Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Six-yr SPIRou monitoring of the young planet-host dwarf AU Mic

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The 33.11-day radial-velocity signal of candidate planet e around AU Mic is real: after 2041 days of SPIRou monitoring it reaches 4.9 sigma and keeps strengthening as data accumulate.

desk verdict A genuinely useful extended re-analysis of AU Mic, but the 33 d candidate planet is not yet separated from its 30.3 d yearly alias. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.01746 v1 pith:WEX54E5Y submitted 2025-07-02 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.EP

J.-F. Donati , P.I. Cristofari , C. Moutou , A. L'Heureux , N.J. Cook , E. Artigau , S.H.P. Alencar , E. Gaidos
show 5 more authors
A. Vidotto P. Petit A. Carmona T. Ray the SPIRou science team
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.EP
keywords AUMicMdwarfradialvelocityexoplanetdetectionGaussianprocessregressionZeeman-Dopplerimagingmagneticactivityyoungplanetarysystems
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

Six years of SPIRou monitoring of the young M dwarf AU Mic produce a case for a third planet. The paper argues that the radial-velocity signal of candidate planet e, at a period of 33.11 ± 0.06 days, is a genuine Keplerian rather than an artifact of stellar activity: it is detected at 4.9 sigma with a semi-amplitude of about 5.9 m/s, implying a mass near 21 Earth masses, and it grows stronger in stacked periodograms as more spectra are added. If true, AU Mic hosts at least three planets, making it a rare benchmark for how planetary architectures settle within the first 20 million years of a star's life. The same analysis sharpens the masses of the two transiting planets, reveals a strong density contrast between them, and places a new upper limit on a fourth candidate.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is a quasi-periodic Gaussian process (GP), a statistical model of the stellar activity signal in the radial velocities, with a covariance that recurs near the 4.865-day stellar rotation period and evolves on a timescale of about 167 days. The GP is meant to absorb the spin-modulated activity jitter so the residuals behave like white noise; the planets are then fitted as circular Keplerians, with the periods of b and c fixed from photometry while the period and phase of candidate e are searched. The diagnostic that carries the confirmation is a stacked periodogram of the activity-filtered velocities: the 33.11-day peak deepening as data are added is presented as the signature that distinguishes a real planet from a transient activity artifact.

What would settle it

Re-run the published radial velocities with the GP evolution timescale freed to exceed 300 days and with the 30.3-day one-year alias modeled explicitly: if the 33.11-day peak falls below roughly 3 sigma, the detection was an artifact of the activity model. A second, empirical test is to continue the campaign: two more seasons should show the stacked periodogram peak either holding phase and growing, or dissolving into alias structure.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that candidate planet e, first proposed in the earlier SPIRou analysis, survives a fivefold-longer baseline. Fitting the 344 radial velocities with a quasi-periodic Gaussian process for activity plus circular Keplerians for planets b and c leaves a residual peak at $P_e = 33.11 \pm 0.06$ d with a false-alarm probability near $2 \times 10^{-9}$, a semi-amplitude $K_e = 5.9^{+1.5}_{-1.2}$ m/s, and a mass $M_e = 21.1^{+5.4}_{-4.3}$ $M_\oplus$. The stacked periodogram shows the peak deepening as data accumulate, and the Bayesian evidence for the three-planet model over the two-planet model is $\Delta\log L \approx 11.5$. The paper also derives updated masses for b and c, a 90% upper limit of 4.9 Earth masses for candidate d, and a six-year magnetic-field evolution in which the dipole weakens from about 1.4 to 1.1 kG before rising again.

