How planets grow by pebble accretion II: Analytical calculations on the evolution of polluted envelopes

C.W. Ormel; M.G. Brouwers

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 115 references

How planets grow by pebble accretion II: Analytical calculations on the evolution of polluted envelopes

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Critical metal mass, not core mass, triggers runaway gas accretion

desk verdict A clean analytical framework for polluted-envelope runaway that is internally contradicted by its own energy calculation at the regime it targets. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.02742 v2 pith:YJNSJJPL submitted 2019-08-07 astro-ph.EP

M.G. Brouwers , C.W. Ormel This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.EP

keywords pebbleaccretionenvelopepollutioncriticalmetalmassrunawaygassuper-Earthformationsub-Neptuneenvelopesrainoutplanet

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

This paper argues that a planet growing by pebble accretion turns into a gas giant not when its core reaches a traditional critical core mass, but when the total mass of heavy elements it has collected, core plus vapor held in the envelope, exceeds a value the authors call the critical metal mass. The authors construct an analytical interior model with a hot, uniformly mixed layer of vaporized rock around the core and derive an approximate threshold, about $4.0\,M_\oplus$ for silicate pollution at nominal parameters, that scales weakly with opacity, disk distance, and solids accretion rate and more strongly with the pollutant's evaporation temperature and with the core mass. If this criterion is right, planets that form close to their star, accreting less volatile material, must swallow more solids before runaway accretion begins, while planets outside the ice line, accreting volatile ices, can become gas giants at smaller solid masses. The same model splits a polluted planet's evolution into four phases, ending with slow rainout of the vapor onto the core after the disk disperses, with no strong mass loss.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the three-zone analytical envelope: an outer isothermal radiative region, an intermediate metal-free convective region with adiabatic index $\gamma_{xy} > 4/3$, and an inner high-Z vapor layer that is assumed perfectly mixed, with mean molecular weight $\mu_g \simeq \mu_{xy}/(1-Z)$ and adiabatic index $\gamma_g < 4/3$. Because $\gamma_g$ lies below $4/3$, most of the vapor mass sits near the core, so the envelope mass is controlled by this inner layer, and runaway is approximated by the crossover $M_z = M_{xy}$; combining these pieces produces the critical metal mass formula (Eqs. 29-30). The same machinery generates the dilution-limited gas accretion scaling for embedded cooling (Eq. 43) and the rainout timescale estimate after disk dispersal (Eq. 51).

What would settle it

Compute the deep interior with a realistic equation of state for hydrogen-helium plus silicate vapor at the temperatures and pressures of a forming super-Earth and check whether the effective adiabatic index stays below 4/3 while the composition remains uniform; a mixed envelope that is dynamically unstable, or that develops a compositional gradient instead of mixing, would break the critical metal mass and dilution-limited cooling.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the classical critical core mass should be replaced, for planets with polluted envelopes, by a critical metal mass $M_{z,\mathrm{crit}}$: runaway gas accretion begins when $M_z = M_c + M_{\mathrm{vapor}}$ exceeds this threshold. For the nominal silicate case the model gives $M_{z,\mathrm{crit}} \approx 4.0\,M_\oplus\,(\kappa_{\mathrm{rcb}}/0.01\,\mathrm{g\,cm^{-2}})^{1/6}(d/\mathrm{AU})^{7/108}(T_{\mathrm{vap}}/2500\,\mathrm{K})^{8/27}(\dot{M}_z/10^{-5}\,M_\oplus\,\mathrm{yr^{-1}})^{1/6}(M_c/M_\oplus)^{1/2}$. Pollution lowers the solid mass at which runaway sets in relative to a metal-free envelope, because the heavy vapor raises the mean molecular weight and lowers the adiabatic index, pulling in nebular gas; the threshold nevertheless rises for larger cores, which dilute the pollution, and for less volatile pollutants, which produce a smaller vapor region. The same framework yields a four-phase evolutionary sequence, with direct core growth, vapor-dominated envelope growth, dilution-limited embedded cooling, and post-disk rainout as the final stage.

