Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Chemical fingerprints of hot Jupiter planet formation

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1712.01035 v2 pith:KE23CYDL submitted 2017-12-04 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.SR

Chemical fingerprints of hot Jupiter planet formation

classification astro-ph.EP astro-ph.SR
keywords jupiterscoolstarsformationplanetsalphadifferencesdistant
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

The current paradigm to explain the presence of Jupiters with small orbital periods (P $<$ 10 days; hot Jupiters) that involves their formation beyond the snow line following inward migration, has been challenged by recent works that explored the possibility of in situ formation. We aim to test whether stars harbouring hot Jupiters and stars with more distant gas-giant planets show any chemical peculiarity that could be related to different formation processes. Our results show that stars with hot Jupiters have higher metallicities than stars with cool distant gas-giant planets in the metallicity range +0.00/+0.20 dex. The data also shows a tendency of stars with cool Jupiters to show larger abundances of $\alpha$ elements. No abundance differences between stars with cool and hot Jupiters are found when considering iron peak, volatile elements or the C/O, and Mg/Si ratios. The corresponding $p$-values from the statistical tests comparing the cumulative distributions of cool and hot planet hosts are 0.20, $<$ 0.01, 0.81, and 0.16 for metallicity, $\alpha$, iron-peak, and volatile elements, respectively. We confirm previous works suggesting that more distant planets show higher planetary masses as well as larger eccentricities. We note differences in age and spectral type between the hot and cool planet hosts samples that might affect the abundance comparison. The differences in the distribution of planetary mass, period, eccentricity, and stellar host metallicity suggest a different formation mechanism for hot and cool Jupiters. The slightly larger $\alpha$ abundances found in stars harbouring cool Jupiters might compensate their lower metallicities allowing the formation of gas-giant planets.

discussion (0)

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