Load-bearing premise

The confirmation of planet e rests on the quasi-periodic Gaussian process absorbing all stellar activity and leaving white noise; if that model underfits long-term magnetic evolution, or if the 30.3-day one-year alias and the 29.5-day lunar window peak leak into the 33.11-day period, the residual signal could be nonplanetary.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • AU Mic would join the small set of sub-20-Myr stars with a confirmed multi-planet system, giving formation and migration models a concrete outer-planet constraint at 0.17 au.
  • The density contrast between b (about 0.32 g/cm3) and c (about 2.9 g/cm3) implies the two transiting planets have very different structures or evolutionary states, with b still inflated.
  • The lower semi-amplitude of 5.9 m/s explains why optical RV surveys with a 10 m/s upper limit missed the signal; future joint optical-infrared fits should recover it.
  • With a circular orbit for e, the three-planet configuration is dynamically stable on Gyr timescales, so the architecture is long-lived rather than a snapshot of a transient arrangement.
  • Candidate planet d, if it causes the observed transit-timing variations, must be lighter than about 4.9 Earth masses, keeping the inner system compact and consistent with the TTV interpretation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The stacked-periodogram growth criterion demonstrated here could serve as a general validation protocol for RV planet candidates around active stars: a signal that strengthens monotonically as seasons accrue is far more likely to be planetary, while one that oscillates in power is likely activity.
  • If e is real and non-transiting, its orbital inclination must be below about 88.7 degrees; a future measurement of the mutual inclination between e and the transiting planets would test whether the system formed coplanar or was scattered.
  • Three to five more years of monitoring would distinguish between a very long magnetic cycle and non-periodic evolution: a polarity switch in the dipole would align AU Mic with less active M dwarfs that show Sun-like cycles, whereas continued drift would support the non-periodic interpretation.
  • The closeness of the 30.3-day one-year alias and the 29.5-day lunar window peak to the claimed 33.11-day period means independent sampling from a different observatory is the cheapest decisive check; if the signal phase-coheres across two observatories, activity-model concerns are largely retired.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. This paper extends the SPIRou monitoring of the young M dwarf AU Mic from 2019 to 2024 (2041 d, 382 spectra) and combines activity modeling, Zeeman-Doppler imaging (ZDI), and radial-velocity (RV) analysis. The authors report that the large-scale magnetic field is mostly poloidal with a dominant dipole of 1.1–1.4 kG that weakened until 2022 and then strengthened, while the small-scale field inferred from ZDI agrees with independent ZeeTurbo line-broadening measurements. They derive updated masses for the transiting planets b and c (6.3 and 11.6 M⊕), a 90% upper limit of 4.9 M⊕ for the putative planet d, and a 4.9σ RV detection of candidate planet e at P = 33.11 ± 0.06 d with M = 21.1 M⊕, which they interpret as a third planet.

Significance. If the planet-e detection holds, this is one of the few multi-planet systems around a pre-main-sequence star and would strengthen the case for early outer-planet formation. The six-year magnetic monitoring is also valuable: it places a lower bound on the magnetic cycle length of a rapidly rotating M dwarf and combines Stokes I and V constraints on both large- and small-scale fields. The paper is careful in several respects: it includes null-spectrum checks, MCMC posteriors with explicit priors, Bayesian model comparisons via marginal likelihoods, and a stacked periodogram showing that the 33-d signal grows as data accumulate. These are genuine strengths. The main caveats are that the RV detection of planet e rests on a restrictive period prior in the presence of a nearby yearly alias, and that the ZDI small-scale field agreement is partly set by the fixed filling-factor ratio fI/fV = 4.5.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 5, Table 1, Fig. 5] The confirmation of candidate e rests on the posterior Pe = 33.11 ± 0.06 d, but the MCMC uses a Gaussian prior centered at 33.1 d with width 1.0 d (Table 1), while the 30.3 d one-year alias is explicitly identified in Fig. 5. Because 30.3 d lies about 2.8σ from the prior center, the prior strongly suppresses the alias before the data are evaluated. The paper should repeat the b+c+e fit with a uniform prior on Pe (or a much wider prior) and also report the marginal likelihood of a model with Pe fixed at 30.3 d, to show that the 33.1 d solution is selected by the data rather than by the prior. The periodogram evidence in Figs. 5 and 6 makes the detection plausible, but those periodograms do not by themselves eliminate the prior-induced selection concern, especially given the 29.5 d lunar window peak in the same region.
  2. [Sec. 4, Table C.1, Sec. 7] The claimed agreement between the ZDI-derived small-scale field <Bs> and the ZeeTurbo <B> measurements is partially built into the model through the fixed filling-factor ratio fI/fV = 4.5 (fI = 0.9, fV = 0.2) and the fixed Doppler width vD = 3.5 km/s. The manuscript should state explicitly how fI/fV was chosen (e.g., inherited from Donati et al. 2023a or tuned to the present data) and should include a sensitivity test varying fI/fV and vD over plausible ranges, showing that the epoch-to-epoch trend and the rotational modulation amplitude of <Bs> remain compatible with <B> without re-tuning. As written, the statement in Sec. 7 that the ZDI modeling 'agrees' with <B> overstates what is partly a consistency check with fixed parameters rather than an independent prediction.
  3. [Sec. 4, Table C.1] The large-scale field strength reconstructed here is about twice that of the previous study, attributed to a much tighter fit to the Stokes I profiles, yet the quoted internal uncertainties on the field values are only about 10 percent (Table C.1 note). Because this factor-of-two change is a central magnetic result, the paper should quantify the systematic uncertainty from the modeling assumptions: the chosen fI, fV, vD, the inclination (i = 80°), and the spherical-harmonic truncation at ℓ = 10. A small grid of inversions with varied settings would show whether the dipole strength of 1.1–1.4 kG is robust or whether the reported values are model-dependent.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 5, Table 1] The sentence 'we respectively fit zero, two (Kb, Kc), five (all but Kd) or all six from the RV data' is confusing because the four cases are listed in the opposite order in Table 1; consider reordering to match the table.
  2. [Table C.1] Column 4 would be easier to read if the header explicitly indicated 'time-averaged value / full-amplitude variation' rather than leaving this to the table note.
  3. [Fig. 6] The stacked periodogram would be more useful if the color scale were accompanied by FAP contours for each stack, so that the reader can judge when the 33-d peak first becomes significant rather than only seeing the color change.
  4. [Sec. 3] There is a small grammatical issue in the sentence about convergence: 'verifying that the burn-in and main phase are more than 10 × longer than the autocorrelation lengths of all parameters..' has a doubled period and should be rephrased.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 5.0 of 10