Load-bearing premise

The whole argument assumes that vaporized rock mixes evenly through the hot inner atmosphere and that this atmosphere remains dynamically stable during formation; if mixing is weak or the atmosphere can collapse, the critical metal mass and dilution mechanisms fail.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Runaway gas accretion is set by the total metal mass, so planets that vaporize their accreted solids can become gas giants at lower solid mass than the classical critical core mass predicts.
Planets inside the ice line, accreting silicates with high evaporation temperature, need more solids to reach runaway, biasing the inner disk toward super-Earths and sub-Neptunes and the outer disk toward gas giants.
If solids accretion stops while the disk is still present, the inflow of hydrogen-helium dilutes the heavy-element vapor and slows further contraction, giving sub-Neptune-mass planets a longer runway before runaway.
After disk dissipation, the contracting envelope eventually condenses its vapor, adding mass to the core over several Gyr, and the energy released comes too late to power significant outflow.
Planets that keep their primordial envelopes can retain part of their heavy elements outside the core after billions of years, so a diffuse heavy-element region in a giant planet need not imply core erosion.

Reading between the lines

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

If the critical metal mass holds, the observed close-in pile-up of sub-Neptunes may partly reflect a formation barrier, the extra solids needed to trigger runaway inside the ice line, rather than only later photo-evaporation sculpting the distribution.
A natural next test is a realistic equation-of-state calculation for mixed hydrogen-helium and silicate vapor in the deep interior, to check whether the effective adiabatic index really stays below $4/3$ and whether such layers are dynamically stable; the paper itself flags this as its largest uncertainty.
The model suggests a correlation between a sub-Neptune's envelope heavy-element abundance and its formation location, with more volatile-rich interiors tracing formation farther out, a prediction that could be checked against atmospheric abundances and orbital architectures.
Because the competing non-mixed picture gives the opposite gas-accretion trend, measuring how efficiently hot planetary interiors mix, through rainout outcomes or through the observable dilution of envelope metals, would decide which scenario shapes super-Earth evolution.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Read this if you care about super-Earth formation. It provides the first analytical model where the runaway criterion is a critical metal mass (core + vapor), replacing the classical critical core mass, and it identifies dilution of the mean molecular weight as a self-limiting mechanism during embedded cooling. The four-phase framework is a useful organizing picture, and the structure is transparent: they check the analytical structure against a numerical integration (Fig. 3) and against their earlier BVO18 core masses (Fig. 5, with corrected opacity). The authors also clearly flag their main assumptions.

The soft spot is not hidden, but it is more serious than they present it. In Sect. 5.2.1 they show that a uniformly mixed polluted envelope with gamma_g < 4/3 has positive total energy when Menv/Mc >~ 0.43, and they call such a configuration 'clearly non-physical.' Yet at the crossover mass that defines the critical metal mass, Menv = Mz(1+f_z) and Mc = Mz(1-f_z), so Menv/Mc >= 1 for every non-zero pollution fraction. For exactly the cases where their new criterion departs from the classical one—small cores, large f_z—the assumed quasi-static structure is unbound well before the criterion is reached. They mention in Sect. 7 that dynamical instability would invalidate their results, but they don't make the link to the derivation of the central criterion. That is a load-bearing internal tension, not a peripheral caveat.

Other concerns run smaller. The perfect-mixing assumption sits at the opposite extreme from Bodenheimer et al. (2018), and mixing efficiency in hot envelopes really is unknown; both trends cannot hold. The ideal-gas EOS is a rough approximation, and Tvap is fitted to BVO18 in a mildly circular way since it sets the normalization of Eq. 30. These are flagged by the authors themselves, and they are acceptable if the stability tension is resolved.

Who is this for? Planet formation theorists interested in the origin of the super-Earth/sub-Neptune population, and people working on envelope pollution in core accretion. It deserves a serious referee. I would send it out, but with a demand for either a stability analysis of the polluted envelope approaching runaway (e.g., along the lines of Wuchterl 1990) or a numerical simulation that tracks whether the supposedly well-mixed structure remains bound. As it stands, the central claim is a good idea whose supporting structure is not yet self-consistent.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents an analytical three-zone model for the interior structure of proto-planets whose envelopes are polluted by vaporized solids. The model assumes an ideal-gas equation of state, a uniformly mixed inner high-Z vapor region with constant adiabatic index γg < 4/3, a step-function compositional transition, and neglect of Ledoux stabilization. Using this model, the authors describe four evolutionary phases: direct core growth, polluted envelope growth, embedded cooling, and post-disk indirect core growth. The central result is a critical metal mass, Eq. (30), that marks the onset of runaway gas accretion when the total metal mass (core plus vapor) exceeds ~4 M⊕ for nominal parameters; this is claimed to supersede the traditional critical core mass. A second major result is that compositional dilution during embedded cooling slows gas accretion, and a third is that post-disk vapor sedimentation produces only slow indirect core growth without significant mass-loss. The derivation is internally consistent in a formal sense and is cross-checked against a numerical integration of the structure equations (Fig. 3) and against phase-I core masses from BVO18 (Fig. 5).

