pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.26075 · v1 · pith:MXNDC2VDnew · submitted 2026-06-24 · 🌌 astro-ph.EP

Glossy Silicate Clouds on the Scorched Dayside of LTT9779b

Suman Saha , James S. Jenkins , Jonathan Brande , Reza Ashtari , Ian J. M. Crossfield , Sarah Stamer , Diana Dragomir , Kevin B. Stevenson
show 5 more authors
Vivien Parmentier Thomas M. Evans-Soma Tansu Daylan Hayley Beltz Emma Esparza-Borges
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-25 19:00 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.EP
keywords exoplanet atmospheressilicate cloudsLTT9779bJWSTultra-hot Neptuneatmospheric retrievalgeometric albedoC/O ratio
0
0 comments X

The pith

Reflective silicate clouds on the dayside of LTT9779b explain its high albedo better than extreme metallicity.

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

The paper analyzes JWST NIRISS and NIRSpec observations of the ultra-hot Neptune LTT9779b to characterize its dayside atmosphere. It reports a 3-to-5 sigma detection of clouds with strong evidence for magnesium silicate condensation. This detection supports the conclusion that a reflective cloud deck, rather than an extremely metal-rich atmosphere, accounts for the planet's anomalously high optical albedo. The work also yields detections of CO and CO2 along with a constrained C/O ratio near 0.98.

Core claim

A comprehensive panchromatic analysis of LTT9779b's dayside atmosphere using JWST NIRISS and NIRSpec/G395H observations reveals a 3-to-5σ detection of dayside clouds with strong evidence for Mg2SiO4(s) condensation. This is the first statistically significant detection of clouds on the dayside of a Neptunian-mass exoplanet. The data show that a highly reflective cloud deck is the most likely explanation for the anomalously high optical albedo, rather than an extremely high-metallicity atmosphere. Robust detections of CO (~4.88σ) and CO2 (~8.76σ) are reported along with a C/O ratio of 0.984 ± 0.019.

What carries the argument

Atmospheric retrievals on panchromatic JWST spectra that separate the spectral signature of a reflective Mg2SiO4 cloud deck from metallicity effects.

If this is right

  • A highly reflective cloud deck rather than extreme metallicity explains the high geometric albedo.
  • CO and CO2 are present with detections at 4.88σ and 8.76σ respectively.
  • The C/O ratio is 0.984 ± 0.019 and aligns with super-solar values seen in ultra-hot Jupiters.
  • Silicate condensation occurs on the dayside of this Neptunian-mass planet.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Oxygen sequestration by clouds may drive high C/O ratios across many ultra-hot atmospheres.
  • Similar JWST observations of other hot Neptunes could test whether dayside silicate clouds are common in this mass range.

Load-bearing premise

Atmospheric retrieval models can reliably separate the effects of a reflective cloud deck from those of extreme atmospheric metallicity without major degeneracies.

