, https://books.google.com/books?id=_PuRmAEACAAJ

    1998

  67. [75]

    K., Christoforidis A., Kissel J., 1988, @doi [ ] 10.1038/332691a0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988Natur.332..691J 332, 691

    Jessberger E. K., Christoforidis A., Kissel J., 1988, @doi [ ] 10.1038/332691a0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988Natur.332..691J 332, 691

    1988 doi

  68. [76]

    Jontof-Hutter D., 2019, @doi [Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences] 10.1146/annurev-earth-053018-060352 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019AREPS..47..141J 47, 141

    2019 doi

  69. [77]

    Jura M., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/508738 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...653..613J 653, 613

    2006 doi

  70. [78]

    Jura M., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/135/5/1785 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008AJ....135.1785J 135, 1785

    2008 doi

  71. [79]

    Jura M., Xu S., 2012a, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/143/1/6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AJ....143....6J 143, 6

    doi

  72. [80]

    Jura M., Xu S., 2012b, @doi [The Astronomical Journal] 10.1088/0004-6256/145/2/30 , 145, 30

    doi

  73. [81]

    D., 2014, @doi [Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences] 10.1146/annurev-earth-060313-054740 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014AREPS..42...45J 42, 45

    Jura M., Young E. D., 2014, @doi [Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences] 10.1146/annurev-earth-060313-054740 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014AREPS..42...45J 42, 45

    2014 doi

  74. [82]

    Jura M., Xu S., Klein B., Koester D., Zuckerman B., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/750/1/69 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...750...69J 750, 69

    2012 doi

  75. [83]

    Kaiser N., et al., 2010, The Pan-STARRS wide-field optical/NIR imaging survey . p. 77330E, @doi 10.1117/12.859188

    2010 doi

  76. [84]

    E., Raftery A

    Kass R. E., Raftery A. E., 1995, @doi [Journal of the American Statistical Association] 10.1080/01621459.1995.10476572 , 90, 773

    1995

  77. [85]

    Klein B., Jura M., Koester D., Zuckerman B., Melis C., 2010, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637x/709/2/950 , 709, 950

    2010 doi

  78. [86]

    L., Doyle A

    Klein B. L., Doyle A. E., Zuckerman B., Dufour P., Blouin S., Melis C., Weinberger A. J., Young E. D., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abe40b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...914...61K 914, 61

    2021 doi

  79. [87]

    Koester D., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200811468 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...498..517K 498, 517

    2009 doi

  80. [88]

    Koester D., 2010, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MmSAI..81..921K 81, 921

    2010

  81. [89]

    O., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201527169 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...583A..86K 583, A86

    Koester D., Kepler S. O., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201527169 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...583A..86K 583, A86

    2015 doi

  82. [90]

    T., Farihi J., 2014, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201423691 , 566, A34

    Koester D., G \"a nsicke B. T., Farihi J., 2014, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201423691 , 566, A34

    2014 doi

  83. [91]

    A., et al., 2017, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.1711.03234 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017arXiv171103234K p

    Kollmeier J. A., et al., 2017, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.1711.03234 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017arXiv171103234K p. arXiv:1711.03234

    2017 doi arXiv

  84. [92]

    Koposov S., et al., 2023, joshspeagle/dynesty: v2.1.3, @doi 10.5281/zenodo.8408702 , https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8408702

    2023 doi

  85. [93]

    Ralchenko Reader J., and NIST ASD Team 2022, NIST Atomic Spectra Database (ver

    Kramida A., Yu. Ralchenko Reader J., and NIST ASD Team 2022, NIST Atomic Spectra Database (ver. 5.10), [Online]. Available: https://physics.nist.gov/asd [2016, January 31]. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD

    2022

  86. [94]

    A., Stempels H

    Kupka F., Piskunov N., Ryabchikova T. A., Stempels H. C., Weiss W. W., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1051/aas:1999267 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999A&AS..138..119K 138, 119

