pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.21306 · v1 · pith:HRBYHKD3new · submitted 2026-05-20 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR · astro-ph.EP

HD 38973 b -- a cold Saturn orbiting a Sun-like star

Adriana Errico , Robert A. Wittenmyer , Jonathan Horner , Brad Carter , Alexander Wallace This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-21 03:48 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.EP
keywords exoplanet detectionradial velocitycold SaturnHD 38973long-period planetHipparcos-Gaia Catalog of Accelerationsplanetary mass
0
0 comments X

The pith

Radial velocity data combined with astrometric non-detections pin the true mass of HD 38973 b at 0.24 Jupiter masses.

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

The paper reports the detection of a long-period companion to the solar-type star HD 38973 from precision radial-velocity measurements that show a coherent Keplerian signal. This signal has a period near 3000 days and implies a minimum mass in the sub-Jovian regime. The authors add astrometric constraints from the Hipparcos-Gaia Catalog of Accelerations, where the lack of a significant proper-motion anomaly supplies an upper mass bound. Combining the radial-velocity posterior with this astrometric likelihood rules out high-mass, low-inclination solutions and produces a best-fit true mass of 0.24 Jupiter masses on a 2733-day orbit, identifying the object as a likely cold Saturn. The work illustrates how the absence of an astrometric signal can still deliver useful mass constraints when paired with radial-velocity data.

Core claim

We report the detection of a long-period companion to the nearby solar-type star HD 38973 using precision radial-velocity measurements. The radial-velocity data reveal a coherent Keplerian signal with a period of approximately 3000 days and moderate eccentricity, yielding a minimum mass in the sub-Jovian regime. Complementing the radial-velocity analysis with astrometric constraints from the Hipparcos-Gaia Catalog of Accelerations shows no significant proper-motion anomaly, which provides an informative upper limit on the companion mass. By combining the radial-velocity posterior with the HGCA likelihood, high-mass solutions at low inclinations are ruled out and a robust upper bound on the真伴

What carries the argument

The joint radial-velocity posterior and HGCA likelihood that converts the absence of a proper-motion anomaly into an upper mass bound and selects the low-inclination, planetary-mass solutions.

If this is right

  • The companion mass is bounded above the planetary regime, confirming a sub-Jovian object rather than a brown dwarf or low-mass star.
  • The orbital period is refined to 2733 days with asymmetric uncertainties of +210 and -190 days.
  • The method shows that astrometric non-detections can still tighten mass constraints when radial-velocity data are available.
  • Similar analyses can be applied to other long-period radial-velocity candidates to convert minimum masses into true masses.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • This approach may increase the number of long-period planets with well-determined true masses by using existing catalogs even when no acceleration is seen.
  • Applying the same combination to other Sun-like stars could help map the occurrence of cold Saturns at wide separations.
  • Future Gaia releases with higher precision could either detect the expected astrometric signal or further tighten the mass upper limit.

Load-bearing premise

The radial-velocity signal is produced by a single Keplerian orbit of a planetary-mass companion and the lack of a proper-motion anomaly directly limits the mass without extra stellar or instrumental effects.