What would settle it

Higher-resolution or extended-wavelength spectra that allow an extreme-metallicity cloud-free model to fit the albedo and features as well as the cloud model would undermine the preference for silicate clouds.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.26075 by Diana Dragomir, Emma Esparza-Borges, Hayley Beltz, Ian J. M. Crossfield, James S. Jenkins, Jonathan Brande, Kevin B. Stevenson, Reza Ashtari, Sarah Stamer, Suman Saha, Tansu Daylan, Thomas M. Evans-Soma, Vivien Parmentier.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Equilibrium temperature vs. planetary radius for known transiting exoplanets. The ultra-hot Neptune LTT9779b is high￾lighted as the red star. The purple shaded region indicates the Nep￾tunian radius regime, whereas the green shaded region demarcates the “Neptunian desert”. both a metal-rich composition and the presence of dayside clouds—a scenario further supported by JWST NIRISS ob￾servations (Radica et a… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Observed panchromatic emission spectra of LTT9779b—combining NIRISS and NIRSpec/G395H observations—shown in terms of brightness temperature (top panel), derived from two independent reductions of the raw data using Eureka! (red) and exoTEDRF (blue), followed by modeling of the binned spectroscopic light curves. The mean absolute difference between the two spectra is ∼0.6σ (bottom panel), indicating excelle… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Observed panchromatic emission spectra (Eureka!) shown with the retrieved best-fit free chemistry model (with Guillot P–T parametrization) and associated residuals. Additional models—excluding specific gaseous species and cloud components—are also overplotted for comparison. → ∞), thereby explaining the highly metal-enriched atmo￾spheric scenarios inferred in previous studies (e.g., Saha et al. 2025; Coulo… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Retrieved posterior P–T profiles from the free chemistry retrievals of the Eureka! spectrum using the Guillot P–T parametrization (top) and the neo-MS P–T parametrization (bottom), together with the corresponding posteriors for Mg2SiO4(s) condensation curves and abundance profiles. The median contribution functions associated with these retrievals are also shown. less pronounced in this case (see Figure A5… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of abundance posteriors for key molecular species—H2O, CO, and CO2—from free chemistry retrievals of the Eureka! spectrum, using the Guillot P–T parametrization (top panels) and the neo-MS P–T parametrization (bottom panels), across different model conditions. could potentially improve these detection significances and enable the definitive detection of refractory species such as SiO, TiO, and V… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Estimated C/O ratio of LTT9779b (red bowtie) shown alongside well-constrained JWST literature values for other exoplanets spanning a wide range of equilibrium temperatures (left panel). Step function fits, illustrating the onset of super-solar C/O ratios in ultra-hot gas giants, are shown both including and excluding LTT9779b (median and 1σ confidence intervals), along with the corresponding fit posteriors… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Discovered deep within the "Neptunian desert", LTT9779b remains the only known ultra-hot Neptune, prompting significant speculation regarding its unique formation and evolutionary history. Its exceptionally high geometric albedo has previously been attributed either to the presence of clouds or to an extremely metal-rich atmosphere. Here, we present a comprehensive panchromatic analysis of its dayside atmosphere using JWST NIRISS and NIRSpec/G395H observations to characterize its atmospheric structure and composition. Leveraging the exceptional signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) in the observed spectra, we report a 3-to-5$\sigma$ detection of dayside clouds, with strong evidence for Mg$_2$SiO$_4$(s) (silicate) condensation. This constitutes the first statistically significant detection of clouds on the dayside of a Neptunian-mass exoplanet. We demonstrate that a highly reflective cloud deck, rather than an extremely high-metallicity atmosphere, is the most likely explanation for the planet's anomalously high optical albedo. Furthermore, our atmospheric retrievals yield robust detections of both CO ($\sim$4.88$\sigma$) and CO$_2$ ($\sim$8.76$\sigma$), while providing tentative constraints on the H$_2$O abundance and upper limits on SiO, TiO, and VO. Finally, our analysis places a robust constraint on the C/O ratio of 0.984 $\pm$ 0.019. This aligns LTT9779b with other known ultra-hot Jupiters exhibiting super-solar C/O ratios, suggesting a broader trend driven by the sequestration of oxygen-bearing condensates in ultra-hot atmospheres.

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

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes JWST NIRISS and NIRSpec/G395H panchromatic dayside spectra of the ultra-hot Neptune LTT9779b. It reports a 3–5σ detection of reflective silicate clouds (Mg₂SiO₄(s)), argues that these clouds (rather than extreme metallicity) explain the planet’s high optical albedo, presents ~4.88σ and ~8.76σ detections of CO and CO₂ respectively, and derives a C/O ratio of 0.984 ± 0.019 that aligns with other ultra-hot giants.