    1999 doi

  87. [95]

    Lodders K., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/375492 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...591.1220L 591, 1220

    2003 doi

  88. [96]

    Luger R., Lustig-Yaeger J., Agol E., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9c43 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...851...94L 851, 94

    2017 doi

  89. [97]

    J., 1991, @doi [Geophysical Research Letters] https://doi.org/10.1029/91GL02492 , 18, 2027

    Mackwell S. J., 1991, @doi [Geophysical Research Letters] https://doi.org/10.1029/91GL02492 , 18, 2027

    1991 doi

  90. [98]

    B., 2009, in Bohlender D

    Markwardt C. B., 2009, in Bohlender D. A., Durand D., Dowler P., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 411, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XVIII. p. 251 ( @eprint arXiv 0902.2850 ), @doi 10.48550/arXiv.0902.2850

    2009 doi arXiv

  91. [99]

    C., et al., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/426387 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...619L...1M 619, L1

    Martin D. C., et al., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/426387 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...619L...1M 619, L1

    2005 doi

  92. [100]

    pp 51--56

    McKinney W., 2010, in van der Walt S., Millman J., eds, Proceedings of the 9th Python in Science Conference. pp 51--56

    2010

  93. [101]

    Melis C., Dufour P., 2017, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/1538-4357/834/1/1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...834....1M 834, 1

    2017 doi

  94. [102]

    J., 1978, in , Vol

    Mor \'e J. J., 1978, in , Vol. 630, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Berlin Springer Verlag. pp 105--116, @doi 10.1007/BFb0067700

    1978 doi

  95. [103]

    E., 2015, Guide to NumPy, 2nd edn

    Oliphant T. E., 2015, Guide to NumPy, 2nd edn. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, North Charleston, SC, USA

    2015

  96. [104]

    Paquette C., Pelletier C., Fontaine G., Michaud G., 1986, @doi [ ] 10.1086/191111 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1986ApJS...61..177P 61, 177

    1986 doi

  97. [105]

    Pelletier C., Fontaine G., Wesemael F., Michaud G., Wegner G., 1986, @doi [ ] 10.1086/164410 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1986ApJ...307..242P 307, 242

    1986 doi

  98. [106]

    E., 2020, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/staa1148 , 495, 321

    Penoyre Z., Belokurov V., Wyn Evans N., Everall A., Koposov S. E., 2020, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/staa1148 , 495, 321

    2020 doi

  99. [107]

    E., Kupka F., Ryabchikova T

    Piskunov N. E., Kupka F., Ryabchikova T. A., Weiss W. W., Jeffery C. S., 1995, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995A&AS..112..525P 112, 525

    1995

  100. [108]

    M., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2018AJ....156..123T 156, 123

    Price-Whelan A. M., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2018AJ....156..123T 156, 123

    2018 doi

  101. [109]

    D., Xu S., 2021, @doi [Nature Communications] 10.1038/s41467-021-26403-8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021NatCo..12.6168P 12, 6168

    Putirka K. D., Xu S., 2021, @doi [Nature Communications] 10.1038/s41467-021-26403-8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021NatCo..12.6168P 12, 6168

    2021 doi

  102. [110]

    T., Koester D., Farihi J., Hermes J

    Raddi R., G \"a nsicke B. T., Koester D., Farihi J., Hermes J. J., Scaringi S., Breedt E., Girven J., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv701 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.450.2083R 450, 2083

    2015 doi

  103. [111]

    E., Williams C

    Rasmussen C. E., Williams C. K. I., 2006, Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning

    2006

  104. [112]

    R., Girven J., Gansicke B

    Rebassa-Mansergas A., Nebot Gomez-Moran A., Schreiber M. R., Girven J., Gansicke B. T., 2011, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18200.x , 413, 1121

    2011

  105. [113]

    Ringwood A., 1989, @doi [Earth and Planetary Science Letters] https://doi.org/10.1016/0012-821X(89)90162-3 , 95, 1