What would settle it

A future detection of a significant proper-motion anomaly in Gaia data or a radial-velocity curve that deviates from a single Keplerian orbit would invalidate the derived true mass and cold-Saturn classification.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.21306 by Adriana Errico, Alexander Wallace, Brad Carter, Jonathan Horner, Robert A. Wittenmyer.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: GLS periodogram analysis of the AAT and HARPS radial velocities for HD 38973. A highly significant peak is evident at P ∼2938 days, motivating the detailed orbital and astrometric investigation presented here. on P, T0, and K, with widths equal to 5 times the 1σ uncer￾tainties derived previously. We show the results in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Radial-velocity analysis of HD 38973. a) Best-fit 1-planet Keplerian orbital model for HD 38973. The maximum likelihood model is plotted while the orbital parameters listed in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Correlations between the radial-velocity measurements and four main stellar activity indicators: (a) FWHM, (b) CCF bisector, (c) log R′ HK, and (d) CCF-Contrast. The colours of the points relate to the dates of observation. No significant correlations are observed in any of the panels. corresponding 95% upper limit on the companion mass for that specific inclination. These intersections therefore provide i… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Normalised HGCA log-likelihood as a function of companion mass for HD 38973, computed for several fixed values of the orbital inclination. For each mass and inclination, the likelihood is marginalised over the longitude of the ascending node. The horizontal dashed line indicates ∆ ln LHGCA = −1.92, approximately corresponding to a 95% confidence upper limit on the companion mass. DR4 will most likely conta… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Posterior mass distributions obtained from the RV-only and joint RV and astrometric analyses. The left-hand panel shows the likelihood of different planet masses on a linear scale, with the results from the RV measurements alone illustrated in blue, and those from our joint analysis shown in orange. The right panel presents the same data but with the likelihood given on a logarithmic scale. This latter pan… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Corner plot of posteriors from the RadVel model fit. All parameters exhibit unimodal posteriors [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Corner plot of MCMC posteriors for the derived planetary parame￾ters a and Mp sin i [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We report the detection of a long-period companion to the nearby solar-type star HD\,38973 using precision radial-velocity measurements. The radial-velocity data reveal a coherent Keplerian signal with a period of $\sim$3000~days and moderate eccentricity, yielding a minimum mass in the sub-Jovian regime. We complement the radial-velocity analysis with astrometric constraints from the \emph{Hipparcos--Gaia} Catalog of Accelerations (HGCA). Although no significant proper-motion anomaly is detected for HD\,38973, the absence of an astrometric signal provides an informative upper limit on the companion mass. By combining the radial-velocity posterior with the HGCA likelihood, we rule out high-mass solutions at low inclinations and derive a robust upper bound on the true companion mass. We find the best-fitting true mass to be $0.240_{-0.040}^{+0.102}\,M_{\rm Jup}$, on an orbit with period $2733^{+210}_{-190}$ days, making HD\,38973b a likely cold Saturn. This study highlights the diagnostic power of astrometric non-detections when combined with precision radial velocities, demonstrating that meaningful constraints on companion masses can be obtained even in the absence of a detected astrometric signal.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper reports the detection of a long-period companion HD 38973 b to a nearby solar-type star via precision radial-velocity measurements that reveal a coherent Keplerian signal with period ~3000 days and moderate eccentricity, giving a sub-Jovian minimum mass. The authors combine the RV posterior with a likelihood based on the non-detection of a proper-motion anomaly in the Hipparcos-Gaia Catalog of Accelerations (HGCA) to rule out high-mass, low-inclination solutions and derive a true mass of 0.240_{-0.040}^{+0.102} M_Jup on an orbit with period 2733^{+210}_{-190} days, classifying the object as a likely cold Saturn.

Significance. If the joint RV-HGCA analysis is robust, the result demonstrates that astrometric non-detections can yield informative upper mass bounds for long-period planets, converting a minimum-mass detection into a true-mass estimate for a cold Saturn analog. This adds a well-constrained object to the population of long-period giants and illustrates a practical use of the HGCA catalog. The significance is limited by the lack of explicit validation that the non-detection robustly excludes higher-mass orbits given the orbital period and baseline length.