Significance. If the central claims hold, this would be the first analytical framework for the evolution of polluted planetary envelopes, with testable scalings for the critical metal mass as a function of orbital distance, opacity, accretion rate, volatility, and core mass. The model usefully identifies dilution as a self-limiting mechanism in embedded cooling and makes a falsifiable prediction that volatile-poor inner-disk planets require more solids to reach runaway than volatile-rich outer-disk planets. The paper is transparent about many of its simplifications, and the comparison with a numerical structure integrator in Fig. 3 is a genuine check. However, the main result is conditional on the perfect-mixing assumption, which the paper itself notes is in direct opposition to the no-mixing numerical models of Bodenheimer et al. (2018). More seriously, the paper's own energy calculation in §5.2.1 implies that the quasi-static well-mixed envelope is unbound at the very crossover that defines the critical metal mass, a contradiction that is not reconciled in the text. The manuscript deserves publication only after this load-bearing issue is addressed.

major comments (2)

[§4.2 (Eqs. 25–30) and §5.2.1 (Eq. 42b)] The runaway criterion Mz,crit is derived for the crossover Mz = Mxy, where the envelope mass is Menv = (1+fz)Mz and the core mass is Mc = (1−fz)Mz. For any fz ≥ 0, Menv/Mc = (1+fz)/(1−fz) ≥ 1. Equation (42b), with the default γg = 1.25, gives Eenv > 0 for Menv/Mc ≳ 0.43, and the authors state in §5.2.1 that this positive-energy configuration is “clearly non-physical” and in §7 that dynamical instability “would fundamentally change their evolution and likely invalidate our results.” The paper does not connect this statement to the validity of the runaway criterion. In the heavily polluted regime (small cores, large fz), where the inner high-Z region dominates the envelope mass, the quasi-static, well-mixed envelope assumed in the derivation of Eq. (30) is unbound at the crossover. The central claim therefore needs either a demonstration that the envelope reaches Mz,crit before becoming dynamically unstable, or a re-derivation of the criterion from the bound-energy limit. As written, the criterion is internally contradicted in exactly the regime where it differs most from the classical critical core mass.
[§2.3.2 and §7] The conclusion that pollution accelerates gas accretion and lowers the mass at runaway rests entirely on the assumption that the convective high-Z region is perfectly mixed with uniform composition. The paper itself notes that Bodenheimer et al. (2018), who assume no compositional mixing, find the opposite trend: in their model a saturated inner region slows gas accretion. Since the mixing efficiency in planetary envelopes is poorly constrained, the sign of the effect is not established by this model. I am not asking for a full parameter study, but the abstract's statement that the critical metal mass “supersedes the traditional critical core mass” should be qualified to make clear that this is a consequence of the perfect-mixing assumption. A concrete step would be to state the regime of validity explicitly and to identify what would falsify the prediction — for example, a numerical simulation with finite compositional diffusion that brackets the mixed and unmixed limits.

minor comments (4)

[Eq. (30)] The normalization of κrcb is written as “0.01 g cm−2”; opacity κ has units of cm2 g−1 in Eq. (6), so the label should read “0.01 cm2 g−1”.
[Fig. 5 caption] The superscript “1” before “Impacts and rainout” appears to be a misplaced footnote marker; the sentence reads awkwardly and should be reformatted.
[§6.1, Eq. (46)] The text says the sedimentation condition is Tcg = Tvap, but Eq. (46) is written in terms of Trcb and rrcb/rc; please clarify how the condition T(rc) = Tvap translates to the stated expression.
[§5.2.1] The phrase “a negative scaling with MenvMc” is ambiguous; it should be “a negative scaling with Menv Mc” (the product of the envelope and core masses).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the critical metal mass is obtained by integrating the assumed hydrostatic structure rather than by fitting runaway data; the Tvap calibration and the positive-energy caveat are self-acknowledged limitations, not input-output equivalences.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain: Equation 30 follows from Equations 25 and 29, which are obtained by substituting the high-Z region mass integral (Eq. 22b), the pollution-fraction parameterization (Eq. 23), and the mean-molecular-weight relation (Eq. 24) into the condition that the envelope mass equals the metal mass. The crossover condition Mz = Mxy is explicitly introduced as an approximation ('we simply approximate runaway accretion to initiate around the crossover mass when Mz = Mxy'), and the paper then computes the value of Mz at that crossover from the structure equations; this is a calculation of the reported mass, not a restatement of it. The only fitted quantity connected to prior work by the same authors is Tvap, used in Section 3.2 to match BVO18 phase-I core masses; the critical-metal-mass expression uses the default silicate estimate Tvap = 2500 K, and the derived scaling with Tvap is not identical to the calibration target. This is therefore a minor self-citation and calibration step, not a load-bearing circular reduction. The paper itself flags the serious caveat that its energy expression, Eq. 42b, turns positive for Menv greater than about 0.43 Mc, and states in Section 7 that dynamical instability 'would fundamentally change their evolution and likely invalidate our results.' At the Eq. 30 crossover, Menv/Mc = (1+fz)/(1-fz) >= 1, so the assumed bound, uniformly mixed envelope is internally contradicted in exactly the regime of interest. That is an internal-consistency and correctness limitation, not a circular reduction, so under the hard rules it does not raise the circularity score. The central derivation is self-contained against the stated structural assumptions and is benchmarked against BVO18 numerics, so the appropriate circularity finding is low: score 2.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The derivation is a hydrostatic ideal-gas model with three zones; it rests on several hand-set parameters (Tvap, gamma_g, gamma_xy, kappa_rcb) and on the ad hoc assumptions of step-function composition, perfect mixing, and constant gamma_g < 4/3. No machine-checked proofs and no code are shipped; the quantitative normalization is partly calibrated by fitting Tvap to the authors' earlier numerical work. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)

