Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 135 references

NGTS-33b: A Young Super-Jupiter Hosted by a Fast Rotating Massive Hot Star

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read NGTS-33b is a young, low-density super-Jupiter orbiting a hot, fast-spinning star.

desk verdict A solid new hot-Jupiter discovery undercut by a unit error that turns the headline low-density claim upside down. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.08960 v1 pith:X62N7LI7 submitted 2024-11-13 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.SR

Douglas R. Alves , James S. Jenkins , Jose I. Vines , Matthew P. Battley , Monika Lendl , François Bouchy , Louise D. Nielsen , Samuel Gill
show 17 more authors
Maximiliano Moyano D. R. Anderson Matthew R. Burleigh Sarah L. Casewell Michael R. Goad Faith Hawthorn Alicia Kendall James McCormac Ares Osborn Alexis M. S. Smith Stephane Udry Peter J. Wheatley Suman Saha Lena Parc Arianna Nigioni Ioannis Apergis Gavin Ramsay
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EPastro-ph.SR
keywords exoplanetshotJupiterssuper-JupiterstransitingplanetsstellarrotationgyrochronologyplanetradiusinflationNGTS
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

The paper reports the discovery and characterization of NGTS-33b, a transiting super-Jupiter with mass $3.6\pm0.3\,M_{\rm jup}$, radius $1.64\pm0.07\,R_{\rm jup}$, and a 2.83-day orbit around an A9V star that spins once every 0.6654 days. The authors aim to establish that the host is very young, 10-50 Myr, based on gyrochronology and a 71% membership likelihood in the Vela OB2 association, and that the planet's low bulk density of $0.19\pm0.03$ g cm$^{-3}$ is about 13% below similar hot Jupiters, implying an inflated radius of up to 15% that cannot be explained by youth alone. A sympathetic reader would care because young massive hot Jupiters around hot, fast-rotating stars are scarce, and this system can test how giant planets form and migrate before their birth discs dissipate. The paper also argues that the planet's emission spectroscopy metric puts it near JWST community targets, making it a promising target for atmospheric follow-up.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by the measured bulk density contrast combined with age-dating methods. Transit photometry from NGTS and TESS fixes the radius, radial velocities from FEROS, HARPS, and CORALIE fix the mass, and the resulting density, $0.19\pm0.03$ g cm$^{-3}$, is compared against the TEPCat population of transiting hot Jupiters and against Fortney et al. (2007) planet structure models evaluated at the system's age. The age itself is anchored by two independent clocks: gyrochronology models by Barnes (2007) and Mamajek & Hillenbrand (2008) give 17-41 Myr from the measured rotation period, and a 71% membership likelihood in the Vela OB2 association (Cantat-Gaudin et al. 2019) gives a 20-35 Myr cluster age; the adopted 10-50 Myr range combines these with the requirement that the planet's structure can still produce a large radius.

What would settle it

A high-confidence measurement that NGTS-33 is not a Vela OB2 member, or an asteroseismic or lithium-based age above roughly 100 Myr, would bring the planet's radius close to standard evolutionary-model predictions and remove the need for a 13-15% inflation; a JWST secondary-eclipse observation could then test whether irradiation alone accounts for the size.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the central discovery is a single transiting planet system: NGTS-33b is a confirmed super-Jupiter with mass $3.63\pm0.27\,M_{\rm jup}$, radius $1.64\pm0.07\,R_{\rm jup}$, and orbital period $2.827972\pm0.000001$ days around a $7437\pm72$ K A9V star of mass $1.60\pm0.11\,M_\odot$ and radius $1.47\pm0.06\,R_\odot$. The host rotates in $0.6654\pm0.0006$ days, and its derived age of 10-50 Myr makes it one of the youngest known hosts of a transiting hot Jupiter. The planet's unusually low bulk density, $0.19\pm0.03$ g cm$^{-3}$, is about 13% below the median for similar-mass transiting hot Jupiters and about 22% below the median for hot-star hosts, and Fortney et al. (2007) structure models place its radius 11-15% above the predicted value, so the paper concludes that the radius is inflated by roughly 13% from a combination of extreme youth and stellar irradiation.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's youth claim (10-50 Myr) rests mainly on a 71% chance that the star belongs to the Vela OB2 association; if that membership is wrong, the association age no longer anchors the system and the inferred radius inflation depends entirely on gyrochronology.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • NGTS-33b becomes one of the most massive transiting hot Jupiters known around a hot star, joining the peak of the mass distribution among the roughly 11 systems with host $T_{\rm eff}\ge6900$ K.
  • If the radius inflation is real, the planet is a direct example of a young giant that has not yet contracted to its equilibrium radius, testing how quickly hot Jupiters cool and shrink.
  • The system adds a data point to the sparse population of planets younger than 100 Myr, potentially constraining formation and migration timescales of massive giants.
  • The expected Rossiter-McLaughlin amplitude of about 660 m/s makes NGTS-33b a strong target for measuring spin-orbit obliquity, which can distinguish migration channels.
  • The emission spectroscopy metric near the JWST community-target range makes it a plausible target for day-side atmosphere observations.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the 71% membership likelihood proves wrong and the star is older than roughly 100 Myr, the radius would fall closer to standard model predictions and the 'young inflated' interpretation would collapse; the gyrochronology ages would then be the only youth anchor.
  • The 0.8-day photometric signal seen in some TESS sectors could indicate latitude-dependent spot rotation rather than a single equatorial period, and resolving that degeneracy would tighten or change the gyro-age.
  • The paper's empirical split of hot Jupiters into three equilibrium-temperature populations with density jumps near 1400 K and 2300 K could be tested on a larger sample and used as a radius predictor for non-transiting hot Jupiters, though the analysis is described as beyond the paper's scope.
  • A direct measurement of the planet's day-side emission with JWST would test whether irradiation alone inflates the radius or whether the planet is simply young; the predicted signal size of about 53 ppm per scale height gives a concrete number to look for.
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. The paper reports the discovery and characterization of NGTS-33b (TOI-6442b), a transiting super-Jupiter with orbital period 2.827972 days around a fast-rotating, hot A9V star. The analysis combines NGTS and TESS photometry with FEROS, HARPS, and CORALIE radial velocities in a joint global fit, and derives stellar parameters from SED fitting with ARIADNE. The authors argue that NGTS-33 is a young (10-50 Myr) star, possibly a member of Vela OB2, and that the planet has an unusually low bulk density (0.19 +/- 0.03 g cm^-3), implying significant radius inflation beyond model predictions. They also discuss the planet's potential for atmospheric follow-up with JWST and for obliquity measurements via the Rossiter-McLaughlin effect.