Significance. If the retrieval results hold, the work supplies the first statistically significant dayside cloud detection for any Neptunian-mass exoplanet and resolves the albedo puzzle for an object in the Neptunian desert. The reported C/O constraint and its comparison to ultra-hot Jupiters constitute a falsifiable trend that can be tested with additional targets.

major comments (1)
  1. [Atmospheric retrieval section (methods and results)] The central claim that a reflective cloud deck is preferred over extreme metallicity rests on the atmospheric retrieval’s ability to break the degeneracy between cloud optical depth/albedo and atmospheric metallicity. The manuscript should include explicit posterior corner plots or Bayes-factor comparisons between the two families of models (with and without the Mg₂SiO₄ cloud deck) to demonstrate that the separation is not driven by prior volume or parameterization choices.
minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract states “strong evidence for Mg₂SiO₄(s) condensation” but does not quote the precise detection significance or the Bayes factor relative to other condensates; the main text should tabulate these quantities for each species considered.
  2. Notation for the C/O ratio (0.984 ± 0.019) should be accompanied by the exact number of free parameters and the prior range used in the retrieval to allow direct comparison with other ultra-hot Jupiter studies.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive review and positive assessment of the manuscript. We address the single major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim that a reflective cloud deck is preferred over extreme metallicity rests on the atmospheric retrieval’s ability to break the degeneracy between cloud optical depth/albedo and atmospheric metallicity. The manuscript should include explicit posterior corner plots or Bayes-factor comparisons between the two families of models (with and without the Mg₂SiO₄ cloud deck) to demonstrate that the separation is not driven by prior volume or parameterization choices.

    Authors: We agree that explicit model comparisons would strengthen the presentation. In the revised manuscript we will add (i) Bayes-factor comparisons between the fiducial retrieval (with Mg₂SiO₄ cloud deck) and an otherwise identical retrieval without the cloud deck, and (ii) corner plots of the joint posteriors for metallicity, cloud optical depth, and cloud albedo to demonstrate that the data, rather than prior volume, drive the preference for the cloudy solution. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity identified

full rationale

The paper's claims of cloud detection, preference for a reflective Mg2SiO4 deck over high metallicity, molecular detections, and C/O ratio constraint are obtained via atmospheric retrievals on JWST NIRISS/NIRSpec spectra. These steps use observed spectral data as input and report posterior preferences without reducing to self-definition, fitted parameters renamed as independent predictions, or load-bearing self-citations. The derivation chain remains self-contained against the external spectral observations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Central claims rest on standard exoplanet atmospheric retrieval assumptions and the ability of the data to break the cloud-metallicity degeneracy; one fitted parameter (C/O) is reported.

free parameters (1)
  • C/O ratio = 0.984 ± 0.019
    Fitted value reported from retrievals on the observed spectra.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Atmospheric retrieval models assume equilibrium chemistry and specific cloud optical properties that allow separation from metallicity effects.
    Invoked implicitly when claiming clouds explain albedo better than high metallicity.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5895 in / 1274 out tokens · 38257 ms · 2026-06-25T19:00:53.043339+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

80 extracted references · 77 canonical work pages · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    S., & Marley, M

    Ackerman, A. S., & Marley, M. S. 2001, ApJ, 556, 872, doi: 10.1086/321540

    work page doi:10.1086/321540 2001

  2. [2]

    R., Alam, M

    Alderson, L., Wakeford, H. R., Alam, M. K., et al. 2023, Nature, 614, 664, doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05591-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05591-3 2023

  3. [3]

    2026, AJ, 171, 215, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ae4494

    Ashtari, R., Collins, S., Splinter, J., et al. 2026, AJ, 171, 215, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ae4494

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ae4494 2026

  4. [4]

    2025, AJ, 170, 165, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/adec89

    Barat, S., D´esert, J.-M., Mukherjee, S., et al. 2025, AJ, 170, 165, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/adec89

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/adec89 2025

  5. [5]

    and Yurchenko, Sergei N

    Barton, E. J., Yurchenko, S. N., & Tennyson, J. 2013, MNRAS, 434, 1469, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1105

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1105 2013

  6. [6]

    Bell and Eva-Maria Ahrer and Jonathan Brande and Aarynn L

    Bell, T. J., Ahrer, E.-M., Brande, J., et al. 2022, Journal of Open Source Software, 7, 4503, doi: 10.21105/joss.04503