Tvap (vapor boundary temperature) = 2500 K default; fitted to BVO18 in Sect. 3.2
Sets the outer edge of the high-Z region and enters the critical metal mass as (Tvap/2500 K)^(8/27) in Eq. 30. The paper states it can match BVO18 core masses if this parameter is fitted.
gamma_g (adiabatic index of high-Z region) = 1.2 (pure silicate), 1.25 (mixed)
Chosen by hand, not derived; the paper calls the constancy of gamma a key assumption. It drives inner region density, energy, and the qualitative gamma_g < 4/3 results.
kappa_rcb (opacity at radiative-convective boundary) = 0.01 g cm^-2 in Eq. 29
Introduced as a free parameter in Eq. 27; its default value sets the normalization of the simplified critical metal mass in Eq. 29.
gamma_xy (adiabatic index of intermediate nebular region) = 1.45
Default from Table 1; a standard adiabatic index for molecular hydrogen mixture, it sets the outer envelope structure and is not fitted to a target result.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Hydrostatic, spherically symmetric envelope with ideal gas equation of state; hydrodynamic term neglected.
Sect. 2, Eqs. 1a-1c. Standard for static envelope models, but the authors state that an ideal gas overestimates density and restricts accuracy to order-of-magnitude.
domain assumption Outer radiative region is isothermal; opacity at the radiative-convective boundary follows a grain-free molecular power law.
Sect. 2.1, Eq. 6. The authors checked isothermality to a few percent for grain-free envelopes; the grain-free choice is motivated by grain settling and deposition below the radiative-convective boundary.
ad hoc to paper Compositional transition to the high-Z region is a step function at rvap with continuous temperature; Ledoux stabilization from the compositional gradient is ignored.
Sect. 2.3, Eqs. 12a-12b. The step-function approximation enables analytical integration but skips the stabilizing compositional gradient noted in Bodenheimer et al. (2018).
ad hoc to paper Convective regions are perfectly mixed, with uniform composition in each zone.
Sect. 2.3.2. The authors call this the most important model assumption; if mixing is inefficient, the critical metal mass and dilution mechanisms do not apply.
ad hoc to paper The high-Z region has constant adiabatic index gamma_g < 4/3 and remains dynamically stable.
Sect. 2.3.1 and Sect. 7. The paper notes that instability of polluted envelopes would fundamentally change their evolution and likely invalidate the results.
domain assumption Planet remains embedded in a Minimum Mass Solar Nebula until disk dissipation; outer boundary at the smaller of Bondi and Hill radii.
Sect. 2, Eq. 2. Standard setup for formation models; it controls all outer boundary conditions and the resulting scaling relations.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of How planets grow by pebble accretion II: Analytical calculations on the evolution of polluted envelopes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YJNSJJPL