Significance. If correct, the paper would add a valuable data point to the sparse population of massive hot Jupiters around hot, rapidly rotating stars, and would strengthen evidence for young, inflated giant planets. The manuscript is careful in several respects: it uses multiple independent RV instruments, performs vetting against blends and activity, checks transit timing variations, and tests dynamical stability. The use of public tools (ARIADNE, EMPEROR, REBOUND) and the provision of data in supplementary material are positive features. However, the central density-based interpretation contains a substantial internal numerical inconsistency, and the age determination rests on a weak membership likelihood; these issues affect the main scientific claims and require correction before the paper can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Table 5; Abstract; Section 4.1] The quoted bulk density rho_p = 0.19 +/- 0.03 g cm^-3 is internally inconsistent with the adopted mass and radius. Using the Table 5 values M_p = 3.63 +/- 0.27 M_J and R_p = 1.64 +/- 0.07 R_J, the density is rho_p = (M_p/M_J) * (R_p/R_J)^-3 * 1.326 g cm^-3 = 1.09 +/- 0.09 g cm^-3, a factor of about 5.7 larger than reported. The quoted 0.19 g cm^-3 would correspond to M_p ~ 0.63 M_J at the same radius. This error propagates directly into the abstract's claim that the density is 13% smaller than expected, into the comparison with the TEPCat medians in Section 4.1 (1.48 g cm^-3 for M_p between 2 and 5 M_J, and 0.88 g cm^-3 for hosts with T_eff >= 6900 K), and into the placement of NGTS-33b in Figs 11 and 14. With the corrected density, the planet is not among the lowest-density hot Jupiters, and the statement that it is ~22% less dense than hot-star-hosted THJs is also arithmetically wrong even using the reported value (0.19/0.88 is about 22% of the median, i.e. ~78% less, not ~22% less). All conclusions that rely on the low-density value, including the 'lowest in density' claim and the emphasis on JWST emission spectroscopy, must be recomputed with the correct density.
  2. [Sections 3.2.1 and 4.2] The adopted age range of 10-50 Myr is not firmly anchored. The membership evidence is a 71% likelihood of belonging to Vela OB2 (Cantat-Gaudin et al. 2019), which is not a strong membership determination. The gyrochronology ages are 17-41 Myr for the adopted Prot = 0.6654 d, but would be 24-58 Myr if the 0.8-day photometric signal is the true rotation period, as the paper itself notes in Section 3.1. The ARIADNE isochrone age is 0.14 +/- 0.12 Gyr, which overlaps the upper end but is not tightly constraining. The lower limit of ~10 Myr is justified partly by the absence of infrared excess and partly by the planet-structure comparison in Section 4.2; this is circular to a degree, because the same models are used both to set the age floor and to infer the radius inflation. Since the claimed 11-15% inflation is explicitly age-dependent (the text states that at ~10 Myr the planet would be inflation-free), the central 'young inflated super-Jupiter' narrative is contingent on this weakly constrained age. Please provide a sensitivity analysis of the inflation fraction and of the 'youngest hosts' claim across the full allowed age range and for both possible rotation periods.
  3. [Section 3.3] The treatment of the two discrepant CORALIE RVs deserves more scrutiny. The text states that these points disagree significantly with the model but were kept after finding no activity indicators. Since the RV amplitude K directly sets the planet mass and hence the corrected density, the influence of these two points on K and on the mass uncertainty should be quantified, for example by re-fitting with those points removed or with a robust likelihood. If the mass changes appreciably, the density-based conclusions would be further affected.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.3] The text says the GLS periodogram shows 'a highest peak at the planet period 1.83 days', but the orbital period is 2.827972 days; this appears to be a typo or an alias mislabeled.
  2. [Figure 2 caption] The caption says 'Sectors 34 and 35 at 5-minute cadences', but Section 2.2 lists TESS Sectors 33 and 34 at 5-minute cadence and Sector 61 at 3.33-minute cadence; the caption and text should be reconciled.
  3. [Equation (1)] The denominator of the Pearson correlation coefficient is written with a sum over (x - x_i)^2; the second factor should be sum over (x_i - xbar)^2 as in the first factor. Please correct the notation.
  4. [Table A1] The hyperparameters for the normal priors are written as '7434, 1002' and '438, 102'; presumably these mean 100^2 and 10^2, but the notation should be clarified.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation is present; the central claims are fits to independent data and external models, though a separate internal density arithmetic error affects the inflation narrative.