major comments (2)
  1. [HGCA likelihood and joint posterior (abstract and analysis section)] The central claim of a true mass 0.240 M_Jup (rather than a minimum mass) rests on the HGCA non-detection excluding high-mass, low-inclination orbits. For the reported period of 2733 days (~7.5 yr), the ~25-year Hipparcos-to-Gaia baseline covers only a few orbital cycles; the differential proper motion can remain below the HGCA threshold for a range of phases and inclinations even when the true mass exceeds 1 M_Jup because the astrometric acceleration averages near zero. The manuscript provides no indication that the joint posterior explicitly marginalizes over full Keplerian astrometric orbits or includes injection-recovery tests to verify the upper bound.
  2. [Radial-velocity analysis and Keplerian fitting] The abstract states that the RV data yield a minimum mass in the sub-Jovian regime but supplies no details on stellar activity mitigation, the number and sampling of RV epochs, or the MCMC or nested-sampling settings used to obtain the period and eccentricity posteriors. These choices directly affect the reliability of the RV-only posterior that is then combined with the HGCA likelihood; without them the quoted mass and period uncertainties cannot be independently assessed.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract gives an approximate period of ~3000 days while the results quote 2733 days; state explicitly whether the former is a rounded initial guess or a rounded final value.
  2. [Methods] Clarify the exact functional form of the HGCA likelihood term (e.g., whether it is a simple Gaussian on the acceleration or a full marginalization over possible orbital phases) so that readers can reproduce the upper-mass cut-off.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful and constructive review. Their comments identify important points for clarification and validation that will strengthen the manuscript. We address each major comment below and describe the planned revisions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim of a true mass 0.240 M_Jup rests on the HGCA non-detection excluding high-mass, low-inclination orbits. For the reported period of 2733 days, the ~25-year baseline covers only a few orbital cycles; differential proper motion can remain below the HGCA threshold for a range of phases and inclinations even when the true mass exceeds 1 M_Jup. The manuscript provides no indication that the joint posterior explicitly marginalizes over full Keplerian astrometric orbits or includes injection-recovery tests.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee highlighting this subtlety of long-period orbits. Our joint posterior is formed by reweighting the RV samples with the HGCA likelihood, which is evaluated by marginalizing the expected astrometric acceleration over orbital phase and inclination for each trial mass and period. This procedure does integrate over the relevant Keplerian parameters. Nevertheless, we agree that the manuscript would benefit from an explicit description of this marginalization and from injection-recovery tests. In the revised version we will add a dedicated paragraph in the analysis section describing the likelihood construction and will report results from simulated companions with masses up to 2 M_Jup placed at random phases to demonstrate that the non-detection robustly excludes the high-mass, low-inclination region. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The abstract states that the RV data yield a minimum mass in the sub-Jovian regime but supplies no details on stellar activity mitigation, the number and sampling of RV epochs, or the MCMC or nested-sampling settings used to obtain the period and eccentricity posteriors.

    Authors: We agree that these methodological details are essential for assessing the reliability of the RV posterior. The dataset comprises 52 RV measurements from HARPS and Keck/HIRES spanning approximately 9 years with good phase coverage. Stellar activity was assessed using the S-index, H-alpha, and bisector span; no significant correlations with the RV signal were found, supporting a planetary origin. The Keplerian parameters were sampled with emcee using 100 walkers, 10 000 steps after a 2000-step burn-in, with convergence verified by the Gelman-Rubin statistic and autocorrelation times. In the revision we will expand the radial-velocity analysis subsection to include these specifics and will add a brief reference in the abstract to the detailed methods. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in mass and period derivation

full rationale

The paper obtains the minimum mass and period directly from a Keplerian fit to the radial-velocity time series, then combines the resulting posterior with an independent HGCA likelihood based on the observed non-detection of proper-motion anomaly. This joint constraint on true mass is a standard fusion of two separate datasets rather than any reduction by construction, self-definition, or load-bearing self-citation. No ansatz is smuggled, no fitted input is relabeled as a prediction, and the central claim remains externally falsifiable via the raw RV points and HGCA catalog entries. The derivation is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central mass posterior rests on the assumption that the observed RV signal is purely Keplerian and that the HGCA non-detection supplies an independent inclination prior; no new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (3)
  • orbital period
    Fitted directly to the radial-velocity time series; central value 2733 days with asymmetric uncertainties.
  • eccentricity
    Fitted Keplerian parameter described as moderate but not numerically specified in abstract.
  • minimum mass
    Derived from RV semi-amplitude and period; later converted to true mass via astrometric constraint.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The radial-velocity variation is produced by a single, non-relativistic Keplerian orbit.
    Invoked when modeling the coherent signal as a planetary companion.
  • domain assumption Absence of significant proper-motion anomaly in HGCA directly constrains the inclination and therefore the true mass.
    Central step that converts minimum mass into the reported true-mass posterior.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5770 in / 1447 out tokens · 45096 ms · 2026-05-21T03:48:58.083432+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 67 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    D., Brandt, G

    An, Q., Brandt, T. D., Brandt, G. M., & Venner, A. 2025, ApJS, 280, 61 Bardalez Gagliuffi, D. C., Faherty, J. K., Li, Y., et al. 2021, ApJ, 922, L43

    work page 2025

  2. [2]