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.04503 2022

  7. [7]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.03325, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2403.03325

    Benneke, B., Roy, P.-A., Coulombe, L.-P., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.03325, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2403.03325

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.03325 2024

  8. [8]

    2024, A&A, 690, A63, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450767

    Blain, D., Landman, R., Molli`ere, P., & Dittmann, J. 2024, A&A, 690, A63, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450767

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450767 2024

  9. [9]

    2002, A&A, 390, 779, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020555

    Borysow, A. 2002, A&A, 390, 779, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020555

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20020555 2002

  10. [10]

    , keywords =

    Borysow, A., Frommhold, L., & Moraldi, M. 1989, ApJ, 336, 495, doi: 10.1086/167027

    work page doi:10.1086/167027 1989

  11. [11]

    , keywords =

    Borysow, A., Jorgensen, U. G., & Fu, Y . 2001, JQSRT, 68, 235, doi: 10.1016/S0022-4073(00)00023-6

    work page doi:10.1016/s0022-4073(00)00023-6 2001

  12. [12]

    , keywords =

    Borysow, J., Frommhold, L., & Birnbaum, G. 1988, ApJ, 326, 509, doi: 10.1086/166112

    work page doi:10.1086/166112 1988

  13. [13]

    Brande, J., Crossfield, I. J. M., Ashtari, R., et al. 2026, Under review

    2026

  14. [14]

    2014, A&A, 564, A125, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322971

    Buchner, J., Georgakakis, A., Nandra, K., et al. 2014, A&A, 564, A125, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322971

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322971 2014

  15. [15]

    2022, JWST Calibration Pipeline, 1.7.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7071140

    Bushouse, H., Eisenhamer, J., Dencheva, N., et al. 2022, JWST Calibration Pipeline, 1.7.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7071140

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.7071140 2022

  16. [16]

    , keywords =

    Calamari, E., Faherty, J. K., Visscher, C., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 67, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1f6d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad1f6d 2024

  17. [17]

    Proceedings of the Physical Society , year = 1965, month = feb, volume =

    Chan, Y . M., & Dalgarno, A. 1965, Proceedings of the Physical Society, 85, 227, doi: 10.1088/0370-1328/85/2/304

    work page doi:10.1088/0370-1328/85/2/304 1965

  18. [18]

    Costa, G. C. C., Jacobson, N. S., & Fegley, Jr., B. 2017, Icarus, 289, 42, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2017.02.006

    work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2017.02.006 2017

  19. [19]

    Nature Astronomy , keywords =

    Coulombe, L.-P., Radica, M., Benneke, B., et al. 2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 512, doi: 10.1038/s41550-025-02488-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-025-02488-9 2025

  20. [20]

    Crossfield, I. J. M., Dragomir, D., Cowan, N. B., et al. 2020, ApJL, 903, L7, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abbc71

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abbc71 2020

  21. [21]

    Dalgarno, A., & Williams, D. A. 1962, ApJ, 136, 690, doi: 10.1086/147428

    work page doi:10.1086/147428 1962

  22. [22]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.27223, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.27223

    Deka, T., Majumdar, L., Basra Khan, T., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.27223, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.27223

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.27223 2025

  23. [23]

    J., Hutchings, J

    Doyon, R., Willott, C. J., Hutchings, J. B., et al. 2023, PASP, 135, 098001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/acd41b

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/acd41b 2023

  24. [24]

    Dragomir, D., Crossfield, I. J. M., Benneke, B., et al. 2020, ApJL, 903, L6, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abbc70

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abbc70 2020

  25. [25]

    2024, ApJL, 962, L30, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad2000

    Edwards, B., & Changeat, Q. 2024, ApJL, 962, L30, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad2000

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad2000 2024

  26. [26]

    , keywords =

    Feinstein, A. D., Radica, M., Welbanks, L., et al. 2023, Nature, 614, 670, doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05674-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05674-1 2023

  27. [27]