full rationale

The claimed derivation chain is self-contained: stellar parameters come from ARIADNE SED fits to archival photometry; planetary parameters come from EMPEROR joint fits to NGTS/TESS photometry and FEROS/HARPS/CORALIE RVs; the age is anchored to gyrochronology (Barnes 2007; Mamajek & Hillenbrand 2008), Vela OB2 membership (Cantat-Gaudin et al. 2019), and disk-dispersal timescales, not to the planet radius. The radius-inflation comparison uses Fortney et al. (2007) structure models at the adopted age, and the empirical mass-density relation explicitly excludes NGTS-33b, so the '13% smaller' comparison is not self-referential. Self-citations to ARIADNE and EMPEROR are public codes used as analysis tools; their outputs are fits to external data, not an imported conclusion, so they do not create a circular chain. Separately, but not as circularity: Table 5's 0.19 ± 0.03 g cm−3 is arithmetically inconsistent with Mp = 3.63 MJ and Rp = 1.64 RJ, which give about 1.02 g cm−3; this internal numerical error (not a reduction of a prediction to an input) undermines the reported density comparison and should be corrected before the inflation percentages are relied upon.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on a chain of adopted model assumptions: the identification of the 0.67-day period as rotation, the gyrochronology calibration, the probabilistic cluster membership, and the Fortney et al. (2007) structure models. These are standard in the field but are assumptions the reader does not pay for upstream. The planet parameters themselves are fitted to data, which is the expected mode for a discovery paper.

free parameters (7)
  • Stellar rotation period Prot = 0.6654 +- 0.0006 d
    Fitted from TESS and NGTS light curves; used for gyrochronology age and vsini estimate. An alternative 0.8 d signal is present but not adopted.
  • Stellar effective temperature Teff = 7437 +- 72 K
    SED fit result; used for age estimates and equilibrium temperature.
  • Stellar radius Rs = 1.47 +- 0.06 Rsun
    Derived from SED fitting with ARIADNE; used to convert transit depth to planet radius.
  • Planet mass Mp = 3.63 +- 0.27 MJ
    Fitted to RV data from FEROS, HARPS, and CORALIE; central to the density comparison.
  • Planet radius Rp = 1.64 +- 0.07 RJ
    Fitted to transit light curves; central to the density comparison.
  • Orbital eccentricity e = 0 (fixed)
    Fixed to zero in the adopted solution; not fitted, so the mass is a minimum in that sense, though standard for short-period hot Jupiters.
  • Dilution factor = 0 (assumed)
    No dilution correction applied to TESS photometry; authors argue NGTS and TESS depths agree, but an 8.75% upper limit is noted if the contaminant were in the same pixel.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption The transiting signal is a genuine planet rather than a background eclipsing binary.
    Vetting tests included odd/even and V-shape checks, and the RV signal is consistent with a planetary mass. Section 2.1.
  • domain assumption The 0.67-day photometric periodicity is stellar rotation, not pulsation.
    Spot-crossing events in TESS data and absence of the period in a nearby star support rotation. Section 3.1.
  • domain assumption The 1.39-day RV signal is stellar activity, not a planet.
    A test particle at that period is dynamically unstable in REBOUND simulations, and no TTV is seen. Sections 3.3-3.5.
  • domain assumption The gyrochronology relations of Barnes (2007) and Mamajek and Hillenbrand (2008) apply to this star.
    Used to derive ages of 17-41 Myr from the adopted rotation period. Section 3.2.1.
  • domain assumption NGTS-33 is a member of Vela OB2 with age 20-35 Myr.
    Based on a 71% membership likelihood from Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2019); a probabilistic, not definitive, identification. Section 3.2.1.
  • domain assumption Fortney et al. (2007) planet structure models are valid for inferring the expected radius at 10-50 Myr.
    Used to estimate that the planet radius is 11-15% above model expectations. Section 4.2.
  • standard math Standard Bayesian inference and Gaussian process modeling are appropriate for the noise.
    Used throughout the global modeling with EMPEROR. Section 3.3.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of NGTS-33b: A Young Super-Jupiter Hosted by a Fast Rotating Massive Hot Star." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/X62N7LI7