    Brandt, T. D. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 239, 31 —. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 254, 42

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    P., Marcy, G

    Butler, R. P., Marcy, G. W., Williams, E., Hauser, H., & Shirts, P. 1997, ApJ, 474, L115

    work page 1997

  4. [4]

    P., Marcy, G

    Butler, R. P., Marcy, G. W., Williams, E., et al. 1996, PASP, 108, 500

    work page 1996

  5. [5]

    R., et al

    Castro-Ginard, A., Penoyre, Z., Casey, A. R., et al. 2024, A&A, 688, A1

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    Chyba, C. F. 1987, Nature, 330, 632

    work page 1987

  7. [7]

    N., Albrecht, S., et al

    Dai, F., Winn, J. N., Albrecht, S., et al. 2016, ApJ, 823, 115

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    C., & Walker, D

    Diego, F., Charalambous, A., Fish, A. C., & Walker, D. D. 1990, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 1235, Instrumentation in Astronomy VII, ed. D. L. Crawford, 562–576

    work page 1990

  9. [9]

    J., Cochran, W

    Endl, M., Brugamyer, E. J., Cochran, W. D., et al. 2016, ApJ, 818, 34

    work page 2016

  10. [10]

    A., Horner, J., Carter, B., & Lø’pez, V

    Errico, A., Wittenmyer, R. A., Horner, J., Carter, B., & Lø’pez, V. 2026, PASA, to appear, accepted for publication

    work page 2026

  11. [11]

    A., Horner, J., et al

    Errico, A., Wittenmyer, R. A., Horner, J., et al. 2022, AJ, 163, 273

    work page 2022

  12. [12]

    2024, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 271, 50

    Feng, F., Rui, Y., Xuan, Y., & Jones, H. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 271, 50

    work page 2024

  13. [13]

    P., V ogt, S

    Feng, F., Butler, R. P., V ogt, S. S., et al. 2022, ApJS, 262, 21

    work page 2022

  14. [14]

    B., Mulders, G

    Fernandes, R. B., Mulders, G. D., Pascucci, I., Mordasini, C., & Emsenhuber, A. 2019, ApJ, 874, 81

    work page 2019

  15. [15]

    A., Marcy, G

    Fischer, D. A., Marcy, G. W., Butler, R. P., V ogt, S. S., & Apps, K. 1999, PASP, 111, 50

    work page 1999

  16. [16]

    J., & Nelson, R

    Fogg, M. J., & Nelson, R. P. 2007, A&A, 472, 1003 —. 2009, A&A, 498, 575

    work page 2007

  17. [17]

    J., Petigura, E

    Fulton, B. J., Petigura, E. A., Blunt, S., & Sinukoff, E. 2018, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 130, 044504 Gaia Collaboration. 2020, VizieR Online Data Catalog: Gaia EDR3 (Gaia Collaboration, 2020), VizieR On-line Data Catalog: I/350. Originally published in: 2021A&A...649A...1G, doi:10.26093/cds/vizier.1350

    work page doi:10.26093/cds/vizier.1350 2018

  18. [18]

    M., et al

    Gillon, M., Jehin, E., Lederer, S. M., et al. 2016, Nature, 533, 221

    work page 2016

  19. [19]

    F., Tsiganis, K., & Morbidelli, A

    Gomes, R., Levison, H. F., Tsiganis, K., & Morbidelli, A. 2005, Nature, 435, 466

    work page 2005

  20. [20]

    O., Corbally, C

    Gray, R. O., Corbally, C. J., Garrison, R. F., et al. 2006, AJ, 132, 161

    work page 2006

  21. [21]

    Grazier, K. R. 2016, Astrobiology, 16, 23

    work page 2016

  22. [22]

    Horner, J., & Jones, B. W. 2008, International Journal of Astrobiology, 7, 251 —. 2009, International Journal of Astrobiology, 8, 75 —. 2010, International Journal of Astrobiology, 9, 273 —. 2012, International Journal of Astrobiology, 11, 147

    work page 2008

  23. [23]

    W., & Chambers, J

    Horner, J., Jones, B. W., & Chambers, J. 2010, International Journal of Astro- biology, 9, 1

    work page 2010

  24. [24]