    P., & Bridges, M

    Feroz, F., Hobson, M. P., & Bridges, M. 2009, MNRAS, 398, 1601, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14548.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14548.x 2009

  28. [28]

    2023, MNRAS, 520, 4683, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad245

    Fonte, S., Turrini, D., Pacetti, E., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 520, 4683, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad245

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad245 2023

  29. [29]

    2018, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 2, 31, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/aaaf6c

    Foreman-Mackey, D. 2018, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 2, 31, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/aaaf6c

    work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/aaaf6c 2018

  30. [30]

    Fast and scalable Gaussian process modeling with applications to astronomical time series

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Agol, E., Ambikasaran, S., & Angus, R. 2017, AJ, 154, 220, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa9332

    work page Pith review doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa9332 2017

  31. [31]

    E., Wogan, N., et al

    Gressier, A., Batalha, N. E., Wogan, N., et al. 2025, AJ, 170, 292, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ae0929

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ae0929 2025

  32. [32]

    On the radiative equilibrium of irradiated planetary atmospheres

    Guillot, T. 2010, A&A, 520, A27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913396

    work page Pith review doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200913396 2010

  33. [33]

    , keywords =

    Hargreaves, R. J., Gordon, I. E., Rey, M., et al. 2020, ApJS, 247, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab7a1a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab7a1a 2020

  34. [34]

    Jones, H. R. A. 2006, MNRAS, 367, 400, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09960.x 12

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09960.x 2006

  35. [35]

    1997, A&A, 327, 743

    Henning, T., & Mutschke, H. 1997, A&A, 327, 743

    1997

  36. [36]

    S., Parmentier, V ., et al

    Hoyer, S., Jenkins, J. S., Parmentier, V ., et al. 2023, A&A, 675, A81, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346117

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346117 2023

  37. [37]

    , keywords =

    Inglis, J., Batalha, N. E., Lewis, N. K., et al. 2024, ApJL, 973, L41, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad725e

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad725e 2024

  38. [38]

    E., Pavlyuchenkov, Y

    Ionov, D. E., Pavlyuchenkov, Y . N., & Shematovich, V . I. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 5639, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty626

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty626 2018

  39. [39]

    1994, A&A, 292, 641

    Henning, T. 1994, A&A, 292, 641

    1994

  40. [40]

    2022, 661, A80, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142663

    Jakobsen, P., Ferruit, P., Alves de Oliveira, C., et al. 2022, A&A, 661, A80, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142663

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142663 2022

  41. [41]

    S., D´ıaz, M

    Jenkins, J. S., D´ıaz, M. R., Kurtovic, N. T., et al. 2020, Nature Astronomy, 4, 1148, doi: 10.1038/s41550-020-1142-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-020-1142-z 2020

  42. [42]

    Bayes factors

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

    work page doi:10.1080/01621459.1995.10476572 1995

  43. [43]

    Khorshid, N., Min, M., Polman, J., & Waters, L. B. F. M. 2024, A&A, 685, A64, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347124

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347124 2024

  44. [44]

    2018, MNRAS, 475, 94, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3141

    Kitzmann, D., & Heng, K. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 94, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3141

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx3141 2018

  45. [45]

    1995, Icarus, 114, 203, doi: 10.1006/icar.1995.1055

    Koike, C., Kaito, C., Yamamoto, T., et al. 1995, Icarus, 114, 203, doi: 10.1006/icar.1995.1055

    work page doi:10.1006/icar.1995.1055 1995

  46. [46]

    2015, 127, 1161, doi: 10.1086/683602 Lecavelier Des Etangs, A., Pont, F., Vidal-Madjar, A., &

    Kreidberg, L. 2015, PASP, 127, 1161, doi: 10.1086/683602

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/683602 2015

  47. [47]

    M., et al

    Lustig-Yaeger, J., Fu, G., May, E. M., et al. 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 1317, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-02064-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-023-02064-z 2023

  48. [48]

    2009, ApJ, 707, 24, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/707/1/24