@misc{pith2026241108960,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: NGTS-33b: A Young Super-Jupiter Hosted by a Fast Rotating Massive Hot Star},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/X62N7LI7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.08960}
}
abstract

In the last few decades planet search surveys have been focusing on solar type stars, and only recently the high-mass regimes. This is mostly due to challenges arising from the lack of instrumental precision, and more importantly, the inherent active nature of fast rotating massive stars. Here we report NGTS-33b (TOI-6442b), a super-Jupiter planet with mass, radius and orbital period of 3.6 $\pm$ 0.3 M$_{\rm jup}$, 1.64 $\pm$ 0.07 R$_{\rm jup}$ and $2.827972 \pm 0.000001$ days, respectively. The host is a fast rotating ($0.6654 \pm 0.0006$ day) and hot (T$_{\rm eff}$ = 7437 $\pm$ 72 K) A9V type star, with a mass and radius of 1.60 $\pm$ 0.11 M$_{\odot}$ and 1.47 $\pm$ 0.06 R$_{\odot}$, respectively. Planet structure and Gyrochronology models shows that NGTS-33 is also very young with age limits of 10-50 Myr. In addition, membership analysis points towards the star being part of the Vela OB2 association, which has an age of $\sim$ 20-35 Myr, thus providing further evidences about the young nature of NGTS-33. Its low bulk density of 0.19$\pm$0.03 g cm$^{-3}$ is 13$\%$ smaller than expected when compared to transiting hot Jupiters with similar masses. Such cannot be solely explained by its age, where an up to 15$\%$ inflated atmosphere is expected from planet structure models. Finally, we found that its emission spectroscopy metric is similar to JWST community targets, making the planet an interesting target for atmospheric follow-up. Therefore, NGTS-33b's discovery will not only add to the scarce population of young, massive and hot Jupiters, but will also help place further strong constraints on current formation and evolution models for such planetary systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.08960 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Top: NGTS detrended lightcurve phase-folded to the best-fitting period listed in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Left: Phase-folded, 30-minute detrended lightcurve from TESS-SPOC, Sector 07. Center: The same as the left plot but for Sectors 34 and 35 at 5-minute cadences. Right: Phase-folded, 3.33-minute detrended light curve from QLP, Sector 61. Colours and labels correspond to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Top: RV phase-folded to the best-fitting period listed in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Periodogram of the line Bisectors (top panel) and CCF-FWHM (bottom panel) for FEROS (in black), HARPS (in gray) and CORALIE (in yellow). The false alarm probability level at the highest peak are shown as horizontal black, gray and yellow lines for FEROS, HARPS, and COR…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Top: The left panel shows the SPOC-TESS LS periodogram in black and ACF in gray, with the bottom and left axes representing the LS periodogram, while the top and left axes are for the ACF model. The vertical blue and green bars corresponding to the optimal periods from…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Top: The best-fitting spectral energy distribution model (black line) based on BT-Settl models given the NGTS-33 photometric data (cyan points) and their respective bandwidths shown as horizontal errorbars. Pur￾ple diamonds represent the synthetic magnitudes centred at…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: TESS Sector 7 Full-Frame Image cutout (11 x 11 pixels) generated with the tpfplotter script described in Aller et al. (2020). NGTS-33b is shown in the centre labeled number 1, followed by UCAC4 271-014742 (number 2), a V = 13.9 mag, and 32" away from the planet. Our an…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: NGTS-33 transit timing variation for the TESS mission (top panel; black open circles) and NGTS mission (bottom panel). The abscissa was zoomed for better visualisation and avoid the large gaps in the time domain. In the top panel, each portion represents a TESS sector …
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: THJ bulk densities as a function of their masses, colour coded by equilibrium temperature. NGTS-33b is represented by the large red star near the image centre towards the bottom right, while the typical uncertainties are shown as a black cross in the bottom left. Blac…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Top: Cumulative distribution functions for the sample of tran￾siting HJs shown as a black solid curve. The green vertical bar highlights NGTS-33b’s mass. The bottom-right plot shows a slice of the cumulative distribution (in gray) containing HJs whose host effective t…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Planet structure models by Fortney et al. (2007). Colour lines rep￾resent the same assumed planet core mass, while the lines shapes describes a HJ evolved to a given epoch shown on the right. For instance, the solid lines on the top represent a HJ at 1 Myr, where blue…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Top: Transmission and emission spectroscopy metrics as a func￾tion of planetary density for the transiting HJ sample are shown in black circles, whereas JWST community targets by (Stevenson et al. 2016) are marked by blue circles. NGTS-33b is represented by the big re…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