@misc{pith2026190802742,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: How planets grow by pebble accretion II: Analytical calculations on the evolution of polluted envelopes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YJNSJJPL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.02742}
}

read the original abstract

Proto-planets embedded in their natal disks acquire hot envelopes as they grow and accrete solids. This ensures that the material they accrete - pebbles, as well as (small) planetesimals - will vaporize to enrich their atmospheres. Enrichment modifies an envelope's structure and significantly alters its further evolution. Our aim is to describe the formation of planets with polluted envelopes from the moment that impactors begin to sublimate to beyond the disk's eventual dissipation. We constructed an analytical interior structure model, characterized by a hot and uniformly mixed high-Z vapor layer surrounding the core, located below the usual unpolluted radiative-convective regions. The evolution of planets with uniformly mixed polluted envelopes follows four potential phases. Initially, the central core grows directly through impacts and rainout until the envelope becomes hot enough to vaporize and absorb all incoming solids. We find that a planet reaches runaway accretion when the sum of its core and vapor mass exceeds a value that we refer to as the critical metal mass - a criterion that supersedes the traditional critical core mass. It scales positively with both the pollutant's evaporation temperature and with the planet's core mass. Hence, planets at shorter orbital separations require the accretion of more solids to reach runaway as they accrete less volatile materials. If the solids accretion rate dries up, we identify the decline of the mean molecular weight - dilution - as a mechanism to limit gas accretion during a polluted planet's embedded cooling phase. When the disk ultimately dissipates, the envelope's inner temperature declines and its vapor eventually rains out, augmenting the mass of the core. The energy release that accompanies this does not result in significant mass-loss, as it only occurs after the planet has substantially contracted.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.02742 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Sketch of the four evolutionary phases of polluted envelopes (excluding photo-evaporation). During the first phase of direct core growth, a portion of the high-Z material makes it through to the core. This contrasts with the second phase, where only the envelope (Menv = Mxy + Mz − Mc) gains additional mass and all accreted solids are absorbed as vapor (Mz − Mc). Phase II could terminate when the planet enters runawa… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Sketch of the three thermodynamic zones of an envelope during its formation in a gaseous disk. Radiation dominates heat transport outside the radiative-convective boundary, while the interior is convectively unstable. The two outer regions are composed of nebular gas. In contrast, the inner high-Z region is formed by vapor from impactors and consists entirely of high-Z material until it becomes sufficiently large … view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Sketch of the inner envelope’s saturation level (Z) in the envelope’s deep interior during the four evolutionary stages. The planet is initially saturated (phase I), but dilutes as nebular gas flows in (phases II and III). The envelope can eventually become saturated again if it cools down sufficiently (phase IV). We sketch in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (6 more)

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Final core masses of direct core growth (phase I). The line indicates our semi-analytical calculation described in the text. The numerical simulations of BVO18 are indicated by the black crosses.1 Impacts and rainout determine the end of direct core growth above and …

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Evolution of three planets in phase II with our default parameters (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: The dependence of the critical metal mass on that of the core, with our default parameters (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Time τ20 (in τKH,0) required for polluted envelopes with initial hydrogen-helium mass fraction 0 to accrete 20% nebular gas. The figure shows that heavily polluted planets accrete gas more slowly in terms of their Kelvin-Helmholtz timescales, but that the initial neb…

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Embedded cooling comparison between metal-free (Mc = Mz , solid lines) and polluted (Mc = 0.5 Mz , dashed lines) grain-free envelopes. The lower and upper lines show initial hydrogen-helium mass fractions of 5% and 10%, respectively. It is clear that while polluted en…

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: Time tsed that planets are required spend in isolation in order to sediment all the vapor contained in their high-Z regions. The values correspond to a grain-free planet at 0.1 AU, calculated with our defeault parameters (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_10.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

115 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

[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]

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]

E., & Cridland , A

Alessi , M., Pudritz , R. E., & Cridland , A. J. 2017, , 464, 428

2017
[4]

2017, , 606, A69

Alibert , Y. 2017, , 606, A69

2017
[5]

Armitage , P. J. 2007, arXiv e-prints, astro

2007
[6]

2004, , 419, L13

Baraffe , I., Selsis , F., Chabrier , G., et al. 2004, , 419, L13

2004
[7]

Bell , K. R. & Lin , D. N. C. 1994, , 427, 987

1994
[8]

2013, Stellar Structure and Evolution (Springer), 47--63

Benacquista , M. 2013, Stellar Structure and Evolution (Springer), 47--63

2013

Show all 115 references

[9]

Benvenuto , O. G. & Brunini , A. 2005, , 356, 1383

2005
[10]

& Asphaug , E

Benz , W. & Asphaug , E. 1999, , 142, 5

1999
[11]

K., Irwin , J., Charbonneau , D., et al

Berta-Thompson , Z. K., Irwin , J., Charbonneau , D., et al. 2015, , 527, 204

2015
[12]