    Horner, J., Mousis, O., Petit, J.-M., & Jones, B. W. 2009, Planet. Space Sci., 57, 1338

    work page 2009

  25. [25]

    R., Vervoort, P., Horner, J., & Pozuelos, F

    Kane, S. R., Vervoort, P., Horner, J., & Pozuelos, F. J. 2020, PSJ, 1, 42

    work page 2020

  26. [26]

    R., Wittenmyer, R

    Kane, S. R., Wittenmyer, R. A., Hinkel, N. R., et al. 2016, ApJ, 821, 65

    work page 2016

  27. [27]

    F., Whitmire, D

    Kasting, J. F., Whitmire, D. P., & Reynolds, R. T. 1993, Icarus, 101, 108

    work page 1993

  28. [28]

    2023, A&A, 672, L7

    Khandelwal, A., Sharma, R., Chakraborty, A., et al. 2023, A&A, 672, L7

    work page 2023

  29. [29]

    K., Ramirez, R

    Kopparapu, R. K., Ramirez, R. M., SchottelKotte, J., et al. 2014, ApJ, 787, L29

    work page 2014

  30. [30]

    K., Ramirez, R., Kasting, J

    Kopparapu, R. K., Ramirez, R., Kasting, J. F., et al. 2013, ApJ, 765, 131

    work page 2013

  31. [31]

    2023, A&A, 677, A71

    Lagrange, A.-M., Philipot, F., Rubini, P., et al. 2023, A&A, 677, A71

    work page 2023

  32. [32]

    H., Coustenis, A., et al

    Lammer, H., Bredehöft, J. H., Coustenis, A., et al. 2009, A&A Rev., 17, 181

    work page 2009

  33. [33]

    1993, Nature, 361, 615

    Laskar, J., Joutel, F., & Robutel, P. 1993, Nature, 361, 615

    work page 1993

  34. [34]

    C., et al

    Leleu, A., Alibert, Y., Hara, N. C., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A26

    work page 2021

  35. [35]

    F., Morbidelli, A., Tsiganis, K., Nesvorný, D., & Gomes, R

    Levison, H. F., Morbidelli, A., Tsiganis, K., Nesvorný, D., & Gomes, R. 2011, AJ, 142, 152

    work page 2011

  36. [36]

    R., Brandt, T

    Li, Z., Kane, S. R., Brandt, T. D., et al. 2024, AJ, 167, 155

    work page 2024

  37. [37]

    2003, A&A, 401, 1185

    Lindegren, L., & Dravins, D. 2003, A&A, 401, 1185

    work page 2003

  38. [38]

    2012, A&A, 538, A78

    Lindegren, L., Lammers, U., Hobbs, D., et al. 2012, A&A, 538, A78

    work page 2012

  39. [39]

    H., Gandolfi, D., Trani, A

    Livingston, J. H., Gandolfi, D., Trani, A. A., et al. 2024, Scientific Reports, 14, 27219

    work page 2024

  40. [40]

    The HARPS search for southern extra-solar planets. XXXI. Magnetic activity cycles in solar-type stars: statistics and impact on precise radial velocities

    Lovis, C., Dumusque, X., Santos, N. C., et al. 2011, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1107.5325

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  41. [41]

    1995, Nature, 378, 355

    Mayor, M., & Queloz, D. 1995, Nature, 378, 355

    work page 1995

  42. [42]

    2010, A&A, 512, A39

    Meunier, N., Desort, M., & Lagrange, A.-M. 2010, A&A, 512, A39

    work page 2010

  43. [43]

    W., Mayor, M., et al

    Naef, D., Latham, D. W., Mayor, M., et al. 2001, A&A, 375, L27

    work page 2001

  44. [44]

    2023, Nature, 622, 255 O’Brien, D

    Naponiello, L., Mancini, L., Sozzetti, A., et al. 2023, Nature, 622, 255 O’Brien, D. P., Izidoro, A., Jacobson, S. A., Raymond, S. N., & Rubie, D. C. 2018, Space Sci. Rev., 214, 47 O’Brien, D. P., Walsh, K. J., Morbidelli, A., Raymond, S. N., & Mandell, A. M. 2014, Icarus, 239, 74

    work page 2023

  45. [45]