The ZDI small-scale field 'agreement' is a calibrated rescaling (fI/fV=4.5) rather than an independent prediction; the planet-e confirmation is not itself circular, though its informative prior and the 30.3-d alias are a robustness caveat.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Sec. 4 (ZDI modeling), Sec. 7 (Summary), and Table C.1 header (fI=0.9, fV=0.2)]
    "we assume that a fraction fI of each grid cell ... hosts small-scale fields of strength BV/fV, implying a small-scale magnetic flux over the whole cell of BI = BV fI/fV. In this context, <B> measured with ZeeTurbo at a given epoch is equal to the weighted limb-darkened average of BI over the visible stellar hemisphere. ... The small-scale surface field <BI> we derive with our self-consistent ZDI modeling, based on the assumption that <BI> locally scales up with the large-scale field <BV> (at a rate of fI/fV = 4.5, see Sec. 4) ... in agreement with the <B> estimates with ZeeTurbo."

    The modeled small-scale field <Bs> is defined as the same limb-darkened hemispheric average of BI that ZeeTurbo measures, with BI = BV fI/fV. The ratio fI/fV is a free parameter fixed at 4.5 (Table C.1), so the overall level of <Bs> is calibrated to the ZeeTurbo scale it is then compared with. Claiming agreement with ZeeTurbo in the abstract is therefore an identity at the field-strength level, not an independent test; only the time evolution and rotational modulation of <Bs> retain predictive content.

full rationale

The paper's main new quantitative results — the improved masses and densities of b and c, the 4.9 M_Earth upper limit on d, and the detection of the 33.11-d candidate e — are derived from the SPIRou RVs with the GP+Keplerian MCMC and are not circular: the planet parameters are fit to the data (with periods of b, c, and d fixed from independent photometry/TTV work), and the resulting Δlog LM and stacked periodogram provide evidence beyond the priors. The 33.11-d period does inherit an informative Gaussian prior centered on the authors' own earlier detection, and the 30.3-d one-year alias is dismissed rather than fitted as an alternative; this is a robustness and confirmation concern about independence, but it is not a by-construction reduction, so it is not scored as a separate circular step. The clearest circular element is the ZDI small-scale field consistency: <Bs> is a linear rescaling of the reconstructed large-scale field with fI/fV fixed to 4.5, so the 'agreement' with ZeeTurbo <B> is partly guaranteed by the parametrization. The magnetic topology, dipole evolution, and cycle-length conclusions do not depend on this rescaling and remain self-contained analyses of the Stokes I/V data.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claims rest on several adopted inputs: fixed ephemerides for known transiting planets, a GP activity model, ZDI forward model parameters, and a stellar mass used to convert RVs to masses. None is provided by this paper; the most delicate is the activity-model assumption behind the 33-day signal.