    1989 doi

  106. [114]

    A., Seager S., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/712/2/974 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...712..974R 712, 974

    Rogers L. A., Seager S., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/712/2/974 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...712..974R 712, 974

    2010 doi

  107. [115]

    K., et al., 2024a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad3557 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.527.6038R 527, 6038

    Rogers L. K., et al., 2024a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad3557 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.527.6038R 527, 6038

    doi

  108. [116]

    K., et al., 2024b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae1520 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.532.3866R 532, 3866

    Rogers L. K., et al., 2024b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae1520 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.532.3866R 532, 3866

    doi

  109. [117]

    Russell C. T. e. a., 2012, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.1219381 , 336, 684

    2012 doi

  110. [118]

    L., Stempels H

    Ryabchikova T., Piskunov N., Kurucz R. L., Stempels H. C., Heiter U., Pakhomov Y., Barklem P. S., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0031-8949/90/5/054005 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015PhyS...90e4005R 90, 054005

    2015 doi

  111. [119]

    Saumon D., Blouin S., Tremblay P.-E., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.physrep.2022.09.001 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022PhR...988....1S 988, 1

    2022 doi

  112. [120]

    A., Militzer B., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/521346 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...669.1279S 669, 1279

    Seager S., Kuchner M., Hier-Majumder C. A., Militzer B., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/521346 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...669.1279S 669, 1279

    2007 doi

  113. [121]

    I., Bolte M., Epps H

    Sheinis A. I., Bolte M., Epps H. W., Kibrick R. I., Miller J. S., Radovan M. V., Bigelow B. C., Sutin B. M., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1086/341706 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002PASP..114..851S 114, 851

    2002 doi

  114. [122]

    V., eds, American Institute of Physics Conference Series Vol

    Skilling J., 2004, in Fischer R., Preuss R., Toussaint U. V., eds, American Institute of Physics Conference Series Vol. 735, Bayesian Inference and Maximum Entropy Methods in Science and Engineering: 24th International Workshop on Bayesian Inference and Maximum Entropy Methods...

    2004 doi

  115. [123]

    Skilling J., 2006, @doi [Bayesian Analysis] 10.1214/06-BA127 , 1, 833

    2006 doi

  116. [124]

    J., Ballmer M

    Spaargaren R. J., Ballmer M. D., Bower D. J., Dorn C., Tackley P. J., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202037632 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...643A..44S 643, A44

    2020 doi

  117. [125]

    J., Wang H

    Spaargaren R. J., Wang H. S., Mojzsis S. J., Ballmer M. D., Tackley P. J., 2023, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/acac7d , 948, 53

    2023 doi

  118. [126]

    S., 2020, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/staa278 , 493, 3132

    Speagle J. S., 2020, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/staa278 , 493, 3132

    2020 doi

  119. [127]

    J., Gerya T

    Stern R. J., Gerya T. V., 2024, @doi [Scientific Reports] 10.1038/s41598-024-54700-x , 14, 8552

    2024 doi

  120. [128]

    W., Redfield S., G \"a nsicke B

    Swan A., Farihi J., Koester D., Hollands M., Parsons S., Cauley P. W., Redfield S., G \"a nsicke B. T., 2019, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stz2337 , 490, 202

    2019 doi

  121. [129]

    Ter Braak C. J. F., 2006, @doi [Statistics and Computing] 10.1007/s11222-006-8769-1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006S&C....16..239T 16, 239

    2006 doi

  122. [130]

    L., Doyle A

    Trierweiler I. L., Doyle A. E., Melis C., Walsh K. J., Young E. D., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac86d5 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...936...30T 936, 30

    2022 doi

  123. [131]

    Turner S. G. D., Wyatt M. C., 2019, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stz3191 , 491, 4672

    2019 doi

  124. [132]