135 extracted references · 61 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Agol E., Steffen J., Sari R., Clarkson W., 2005, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 359, 567

    2005

  2. [2]

    H., Dawson R

    Albrecht S. H., Dawson R. I., Winn J. N., 2022, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 134, 082001

    2022

  3. [3]

    Alibert Y., Mordasini C., Benz W., Winisdoerffer C., 2005, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 434, 343

    2005

  4. [4]

    Allard F., Homeier D., Freytag B., 2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 370, 2765

    2012

  5. [5]

    F., Forteza S

    Aller A., Lillo-Box J., Jones D., Miranda L. F., Forteza S. B., 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 635, A128

    2020

  6. [6]

    M., et al., 2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 615, A90

    Almenara J. M., et al., 2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 615, A90

    2018

  7. [7]

    R., et al., 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 517, 4447

    Alves D. R., et al., 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 517, 4447

    2022

  8. [8]

    Auvergne M., et al., 2009, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 506, 411

    2009

Show all 135 references
  1. [9]

    D., Domsa I., 2004, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 116, 266

    Bakos G., Noyes R., Kov \'a cs G., Stanek K., Sasselov D. D., Domsa I., 2004, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 116, 266

    2004

  2. [10]

    Bakos G., et al., 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 710, 1724

    2010

  3. [11]

    Barbato D., et al., 2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 621, A110

    2019

  4. [12]

    A., 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 669, 1167

    Barnes S. A., 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 669, 1167

    2007

  5. [13]

    Barros S., et al., 2014, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 561, L1

    2014

  6. [14]

    Battley M., et al., 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.02974

    2024 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Bayliss D., et al., 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 475, 4467

    2018

  8. [16]

    pp 441--455

    Bayliss D., et al., 2022, in X-Ray, Optical, and Infrared Detectors for Astronomy X. pp 441--455

    2022

  9. [17]

    C., Vanderburg A., Adams F

    Becker J. C., Vanderburg A., Adams F. C., Rappaport S. A., Schwengeler H. M., 2015, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 812, L18

    2015

  10. [18]

    J., et al., 2010, Science, 327, 977

    Borucki W. J., et al., 2010, Science, 327, 977

    2010

  11. [19]

    Bouchy F., et al., 2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 684, A201

    2024

  12. [20]

    Bouma L., Hartman J., Bhatti W., Winn J., Bakos G., 2019, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 245, 13

    2019

  13. [21]

    Brahm R., Jord \'a n A., Espinoza N., 2017, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 129, 034002

    2017

  14. [22]

    G., et al., 2021, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 649, A1

    Brown A. G., et al., 2021, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 649, A1

    2021

  15. [23]

    M., et al., 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 499, 3139

    Bryant E. M., et al., 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 499, 3139

    2020

  16. [24]

    A., Bitsch B., Johansen A., Latham D

    Buchhave L. A., Bitsch B., Johansen A., Latham D. W., Bizzarro M., Bieryla A., Kipping D. M., 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 856, 37

    2018

  17. [25]

    A., et al., 2020, Research Notes of the AAS, 4, 201

    Caldwell D. A., et al., 2020, Research Notes of the AAS, 4, 201

    2020

  18. [26]

    C., et al., 2010, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 407, 507

    Cameron A. C., et al., 2010, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 407, 507

    2010

  19. [27]

    Cantat-Gaudin T., et al., 2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 626, A17

    2019

  20. [28]

    L., 2004, arXiv preprint astro-ph/0405087

    Castelli F., Kurucz R. L., 2004, arXiv preprint astro-ph/0405087

    2004 arXiv

  21. [29]

    M., Latham D

    Charbonneau D., Brown T. M., Latham D. W., Mayor M., 2000, The Astrophysical Journal, 529, L45

    2000

  22. [30]

    Chazelas B., et al., 2012, in Ground-based and Airborne Telescopes IV. p. 84440E, @doi 10.1117/12.925755

    2012 doi

  23. [31]

    S., 2018, arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.03125

    Christensen-Dalsgaard J., Aguirre V. S., 2018, arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.03125

    2018 arXiv

  24. [32]

    D., et al., 2011, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 197, 7

    Cochran W. D., et al., 2011, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 197, 7