free parameters (5)
  • fI/fV filling-factor ratio = 4.5 (fI=0.9, fV=0.2)
    Fixed from previous work; sets the small-scale field predicted by ZDI. If it had been tuned to match ZeeTurbo <B>, the consistency between Secs. 3 and 4 is partly constructed.
  • Doppler width v_D = 3.5 km/s
    Used in ZDI synthetic profiles; affects line broadening and therefore the reconstructed field strength. Taken from Donati et al. 2023a.
  • Stellar mass M* = Not stated in the provided text
    Planet masses are derived from K and M*; any error in the adopted stellar mass propagates linearly into Mb, Mc, Me.
  • Stellar inclination i = 80 degrees
    ZDI assumes this inclination to reduce mirroring; it influences the reconstructed field topology and dipole tilt.
  • GP hyperparameters for RV model (theta1 to theta5) = theta1~39 m/s, theta2~4.8652 d, theta3~168 d, theta4~0.35, theta5~12 m/s (Table 1, b+c+e+d case)
    Fitted jointly with planet signals; if the GP absorbs part of a planet signal or leaves correlated noise, the K values and the 33-day detection could be biased.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Transiting planets b and c are real and their periods and epochs are fixed to literature values (Mallorquin et al. 2024; Wittrock et al. 2023).
    These ephemerides are inputs, not fitted; an error biases the RV modeling of all planets.
  • domain assumption The quasi-periodic Gaussian process of Haywood et al. (2014) and Rajpaul et al. (2015) adequately describes stellar activity in RVs and dT.
    The planet signal extraction depends on residualizing the GP; misspecification could create or hide a 33-day signal.
  • domain assumption The Unno-Rachkovsky Milne-Eddington forward model with i=80, v_D=3.5 km/s, and linear limb darkening 0.3 is sufficient for ZDI.
    The magnetic field strengths and topology are inferred from this model; overly simplistic assumptions can bias the fields.
  • standard math Maximum entropy regularization selects the unique, physically meaningful ZDI image.
    ZDI is ill-posed; the regularization is not derived from the data, and other regularizations may change the maps.
  • domain assumption The adopted stellar parameters (Teff=3750 K, log g=4.5, v sin i=8.5 km/s, and stellar mass from prior literature) are correct.
    LSD masks, ZDI models, and planet mass conversions all inherit these values.
  • domain assumption The orbits of b, c, and e are circular in the main fits.
    Fixing circular orbits is used to derive K and masses; the Keplerian test yields only marginal improvement but does not rule out moderate eccentricities.
invented entities (1)
  • Candidate planet e (AU Mic e) independent evidence
    purpose: Massive outer planet at 0.17 au, P=33.11 d, invoked to explain a persistent RV signal and possible dynamical influence on planets b and c.
    The paper predicts a period, mass, and non-transiting geometry that future RV or photometric observations can confirm or refute; the stacked periodogram is an internal consistency test, not independent confirmation. Because a falsifiable handle exists, independent_evidence is True even though the signal is not yet independently confirmed.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Six-yr SPIRou monitoring of the young planet-host dwarf AU Mic." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WEX54E5Y

@misc{pith2026250701746,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Six-yr SPIRou monitoring of the young planet-host dwarf AU Mic},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WEX54E5Y}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.01746}
}
read the original abstract