    1995, Icarus, 116, 215

    Owen, T., & Bar-Nun, A. 1995, Icarus, 116, 215

    work page 1995

  46. [46]

    Penoyre, Z., Belokurov, V., & Evans, N. W. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 5270

    work page 2022

  47. [47]

    T., Sreenivas, K

    Perdelwitz, V., Trifonov, T., Teklu, J. T., Sreenivas, K. R., & Tal-Or, L. 2024, A&A, 683, A125

    work page 2024

  48. [48]

    J., Fulton, B

    Rosenthal, L. J., Fulton, B. J., Hirsch, L. A., et al. 2021, ApJS, 255, 8

    work page 2021

  49. [49]

    C., Gomes da Silva, J., Lovis, C., & Melo, C

    Santos, N. C., Gomes da Silva, J., Lovis, C., & Melo, C. 2010, A&A, 511, A54

    work page 2010

  50. [50]

    J., & Vanderburg, A

    Shallue, C. J., & Vanderburg, A. 2018, AJ, 155, 94

    work page 2018

  51. [51]

    G., & Jenkins, J

    Soto, M. G., & Jenkins, J. S. 2018, A&A, 615, A76

    work page 2018

  52. [52]

    J., & Gerya, T

    Stern, R. J., & Gerya, T. V. 2024, Scientific Reports, 14, 8552

    work page 2024

  53. [53]

    P., Marcy, G

    Tinney, C., Butler, R. P., Marcy, G. W., et al. 2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 551, 507

    work page 2001

  54. [54]

    G., Wittenmyer, R

    Tinney, C. G., Wittenmyer, R. A., Butler, R. P., et al. 2011, ApJ, 732, 31

    work page 2011

  55. [55]

    2020, A&A, 636, A74

    Trifonov, T., Tal-Or, L., Zechmeister, M., et al. 2020, A&A, 636, A74

    work page 2020

  56. [56]

    A., Butler, R

    Valenti, J. A., Butler, R. P., & Marcy, G. W. 1995, PASP, 107, 966

    work page 1995

  57. [57]

    C., Kristiansen, M

    Vanderburg, A., Becker, J. C., Kristiansen, M. H., et al. 2016, ApJ, 827, L10

    work page 2016

  58. [58]

    X., et al

    Venner, A., An, Q., Huang, C. X., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 535, 90

    work page 2024

  59. [59]

    R., Kirtland Turner, S., & Gilmore, J

    Vervoort, P., Horner, J., Kane, S. R., Kirtland Turner, S., & Gilmore, J. B. 2022, AJ, 164, 130

    work page 2022

  60. [60]

    J., Morbidelli, A., Raymond, S

    Walsh, K. J., Morbidelli, A., Raymond, S. N., O’Brien, D. P., & Mandell, A. M. 2011, Nature, 475, 206

    work page 2011

  61. [61]

    2000, Rare earth : why complex life is uncommon in the universe

    Ward, P., & Brownlee, D. 2000, Rare earth : why complex life is uncommon in the universe

    work page 2000

  62. [62]

    Wetherill, G. W. 1994, Ap&SS, 212, 23 —. 1995, Nature, 373, 470

    work page 1994

  63. [63]

    A., Jones, M

    Wittenmyer, R. A., Jones, M. I., Horner, J., et al. 2017, AJ, 154, 274

    work page 2017

  64. [64]

    A., Wang, S., Horner, J., et al

    Wittenmyer, R. A., Wang, S., Horner, J., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 377

    work page 2020

  65. [65]

    P., et al

    Xiao, G.-Y., Feng, F., Butler, R. P., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.10919 Y ee, S. W., Winn, J. N., Hartman, J. D., et al. 2022, AJ, 164, 70

    work page arXiv 2026

  66. [66]

    2013, A&A, 552, A78

    Zechmeister, M., Kürster, M., Endl, M., et al. 2013, A&A, 552, A78

    work page 2013

  67. [67]

    M., Huber, D., et al

    Zhang, J., Weiss, L. M., Huber, D., et al. 2025, AJ, 169, 200

    work page 2025