    2011

  25. [33]

    Collier Cameron A., et al., 2006, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 373, 799

    2006

  26. [34]

    J., Lust N

    Cubillos P., Harrington J., Loredo T. J., Lust N. B., Blecic J., Stemm M., 2016, The Astronomical Journal, 153, 3

    2016

  27. [35]

    Demory B.-O., Seager S., 2011a, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/197/1/12 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJS..197...12D 197, 12

    doi

  28. [36]

    Demory B.-O., Seager S., 2011b, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 197, 12

  29. [37]

    L., et al., 2010, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 514, A72

    Des Etangs A. L., et al., 2010, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 514, A72

    2010

  30. [38]

    Dong J., Foreman-Mackey D., 2023, The Astronomical Journal, 166, 112

    2023

  31. [39]

    J., King G

    Fern \'a ndez Fern \'a ndez J., Wheatley P. J., King G. W., Jenkins J. S., 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 527, 911

    2024

  32. [40]

    A., Valenti J., 2005, The Astrophysical Journal, 622, 1102

    Fischer D. A., Valenti J., 2005, The Astrophysical Journal, 622, 1102

    2005

  33. [41]

    W., Lang D., Goodman J., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1086/670067 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013PASP..125..306F 125, 306

    Foreman-Mackey D., Hogg D. W., Lang D., Goodman J., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1086/670067 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013PASP..125..306F 125, 306

    2013 doi

  34. [42]

    J., Marley M

    Fortney J. J., Marley M. S., Barnes J. W., 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 659, 1661

    2007

  35. [43]

    J., Dawson R

    Fortney J. J., Dawson R. I., Komacek T. D., 2021, Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets, 126, e2020JE006629

    2021

  36. [44]

    S., Winn J

    Gaudi B. S., Winn J. N., 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 655, 550

    2007

  37. [45]

    Gill S., et al., 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.07367

    2024 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Gillen E., et al., 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 492, 1008

    2020

  39. [47]

    Gillon M., et al., 2017, Nature, 542, 456

    2017

  40. [48]

    Gonzalez G., 1997, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 285, 403

    1997

  41. [49]

    D., et al., 2016, The Astronomical Journal, 152, 182

    Hartman J. D., et al., 2016, The Astronomical Journal, 152, 182

    2016

  42. [50]

    H., Allard F., Baron E., 1999, The Astrophysical Journal, 512, 377

    Hauschildt P. H., Allard F., Baron E., 1999, The Astrophysical Journal, 512, 377

    1999

  43. [51]

    A., Levine S., Terrell D., Welch D

    Henden A. A., Levine S., Terrell D., Welch D. L., 2015, in American astronomical society meeting abstracts\# 225. pp 336--16

    2015

  44. [52]

    L., et al., 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 856, 125

    Hidalgo S. L., et al., 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 856, 125

    2018

  45. [53]

    A., 2005, arXiv preprint astro-ph/0511083

    Hillenbrand L. A., 2005, arXiv preprint astro-ph/0511083

    2005 arXiv

  46. [54]

    N., Narita N., Takahashi Y

    Hirano T., Sanchis-Ojeda R., Takeda Y., Winn J. N., Narita N., Takahashi Y. H., 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 783, 9

    2014

  47. [55]

    Holczer T., et al., 2016, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 225, 9

    2016

  48. [56]

    Hoyer S., et al., 2023, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 675, A81

    2023

  49. [57]

    C., Ford E

    Hsu D. C., Ford E. B., Ragozzine D., Ashby K., 2019, The Astronomical Journal, 158, 109

    2019

  50. [58]

    H., 2013, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 553, A6

    Husser T.-O., Wende-von Berg S., Dreizler S., Homeier D., Reiners A., Barman T., Hauschildt P. H., 2013, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 553, A6

    2013

  51. [59]

    Jenkins J., et al., 2009, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 398, 911

    2009

  52. [60]

    M., et al., 2016, in Software and Cyberinfrastructure for Astronomy IV

    Jenkins J. M., et al., 2016, in Software and Cyberinfrastructure for Astronomy IV. pp 1232--1251

    2016

  53. [61]

    S., et al., 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 466, 443

    Jenkins J. S., et al., 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 466, 443

    2017

  54. [62]

    S., et al., 2020, Nature Astronomy, 4, 1148

    Jenkins J. S., et al., 2020, Nature Astronomy, 4, 1148

    2020

  55. [63]

    A., Aller K

    Johnson J. A., Aller K. M., Howard A. W., Crepp J. R., 2010, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 122, 905

    2010

  56. [64]

    Jones M., et al., 2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 590, A38

    2016

  57. [65]

    KURUCZ R.-L., 1993, Kurucz CD-Rom, 13

    1993

  58. [66]