In this paper we revisit our spectropolarimetric and velocimetric analysis of the young M dwarf AU Mic based on data collected with SPIRou at the Canada-France-Hawaii telescope, over a monitoring period of 2041 d from 2019 to 2024. The longitudinal magnetic field, the small-scale magnetic field, and the differential temperature of AU Mic, derived from the unpolarized and circularly-polarized spectra, were clearly modulated with the stellar rotation period, with a pattern that evolved over time. The magnetic modeling with Zeeman-Doppler imaging provides a consistent description of the global field of AU Mic that agrees not only with the Least-Squares Deconvolved profiles of the circularly-polarized and unpolarized spectral lines, but also with the small-scale field measurements derived from the broadening of spectral lines, for each of the 11 subsets of the full data. We find that the large-scale field was mostly poloidal, with a dominant dipole component slightly tilted to the rotation axis which decreased from 1.4 to 1.1 kG before increasing at the end of the campaign. The average small-scale field followed a similar trend, decreasing from 2.8 to 2.6 kG then rising. The long-term magnetic evolution we report for AU Mic suggests that, if cyclic, the cycle period is significantly longer than 6 yr. From velocimetric data, we derived improved mass estimates for the two transiting planets, respectively equal to M_b = 6.3+2.5-1.8 M_earth and M_c = 11.6+3.3-2.7 M_earth, yielding very contrasting densities of 0.32+0.13-0.10 and 2.9+1.1-0.8 g/cm3, and a new 90% confidence upper limit of 4.9 M_earth for candidate planet d (period 12.7 d) suspected to induce the transit-timing variations of b and c. We also confirm our claim regarding candidate planet e orbiting with a period of 33.11+-0.06 d, albeit with a smaller mass of M_e = 21.1+5.4-4.3 M_earth.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.01746 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Longitudinal magnetic field Bℓ (top panel), small-scale magnetic field <B> (medium panel) and temperature variations dT (bottom panel) of AU Mic (red dots), and QP GPR fit to the data (cyan full line) with corresponding 68 percent confidence intervals (cyan dotted lines). The residuals, shown in the bottom plot of each panel, yield rms of 7.2 G, 0.038 kG and 0.96 K (χ 2 r = 2.3, 0.98 and 0.60, respectively). A zoom … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Reconstructed maps of the large-scale field of AU Mic ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Quadratic average of the large-scale magnetic field o [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Raw (top), filtered (middle) and residual (bottom) RV [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Periodogram of the raw (top), filtered (middle) and re [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Phase-folded filtered (top plots) and residual (bott [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Mass-radius diagram for exoplanets with mass and rad [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Unstable magnetospheric accretion on the T Tauri star TW Hya

    astro-ph.SR 2026-07 accept novelty 4.5 of 10

    TW Hya’s large-scale field is a ~0.83 kG tilted dipole that varies yearly; accretion is unstable (rmag/rcor ≈ 0.33–0.40) and no close-in planet is detected above ~0.3–1 Mjup.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archiveprefix author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution eprint journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all := #1 ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in " " * FUNCTION format....

  3. [3]

    2021, , 914, 84

    Aguichine , A., Mousis , O., Deleuil , M., & Marcq , E. 2021, , 914, 84

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    B., Jaziri , A

    Allart , R., Lem \'e e-Joliecoeur , P. B., Jaziri , A. Y., et al. 2023, , 677, A164

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    D., Cohen , O., Drake , J

    Alvarado-G \'o mez , J. D., Cohen , O., Drake , J. J., et al. 2022, , 928, 147

    2022

  6. [6]

    J., et al

    Artigau , \'E ., Cadieux , C., Cook , N. J., et al. 2024, , 168, 252

    2024

  7. [7]

    J., et al

    Artigau , \'E ., Cadieux , C., Cook , N. J., et al. 2022, , 164, 84

    2022

  8. [8]

    M., et al

    Barat , S., D \'e sert , J.-M., Goyal , J. M., et al. 2024, , 692, A198

    work page 2024

Show all 64 references
  1. [9]

    G., Mann , A

    Barber , M. G., Mann , A. W., Vanderburg , A., et al. 2024, , 635, 574

    2024

  2. [10]

    T., et al

    Bellotti , S., Morin , J., Lehmann , L. T., et al. 2024, , 686, A66

    2024

  3. [11]

    Berdyugina , S. V. 2005, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 2, 8

    2005

  4. [12]

    R., Vedantham , H

    Bloot , S., Callingham , J. R., Vedantham , H. K., et al. 2024, , 682, A170

    2024

  5. [13]