N., & Izidoro , A

Bitsch , B., Raymond , S. N., & Izidoro , A. 2019, , 624, A109

2019
[13]

J., Lissauer , J

Bodenheimer , P., Stevenson , D. J., Lissauer , J. J., & D'Angelo , G. 2018, , 868, 138

2018
[14]

J., Koch , D

Borucki , W. J., Koch , D. G., Basri , G., et al. 2011, , 736, 19

2011
[15]

G., Vazan , A., & Ormel , C

Brouwers , M. G., Vazan , A., & Ormel , C. W. 2018, , 611, A65

2018
[16]

& Laughlin , G

Chiang , E. & Laughlin , G. 2013, , 431, 3444

2013
[17]

F., Thomas , P

Chyba , C. F., Thomas , P. J., & Zahnle , K. J. 1993, , 361, 40

1993
[18]

P., Kuiper , R., & Ormel , C

Cimerman , N. P., Kuiper , R., & Ormel , C. W. 2017, , 471, 4662

2017
[19]

Coleman , G. A. L., Papaloizou , J. C. B., & Nelson , R. P. 2017, , 470, 3206

2017
[20]

Cranmer , S. R. 2004, American Journal of Physics, 72, 1397

2004
[21]

& Bodenheimer , P

D'Angelo , G. & Bodenheimer , P. 2013, , 778, 77

2013
[22]

& Podolak , M

D'Angelo , G. & Podolak , M. 2015, , 806, 203

2015
[23]

I., Chiang , E., & Lee , E

Dawson , R. I., Chiang , E., & Lee , E. J. 2015, , 453, 1471

2015
[24]

D., Charbonneau , D., & Newton , E

Dressing , C. D., Charbonneau , D., & Newton , E. R. 2015, in AAS/Division for Extreme Solar Systems Abstracts, Vol. 47, 501.03

2015
[25]

2018, Computer Physics Communications, 227, 117

Faik , S., Tauschwitz , A., & Iosilevskiy , I. 2018, Computer Physics Communications, 227, 117

2018
[26]

2013, , 766, 81

Fressin , F., Torres , G., Charbonneau , D., et al. 2013, , 766, 81

2013
[27]

Fulton , B. J. & Petigura , E. A. 2018, , 156, 264

2018
[28]

J., Petigura , E

Fulton , B. J., Petigura , E. A., Howard , A. W., et al. 2017, , 154, 109

2017
[29]

2015, , 811, 101

Fung , J., Artymowicz , P., & Wu , Y. 2015, , 811, 101

2015
[30]

E., & Sari , R

Ginzburg , S., Schlichting , H. E., & Sari , R. 2016, , 825, 29

2016
[31]

E., & Sari , R

Ginzburg , S., Schlichting , H. E., & Sari , R. 2018, , 476, 759

2018
[32]

2010, , 520, A27

Guillot , T. 2010, , 520, A27

2010
[33]

& Schlichting , H

Gupta , A. & Schlichting , H. E. 2018, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1811.03202

2018 arXiv
[34]

1981, Progress of Theoretical Physics Supplement, 70, 35

Hayashi , C. 1981, Progress of Theoretical Physics Supplement, 70, 35

1981
[35]

& Guillot , T

Helled , R. & Guillot , T. 2018, Internal Structure of Giant and Icy Planets: Importance of Heavy Elements and Mixing (Springer), 44

2018
[36]

& Stevenson , D

Helled , R. & Stevenson , D. 2017, , 840, L4

2017
[37]

& Ikoma , M

Hori , Y. & Ikoma , M. 2011, , 416, 1419

2011
[38]

Howard , A. W. 2013, Science, 340, 572

2013
[39]

B., Hattori , M

Hubbard , W. B., Hattori , M. F., Burrows , A., & Hubeny , I. 2007, , 658, L59

2007
[40]

Hubickyj , O., Bodenheimer , P., & Lissauer , J. J. 2005, , 179, 415

2005
[41]

& Podolak , M

Iaroslavitz , E. & Podolak , M. 2007, , 187, 600

2007
[42]

& Hori , Y

Ikoma , M. & Hori , Y. 2012, , 753, 66

2012
[43]

Inamdar , N. K. & Schlichting , H. E. 2015, , 448, 1751

2015
[44]

& Mordasini , C

Jin , S. & Mordasini , C. 2018, , 853, 163

2018
[45]

S., Mac Low , M.-M., et al

Johansen , A., Oishi , J. S., Mac Low , M.-M., et al. 2007, , 448, 1022

2007
[46]