    Kaufer A., Stahl O., Tubbesing S., N rregaard P., Avila G., Francois P., Pasquini L., Pizzella A., 1999, The Messenger, vol. 95, p. 8-12, 95, 8

    1999

  59. [67]

    M.-R., et al., 2018, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 130, 114401

    Kempton E. M.-R., et al., 2018, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 130, 114401

    2018

  60. [68]

    Kov \'a cs G., Zucker S., Mazeh T., 2002, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 391, 369

    2002

  61. [69]

    Kreidberg L., 2015, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 127, 1161

    2015

  62. [70]

    T., Gillen E., Briegal J

    Kreutzer L. T., Gillen E., Briegal J. T., Queloz D., 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 522, 5049

    2023

  63. [71]

    Kunimoto M., et al., 2021, Research Notes of the AAS, 5, 234

    2021

  64. [72]

    Lightkurve Collaboration et al., 2018, Lightkurve: Kepler and TESS time series analysis in Python , Astrophysics Source Code Library ( @eprint ascl 1812.013 )

    2018

  65. [73]

    Lithwick Y., Xie J., Wu Y., 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 761, 122

    2012

  66. [74]

    D., Fortney J

    Lopez E. D., Fortney J. J., 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 776, 2

    2013

  67. [75]

    Lovis C., Pepe F., 2007, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 468, 1115

    2007

  68. [76]

    E., Hillenbrand L

    Mamajek E. E., Hillenbrand L. A., 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 687, 1264

    2008

  69. [77]

    Mayor M., Queloz D., 1995, nature, 378, 355

    1995

  70. [78]

    Mayor M., et al., 2003, The Messenger, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003Msngr.114...20M 114, 20

    2003

  71. [79]

    McCormac J., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1088/1538-3873/129/972/025002 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017PASP..129b5002M 129, 025002

    2017 doi

  72. [80]

    McCormac J., et al., 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 493, 126

    2020

  73. [81]

    McQuillan A., Mazeh T., Aigrain S., 2014, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 211, 24

    2014

  74. [82]

    J., 2011, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 736, L29

    Miller N., Fortney J. J., 2011, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 736, L29

    2011

  75. [83]

    D., 2015, Astrophysics Source Code Library, pp ascl--1503

    Morton T. D., 2015, Astrophysics Source Code Library, pp ascl--1503

    2015

  76. [84]

    D., Pascucci I., Apai D., 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 798, 112

    Mulders G. D., Pascucci I., Apai D., 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 798, 112

    2015

  77. [85]

    Osborn A., Bayliss D., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz3207 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.491.4481O 491, 4481

    2020 doi

  78. [86]

    E., Wu Y., 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 847, 29

    Owen J. E., Wu Y., 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 847, 29

    2017

  79. [87]

    M., et al., 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 509, 6111

    O’Brien S. M., et al., 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 509, 6111

    2022

  80. [88]

    Pepe F., Mayor M., Galland F., Naef D., Queloz D., Santos N., Udry S., Burnet M., 2002, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 388, 632

    2002

  81. [89]

    A., Youdin A

    Piso A.-M. A., Youdin A. N., 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 786, 21

    2014

  82. [90]

    L., et al., 2006, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 118, 1407

    Pollacco D. L., et al., 2006, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 118, 1407

    2006

  83. [91]

    B., Hubickyj O., Bodenheimer P., Lissauer J

    Pollack J. B., Hubickyj O., Bodenheimer P., Lissauer J. J., Podolak M., Greenzweig Y., 1996, icarus, 124, 62

    1996

  84. [92]

    Queloz D., et al., 2000, Astronomy and Astrophysics, v. 354, p. 99-102 (2000), 354, 99

    2000

  85. [93]

    Reffert S., Bergmann C., Quirrenbach A., Trifonov T., K \"u nstler A., 2015, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 574, A116

    2015

  86. [94]

    F., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201118085 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A&A...537A.128R 537, A128

    Rein H., Liu S. F., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201118085 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A&A...537A.128R 537, A128

    2012 doi

  87. [95]

    R., et al., 2015, @doi [Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems] 10.1117/1.JATIS.1.1.014003 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015JATIS...1a4003R 1, 014003

    Ricker G. R., et al., 2015, @doi [Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems] 10.1117/1.JATIS.1.1.014003 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015JATIS...1a4003R 1, 014003

    2015 doi

  88. [96]

    Santerne A., et al., 2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 587, A64

    2016

  89. [97]

    Santos N., Israelian G., Mayor M., 2001, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 373, 1019

    2001

  90. [98]

    D., 2000, The Astrophysical Journal, 537, 916

    Seager S., Sasselov D. D., 2000, The Astrophysical Journal, 537, 916

    2000

  91. [99]

    F., et al., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/498708 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006AJ....131.1163S 131, 1163

    Skrutskie M. F., et al., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/498708 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006AJ....131.1163S 131, 1163