    M., et al

    Boccaletti , A., Sezestre , E., Lagrange , A. M., et al. 2018, , 614, A52

    2018

  6. [14]

    2015, , 526, 230

    Boccaletti , A., Thalmann , C., Lagrange , A.-M., et al. 2015, , 526, 230

    2015

  7. [15]

    M., Kriskovics , L., et al

    Boldog , \'A ., Szab \'o , G. M., Kriskovics , L., et al. 2025, , 694, A137

    2025

  8. [16]

    F., Donati , J.-F., Rees , D

    Brown , S. F., Donati , J.-F., Rees , D. E., & Semel , M. 1991, , 250, 463

    1991

  9. [17]

    L., Reefe , M., Plavchan , P., et al

    Cale , B. L., Reefe , M., Plavchan , P., et al. 2021, , 162, 295

    2021

  10. [18]

    A., Plavchan , P., Villarreal D'Angelo , C., & Hazra , G

    Carolan , S., Vidotto , A. A., Plavchan , P., Villarreal D'Angelo , C., & Hazra , G. 2020, , 498, L53

    2020

  11. [19]

    & Jeliazkov , I

    Chib , S. & Jeliazkov , I. 2001, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 96, 270

    2001

  12. [20]

    J., Artigau , \'E ., Doyon , R., et al

    Cook , N. J., Artigau , \'E ., Doyon , R., et al. 2022, , 134, 114509

    2022

  13. [21]

    I., Donati , J

    Cristofari , P. I., Donati , J. F., Folsom , C. P., et al. 2023, , 522, 1342

    2023

  14. [22]

    & Brown , S

    Donati , J.-F. & Brown , S. F. 1997, , 326, 1135

    1997

  15. [23]

    F., Cristofari , P

    Donati , J. F., Cristofari , P. I., Finociety , B., et al. 2023 a , , 525, 455

    2023

  16. [24]

    F., Cristofari , P

    Donati , J. F., Cristofari , P. I., Lehmann , L. T., et al. 2024 a , , 531, 3256

    2024

  17. [25]

    F., Finociety , B., Cristofari , P

    Donati , J. F., Finociety , B., Cristofari , P. I., et al. 2024 b , , 530, 264

    2024

  18. [26]

    D., Jardine , M

    Donati , J.-F., Howarth , I. D., Jardine , M. M., et al. 2006, , 370, 629

    2006

  19. [27]

    F., Kouach , D., Moutou , C., et al

    Donati , J. F., Kouach , D., Moutou , C., et al. 2020, , 498, 5684

    2020

  20. [28]

    F., Lehmann , L

    Donati , J. F., Lehmann , L. T., Cristofari , P. I., et al. 2023 b , , 525, 2015

    2023

  21. [29]

    D., Rees , D

    Donati , J.-F., Semel , M., Carter , B. D., Rees , D. E., & Collier Cameron , A. 1997, , 291, 658

    1997

  22. [30]

    & Donati , J

    Finociety , B. & Donati , J. F. 2022, , 516, 5887

    2022

  23. [31]

    F., Cristofari , P

    Finociety , B., Donati , J. F., Cristofari , P. I., et al. 2023, , 526, 4627

    2023

  24. [32]

    P., Cotter , G., et al

    Hallinan , G., Littlefair , S. P., Cotter , G., et al. 2015, , 523, 568

    2015

  25. [33]

    D., Collier Cameron , A., Queloz , D., et al

    Haywood , R. D., Collier Cameron , A., Queloz , D., et al. 2014, , 443, 2517

    2014

  26. [34]

    2020, , 899, L13

    Hirano , T., Krishnamurthy , V., Gaidos , E., et al. 2020, , 899, L13

    2020

  27. [35]

    V., Buccino , A

    Iba \ n ez Bustos , R. V., Buccino , A. P., Flores , M., et al. 2019, , 483, 1159

    2019

  28. [36]

    C., & Matthews , B

    Kalas , P., Liu , M. C., & Matthews , B. C. 2004, Science, 303, 1990

    2004

  29. [37]