2009, , 704, L75

Johansen , A., Youdin , A., & Mac Low , M.-M. 2009, , 704, L75

2009
[47]

& Weigert , A

Kippenhahn , R. & Weigert , A. 1989, Stellar Structure and Evolution (Springer-Verlag), 64--66

1989
[48]

G., Stewart , S

Kraus , R. G., Stewart , S. T., Swift , D. C., et al. 2012, Journal of Geophysical Research (Planets), 117, E09009

2012
[49]

& Johansen , A

Lambrechts , M. & Johansen , A. 2012, , 544, A32

2012
[50]

2014, , 572, A35

Lambrechts , M., Johansen , A., & Morbidelli , A. 2014, , 572, A35

2014
[51]

A., et al

Lambrechts , M., Morbidelli , A., Jacobson , S. A., et al. 2019, , 627, A83

2019
[52]

Lee , E. J. 2019, , 878, 36

2019
[53]

Lee , E. J. & Chiang , E. 2015, , 811, 41

2015
[54]

Lee, E. J. & Chiang, E. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 817, 90

2016
[55]

J., Chiang , E., & Ormel , C

Lee , E. J., Chiang , E., & Ormel , C. W. 2014, , 797, 95

2014
[56]

2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1906.09261

Li , R., Youdin , A., & Simon , J. 2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1906.09261

2019 arXiv
[57]

J., Hubickyj , O., D'Angelo , G., & Bodenheimer , P

Lissauer , J. J., Hubickyj , O., D'Angelo , G., & Bodenheimer , P. 2009, , 199, 338

2009
[58]

Lissauer , J. J. & Stevenson , D. J. 2007, in Protostars and Planets V, ed. B. Reipurth , D. Jewitt , & K. Keil , 591

2007
[59]

W., & Johansen , A

Liu , B., Ormel , C. W., & Johansen , A. 2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1902.10062

2019 arXiv
[60]

Lopez , E. D. & Fortney , J. J. 2013, , 776, 2

2013
[61]

Lopez , E. D. & Fortney , J. J. 2014, , 792, 1

2014
[62]

D., Fortney , J

Lopez , E. D., Fortney , J. J., & Miller , N. 2012, , 761, 59

2012
[63]

2018, , 866, 49

Lozovsky , M., Helled , R., Dorn , C., & Venturini , J. 2018, , 866, 49

2018
[64]

D., & Bodenheimer , P

Lozovsky , M., Helled , R., Rosenberg , E. D., & Bodenheimer , P. 2017, , 836, 227

2017
[65]

W., Isaacson , H., Howard , A

Marcy , G. W., Isaacson , H., Howard , A. W., et al. 2014, , 210, 20

2014
[66]

McAuliffe , J. P. & Christou , A. A. 2006, , 180, 8

2006
[67]

Melosh , H. J. 2007, Meteoritics and Planetary Science, 42, 2079

2007
[68]

Melosh , H. J. & Goldin , T. J. 2008, in Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, Vol. 39, Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, 2457

2008
[69]

1980, Progress of Theoretical Physics, 64, 544

Mizuno , H. 1980, Progress of Theoretical Physics, 64, 544

1980
[70]

2015, , 258, 418

Morbidelli , A., Lambrechts , M., Jacobson , S., & Bitsch , B. 2015, , 258, 418

2015
[71]

& Nesvorny , D

Morbidelli , A. & Nesvorny , D. 2012, , 546, A18

2012
[72]

2014, , 572, A118

Mordasini , C. 2014, , 572, A118

2014
[73]

2015, International Journal of Astrobiology, 14, 201

Mordasini , C., Molli \`e re , P., Dittkrist , K.-M., Jin , S., & Alibert , Y. 2015, International Journal of Astrobiology, 14, 201

2015
[74]

D., Mordasini , C., Pascucci , I., et al

Mulders , G. D., Mordasini , C., Pascucci , I., et al. 2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1905.08804

2019 arXiv
[75]

A., Chiang , E

Murray-Clay , R. A., Chiang , E. I., & Murray , N. 2009, , 693, 23

2009
[76]

Ormel , C. W. 2014, , 789, L18

2014
[77]

Ormel , C. W. & Klahr , H. H. 2010, , 520, A43

2010
[78]

Ormel , C. W. & Kobayashi , H. 2012, , 747, 115

2012
[79]

W., Shi , J.-M., & Kuiper , R

Ormel , C. W., Shi , J.-M., & Kuiper , R. 2015, , 447, 3512

2015
[80]