    2006 doi

  92. [100]

    Smith A., et al., 2021, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 646, A183

    2021

  93. [101]

    D., et al., 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 523, 169

    Smith G. D., et al., 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 523, 169

    2023

  94. [102]

    Snellen I., et al., 2009, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 497, 545

    2009

  95. [103]

    S., 2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 615, A76

    Soto M., Jenkins J. S., 2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 615, A76

    2018

  96. [104]

    Southworth J., 2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 417, 2166

    2011

  97. [105]

    S., 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 493, 3132

    Speagle J. S., 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 493, 3132

    2020

  98. [106]

    G., et al., 2018, The Astronomical Journal, 156, 102

    Stassun K. G., et al., 2018, The Astronomical Journal, 156, 102

    2018

  99. [107]

    H., et al., 2012a, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109, 7982

    Steffen J. H., et al., 2012a, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109, 7982

  100. [108]

    H., et al., 2012b, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 421, 2342

    Steffen J. H., et al., 2012b, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 421, 2342

  101. [109]

    B., et al., 2016, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 128, 094401

    Stevenson K. B., et al., 2016, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 128, 094401

    2016

  102. [110]

    Talens G., et al., 2017, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 606, A73

    2017

  103. [111]

    Tamuz O., Mazeh T., Zucker S., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08585.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005MNRAS.356.1466T 356, 1466

    2005

  104. [112]

    P., Fortney J

    Thorngren D. P., Fortney J. J., 2018, The Astronomical Journal, 155, 214

    2018

  105. [113]

    H., et al., 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 504, 6018

    Tilbrook R. H., et al., 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 504, 6018

    2021

  106. [114]

    H., et al., 2009, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 506, 377

    Triaud A. H., et al., 2009, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 506, 377

    2009

  107. [115]

    A., Fischer D

    Valenti J. A., Fischer D. A., 2005, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 159, 141

    2005

  108. [116]

    T., 2018, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 236, 16

    VanderPlas J. T., 2018, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 236, 16

    2018

  109. [117]

    Vick M., Su Y., Lai D., 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 943, L13

    2023

  110. [118]

    L., D \'e sert J.-M., Ballester G., Ferlet R., H \'e brard G., Mayor M., 2003, Nature, 422, 143

    Vidal-Madjar A., Des Etangs A. L., D \'e sert J.-M., Ballester G., Ferlet R., H \'e brard G., Mayor M., 2003, Nature, 422, 143

    2003

  111. [119]

    I., Jenkins J

    Vines J. I., Jenkins J. S., 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 513, 2719

    2022

  112. [120]

    I., et al., 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 489, 4125

    Vines J. I., et al., 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 489, 4125

    2019

  113. [121]

    I., et al., 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 518, 2627

    Vines J. I., et al., 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 518, 2627

    2023

  114. [122]

    Watanabe N., et al., 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 512, 4404

    2022

  115. [123]

    G., et al., 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 486, 5094

    West R. G., et al., 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 486, 5094

    2019

  116. [124]

    J., et al., 2013, in European Physical Journal Web of Conferences

    Wheatley P. J., et al., 2013, in European Physical Journal Web of Conferences. p. 13002 ( @eprint arXiv 1302.6592 ), @doi 10.1051/epjconf/20134713002

    2013 arXiv

  117. [125]

    J., et al., 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 475, 4476

    Wheatley P. J., et al., 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 475, 4476

    2018

  118. [126]

    N., et al., 2011, The Astronomical Journal, 141, 63

    Winn J. N., et al., 2011, The Astronomical Journal, 141, 63

    2011

  119. [127]

    A., Winn J

    Wong I., Shporer A., Vissapragada S., Greklek-McKeon M., Knutson H. A., Winn J. N., Benneke B., 2022, The Astronomical Journal, 163, 175

    2022

  120. [128]

    L., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W 140, 1868

    Wright E. L., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W 140, 1868

    2010 doi

  121. [129]

    Wyttenbach A., et al., 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 638, A87

    2020

  122. [130]

    Zari E., Hashemi H., Brown A. G. A., Jardine K., de Zeeuw P. T., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834150 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...620A.172Z 620, A172

    2018 doi

  123. [131]

    Zhou G., et al., 2019, The Astronomical Journal, 158, 141

    2019

  124. [132]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...

  125. [133]

    N., 2013, Journal of Improbable Astronomy, 1, 1

    Author A. N., 2013, Journal of Improbable Astronomy, 1, 1

    2013

  126. [134]

    D., 2015, Journal of Interesting Stuff, 17, 198

    Jones C. D., 2015, Journal of Interesting Stuff, 17, 198

    2015

  127. [135]

    B., 2014, The Example Journal, 12, 345 (Paper I)

    Smith A. B., 2014, The Example Journal, 12, 345 (Paper I)

    2014

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.