    Madhusudhan, N., & Seager, S. 2009, ApJ, 707, 24, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/707/1/24

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/707/1/24 2009

  49. [49]

    B., et al

    Madhusudhan, N., Harrington, J., Stevenson, K. B., et al. 2011, Nature, 469, 64, doi: 10.1038/nature09602

    work page doi:10.1038/nature09602 2011

  50. [50]

    W., Fortenbach, C

    Mayo, A. W., Fortenbach, C. D., Louie, D. R., et al. 2025, AJ, 170, 50, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/adda2e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/adda2e 2025

  51. [51]

    2016, A&A, 589, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201528065

    Mazeh, T., Holczer, T., & Faigler, S. 2016, A&A, 589, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201528065

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201528065 2016

  52. [52]

    B., Ahrer, E.-M., et al

    Meech, A., Claringbold, A. B., Ahrer, E.-M., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 539, 1381, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf530

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf530 2025

  53. [53]

    P., van Boekel , R., et al

    Molli`ere, P., Wardenier, J. P., van Boekel, R., et al. 2019, A&A, 627, A67, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935470

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935470 2019

  54. [54]

    2024 , publisher =

    Nasedkin, E., Molli`ere, P., & Blain, D. 2024, The Journal of Open Source Software, 9, 5875, doi: 10.21105/joss.05875

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.05875 2024

  55. [55]

    C., Asnodkar, A

    Petz, S., Johnson, M. C., Asnodkar, A. P., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 7079, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3481

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3481 2024

  56. [56]

    , keywords =

    Pollack, J. B., Hollenbach, D., Beckwith, S., et al. 1994, ApJ, 421, 615, doi: 10.1086/173677

    work page doi:10.1086/173677 1994

  57. [57]

    L., Kyuberis, A

    Polyansky, O. L., Kyuberis, A. A., Zobov, N. F., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 2597, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1877

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1877 2018

  58. [58]

    2003, ApJS, 149, 437, doi: 10.1086/379167

    Posch, T., Kerschbaum, F., Fabian, D., et al. 2003, ApJS, 149, 437, doi: 10.1086/379167

    work page doi:10.1086/379167 2003

  59. [59]

    D., Lee, E

    Powell, D., Feinstein, A. D., Lee, E. K. H., et al. 2024, Nature, 626, 979, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07040-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07040-9 2024

  60. [60]

    2024, The Journal of Open Source Software, 9, 6898, doi: 10.21105/joss.06898

    Radica, M. 2024, The Journal of Open Source Software, 9, 6898, doi: 10.21105/joss.06898

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.06898 2024

  61. [61]

    2024, ApJL, 962, L20, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad20e4 Ram´ırez Reyes, R., Jenkins, J

    Radica, M., Coulombe, L.-P., Taylor, J., et al. 2024, ApJL, 962, L20, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad20e4 Ram´ırez Reyes, R., Jenkins, J. S., Sedaghati, E., et al. 2025, A&A, 695, A26, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451044

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad20e4 2024

  62. [62]

    Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems , year = 2015, month = jan, volume =

    Ricker, G. R., Winn, J. N., Vanderspek, R., et al. 2015, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 1, 014003, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.1.1.014003

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1117/1.jatis.1.1.014003 2015

  63. [63]

    , year = 2010, month = oct, volume =

    Rothman, L. S., Gordon, I. E., Barber, R. J., et al. 2010, JQSRT, 111, 2139, doi: 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2010.05.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jqsrt.2010.05.001 2010

  64. [64]

    The HITRAN2012 molecular spectroscopic database

    Rothman, L. S., Gordon, I. E., Babikov, Y ., et al. 2013, JQSRT, 130, 4, doi: 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2013.07.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jqsrt.2013.07.002 2013

  65. [65]

    2023, ApJS, 268, 2, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acdb6b —

    Saha, S. 2023, ApJS, 268, 2, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acdb6b —. 2024, ApJS, 274, 13, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad6a60 —. 2025, MNRAS, 539, 928, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf550