    Vanderburg A., 2021, avanderburg/edmcmc: v1.0.0, @doi 10.5281/zenodo.5599854 , https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5599854

    2021 doi

  125. [133]

    Veras D., 2021, Planetary Systems Around White Dwarfs, @doi 10.1093/acrefore/9780190647926.013.238 , https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190647926.013.238

    2021

  126. [134]

    Vincent O., Bergeron P., Dufour P., 2023, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stad580 , 521, 760

    2023 doi

  127. [135]

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

    2020 doi

  128. [136]

    Weidemann V., 1960, @doi [ ] 10.1086/146877 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1960ApJ...131..638W 131, 638

    1960 doi

  129. [137]

    Weidemann V., Koester D., 1983, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1983A&A...121...77W 121, 77

    1983

  130. [138]

    T., G \"a nsicke B

    Williams J. T., G \"a nsicke B. T., Swan A., O'Brien M. W., Izquierdo P., Cutolo A. M., Cunningham T., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202450509 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...691A.352W 691, A352

    2024 doi

  131. [139]

    J., G \"a nsicke B

    Wilson D. J., G \"a nsicke B. T., Koester D., Toloza O., Pala A. F., Breedt E., Parsons S. G., 2015, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stv1201 , 451, 3237

    2015 doi

  132. [140]

    C., Farihi J., Pringle J

    Wyatt M. C., Farihi J., Pringle J. E., Bonsor A., 2014, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stu183 , 439, 3371

    2014 doi

  133. [141]

    Xu S., Jura M., Klein B., Koester D., Zuckerman B., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/766/2/132 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...766..132X 766, 132

    2013 doi

  134. [142]

    D., Klein B., Jura M., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/836/1/L7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...836L...7X 836, L7

    Xu S., Zuckerman B., Dufour P., Young E. D., Klein B., Jura M., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/836/1/L7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...836L...7X 836, L7

    2017 doi

  135. [143]

    N., Zuckerman B., Young E

    Xu S., Dufour P., Klein B., Melis C., Monson N. N., Zuckerman B., Young E. D., Jura M. A., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ab4cee , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019AJ....158..242X 158, 242

    2019 doi

  136. [144]

    K., Blouin S., 2024, @doi [Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry] 10.2138/rmg.2024.90.06 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024RvMG...90..171X 90, 171

    Xu S., Rogers L. K., Blouin S., 2024, @doi [Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry] 10.2138/rmg.2024.90.06 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024RvMG...90..171X 90, 171

    2024 doi

  137. [145]

    G., et al., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/301513 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000AJ....120.1579Y 120, 1579

    York D. G., et al., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/301513 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000AJ....120.1579Y 120, 1579

    2000 doi

  138. [146]

    Zeng L., Sasselov D., 2013, @doi [Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific] 10.1086/669163 , 125, 227

    2013 doi

  139. [147]

    Zeng L., Seager S., 2008, @doi [Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific] 10.1086/591807 , 120, 983

    2008 doi

  140. [148]

    D., Jacobsen S

    Zeng L., Sasselov D. D., Jacobsen S. B., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/819/2/127 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...819..127Z 819, 127

    2016 doi

  141. [149]

    N., H \"u nsch M., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/377492 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...596..477Z 596, 477

    Zuckerman B., Koester D., Reid I. N., H \"u nsch M., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/377492 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...596..477Z 596, 477

    2003 doi

  142. [150]

    M., Jura M., 2007, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/522223 , 671, 872

    Zuckerman B., Koester D., Melis C., Hansen B. M., Jura M., 2007, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/522223 , 671, 872

    2007 doi

  143. [151]

    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

    2010 doi

  144. [152]

    Zuckerman B., Koester D., Dufour P., Melis C., Klein B., Jura M., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/739/2/101 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...739..101Z 739, 101

    2011 doi

  145. [153]

    van Maanen A., 1917, @doi [Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific] 10.1086/122654 , 29, 258

    1917 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.