    D., Vidotto , A

    Kavanagh , R. D., Vidotto , A. A., Klein , B., et al. 2021, , 504, 1511

    2021

  30. [38]

    G., Fossati , L., Johnstone , C

    Kislyakova , K. G., Fossati , L., Johnstone , C. P., et al. 2018, , 858, 105

    2018

  31. [39]

    2021, , 502, 188

    Klein , B., Donati , J.-F., Moutou , C., et al. 2021, , 502, 188

    2021

  32. [40]

    D., et al

    Klein , B., Zicher , N., Kavanagh , R. D., et al. 2022, , 512, 5067

    2022

  33. [41]

    2021, , 29, 1

    Kochukhov , O. 2021, , 29, 1

    2021

  34. [42]

    Kochukhov , O., Hackman , T., & Lehtinen , J. J. 2023, , 680, L17

    2023

  35. [43]

    & Reiners , A

    Kochukhov , O. & Reiners , A. 2020, , 902, 43

    2020

  36. [44]

    & Landolfi , M

    Landi degl'Innocenti , E. & Landolfi , M. 2004, Polarisation in spectral lines (Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers)

    2004

  37. [45]

    Lehmann , L. T. & Donati , J. F. 2022, , 514, 2333

    2022

  38. [46]

    T., Donati , J

    Lehmann , L. T., Donati , J. F., Fouqu \'e , P., et al. 2024, , 527, 4330

    2024

  39. [47]

    Mallorqu \' n , M., B \'e jar , V. J. S., Lodieu , N., et al. 2024, , 689, A132

    2024

  40. [48]

    Mamajek , E. E. & Bell , C. P. M. 2014, , 445, 2169

    2014

  41. [49]

    Martioli , E., H \'e brard , G., Correia , A. C. M., Laskar , J., & Lecavelier des Etangs , A. 2021, , 649, A177

    2021

  42. [50]

    2024, , 688, A179

    Masson , A., Vinatier , S., B \'e zard , B., et al. 2024, , 688, A179

    2024

  43. [51]

    Miret-Roig , N., Galli , P. A. B., Brandner , W., et al. 2020, , 642, A179

    2020

  44. [52]

    2008, , 390, 567

    Morin , J., Donati , J.-F., Petit , P., et al. 2008, , 390, 567

    2008

  45. [53]

    2020, , 643, A25

    Palle , E., Oshagh , M., Casasayas-Barris , N., et al. 2020, , 643, A25

    2020

  46. [54]

    2020, , 582, 497

    Plavchan , P., Barclay , T., Gagn \'e , J., et al. 2020, , 582, 497

    2020

  47. [55]

    A., Reece , S., & Roberts , S

    Rajpaul , V., Aigrain , S., Osborne , M. A., Reece , S., & Roberts , S. 2015, , 452, 2269

    2015

  48. [56]

    J., et al

    Reiners , A., Shulyak , D., K \"a pyl \"a , P. J., et al. 2022, , 662, A41

    2022

  49. [57]

    E., Newton , E

    Rockcliffe , K. E., Newton , E. R., Youngblood , A., et al. 2023, , 166, 77

    2023

  50. [58]

    L., et al

    Ryabchikova , T., Piskunov , N., Kurucz , R. L., et al. 2015, , 90, 054005

    2015

  51. [59]

    & Bryan , R

    Skilling , J. & Bryan , R. K. 1984, , 211, 111

    1984

  52. [60]

    M., Garai , Z., Brandeker , A., et al

    Szab \'o , G. M., Garai , Z., Brandeker , A., et al. 2022, , 659, L7

    2022

  53. [61]

    M., Plavchan , P

    Wittrock , J. M., Plavchan , P. P., Cale , B. L., et al. 2023, , 166, 232

    2023

  54. [62]

    2025, , 536, 2046

    Yu , H., Garai , Z., Cretignier , M., et al. 2025, , 536, 2046

    2025

  55. [63]

    B., Sasselov , D

    Zeng , L., Jacobsen , S. B., Sasselov , D. D., et al. 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 116, 9723

    2019

  56. [64]

    2022, , 512, 3060

    Zicher , N., Barrag \'a n , O., Klein , B., et al. 2022, , 512, 3060

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.