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acdb6b 2023

  66. [66]

    2021, AJ, 162, 18, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac01dd

    Saha, S., Chakrabarty, A., & Sengupta, S. 2021, AJ, 162, 18, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac01dd

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac01dd 2021

  67. [67]

    Saha, S., & Jenkins, J. S. 2025a, ApJL, 994, L39, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae1c1c —. 2025b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.11479, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.11479 —. 2026, AJ, 171, 295, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ae5481

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae1c1c 2041

  68. [68]

    2021, AJ, 162, 221, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac294d

    Saha, S., & Sengupta, S. 2021, AJ, 162, 221, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac294d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac294d 2021

  69. [69]

    S., Parmentier, V ., et al

    Saha, S., Jenkins, J. S., Parmentier, V ., et al. 2025, A&A, 700, A45, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554303

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554303 2025

  70. [70]

    L., & Piriou, B

    Servoin, J. L., & Piriou, B. 1973, Physica Status Solidi B Basic Research, 55, 677, doi: 10.1002/pssb.2220550224

    work page doi:10.1002/pssb.2220550224 1973

  71. [71]

    Shornikov, S. I. 2019, Russian Journal of Physical Chemistry A, 93, 1024, doi: 10.1134/S0036024419060293

    work page doi:10.1134/s0036024419060293 2019

  72. [72]

    Materials Pushing the Application Limits of Wire Grid Polarizers further into the Deep Ultraviolet Spectral Range

    Siefke, T., Kroker, S., Pfeiffer, K., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1607.04866, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1607.04866

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1607.04866 2016

  73. [73]

    F., Tennyson, J., & Yurchenko, S

    Sousa-Silva, C., Al-Refaie, A. F., Tennyson, J., & Yurchenko, S. N. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 2337, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2246

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2246 2015

  74. [74]

    Speagle, J. S. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 3132, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa278

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa278 2020

  75. [75]

    Stull, D. R. 1947, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry, 39, 517, doi: 10.1021/ie50448a022

    work page doi:10.1021/ie50448a022 1947

  76. [76]

    2008, Contemporary Physics, 49, 71, doi: 10.1080/00107510802066753

    Trotta, R. 2008, Contemporary Physics, 49, 71, doi: 10.1080/00107510802066753

    work page doi:10.1080/00107510802066753 2008

  77. [77]

    1998, Journal of Physics Condensed Matter, 10, 3669, doi: 10.1088/0953-8984/10/16/018 Weiner Mansfield, M., Line, M

    Ueda, K., Yanagi, H., Noshiro, R., Hosono, H., & Kawazoe, H. 1998, Journal of Physics Condensed Matter, 10, 3669, doi: 10.1088/0953-8984/10/16/018 Weiner Mansfield, M., Line, M. R., Wardenier, J. P., et al. 2024, AJ, 168, 14, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad4a5f

    work page doi:10.1088/0953-8984/10/16/018 1998

  78. [78]

    arXiv e-prints , author =

    Wiser, L. S., Bell, T. J., Line, M. R., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.01800, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.01800

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.01800 2025

  79. [79]

    L., Zhang, M., et al

    Xue, Q., Bean, J. L., Zhang, M., et al. 2024, ApJL, 963, L5, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad2682 13

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad2682 2024

  80. [80]

    2011, A&A, 526, A68, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015219 A1 APPENDIX Table A1.Priors of the free parameters used in the atmospheric retrievals

    Zeidler, S., Posch, T., Mutschke, H., Richter, H., & Wehrhan, O. 2011, A&A, 526, A68, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015219 A1 APPENDIX Table A1.Priors of the free parameters used in the atmospheric retrievals. Parameter Prior Tint [K]U(0,2000) Teq [K]U(0,5000) [γ]U(−2,2) [κIR]U(−4,0) T0 [K]U(500,3000) δP1 U(0,0.8) δP2 U(0,1) δP3 U(0,1) [γ1]U(−4,1) [γ2]U(−4,1)...

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201015219 2011