Owen , J. E. & Wu , Y. 2016, , 817, 107

2016
[81]

Owen , J. E. & Wu , Y. 2017, , 847, 29

2017
[82]

Papaloizou , J. C. B. & Nelson , R. P. 2005, , 433, 247

2005
[83]

Parker, E. N. 1958, The Astrophysical Journal, 128, 664

1958
[84]

& Chiang , E

Perez-Becker , D. & Chiang , E. 2013, , 433, 2294

2013
[85]

2002, in COSPAR Meeting, Vol

Petrovic , J. 2002, in COSPAR Meeting, Vol. 34, 34th COSPAR Scientific Assembly

2002
[86]

2016, , 463, 4516

Pinhas , A., Madhusudhan , N., & Clarke , C. 2016, , 463, 4516

2016
[87]

Piso , A.-M. A. & Youdin , A. N. 2014, , 786, 21

2014
[88]

A., Youdin , A

Piso , A.-M. A., Youdin , A. N., & Murray-Clay , R. A. 2015, , 800, 82

2015
[89]

B., & Reynolds , R

Podolak , M., Pollack , J. B., & Reynolds , R. T. 1988, , 73, 163

1988
[90]

B., Hubickyj , O., Bodenheimer , P., et al

Pollack , J. B., Hubickyj , O., Bodenheimer , P., et al. 1996, , 124, 62

1996
[91]

K., et al

Popova , O., Borovi c ka , J., Hartmann , W. K., et al. 2011, Meteoritics and Planetary Science, 46, 1525

2011
[92]

N., Boulet , T., Izidoro , A., Esteves , L., & Bitsch , B

Raymond , S. N., Boulet , T., Izidoro , A., Esteves , L., & Bitsch , B. 2018, , 479, L81

2018
[93]

Rogers , L. A. 2015, , 801, 41

2015
[94]

Rogers , L. A. & Seager , S. 2010, , 716, 1208

2010
[95]

Saumon , D., Chabrier , G., & van Horn , H. M. 1995, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 99, 713

1995
[96]

Schlichting , H. E. 2014, , 795, L15

2014
[97]

2015, , 799, 180

Silburt , A., Gaidos , E., & Wu , Y. 2015, , 799, 180

2015
[98]

B., Armitage , P

Simon , J. B., Armitage , P. J., Youdin , A. N., & Li , R. 2017, , 847, L12

2017
[99]

Stevenson , D. J. 1982, Planetary and Space Science, 30, 755

1982
[100]

Stewart , S. T. & Leinhardt , Z. M. 2011, in EPSC-DPS Joint Meeting 2011, 1447

2011
[101]

Stull, D. R. 1947, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry, 39, 517

1947
[102]

V., Nemtchinov , I

Svetsov , V. V., Nemtchinov , I. V., & Teterev , A. V. 1995, , 116, 131

1995
[103]

2010, , 516, A20

Valencia , D., Ikoma , M., Guillot , T., & Nettelmann , N. 2010, , 516, A20

2010
[104]

& Helled , R

Valletta , C. & Helled , R. 2018, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1811.10904

2018 arXiv
[105]

2016, , 829, 118

Vazan , A., Helled , R., Podolak , M., & Kovetz , A. 2016, , 829, 118

2016
[106]

W., Noack , L., & Dominik , C

Vazan , A., Ormel , C. W., Noack , L., & Dominik , C. 2018, , 869, 163

2018
[107]

2016, , 596, A90

Venturini , J., Alibert , Y., & Benz , W. 2016, , 596, A90

2016
[108]

2015, , 576, A114

Venturini , J., Alibert , Y., Benz , W., & Ikoma , M. 2015, , 576, A114

2015
[109]

& Helled , R

Venturini , J. & Helled , R. 2017, , 848, 95

2017
[110]

M., Hubbard , W

Wahl , S. M., Hubbard , W. B., Militzer , B., et al. 2017, , 44, 4649

2017
[111]

Weidenschilling , S. J. 1977, , 51, 153

1977
[112]

Whipple , F. L. 1972, in From Plasma to Planet, ed. A. Elvius , 211

1972
[113]

Winn , J. N. & Fabrycky , D. C. 2015, , 53, 409

2015
[114]

1990, , 238, 83

Wuchterl , G. 1990, , 238, 83

1990
[115]

1993, , 106, 323

Wuchterl , G. 1993, , 106, 323

1993

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[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]

E., & Cridland , A

Alessi , M., Pudritz , R. E., & Cridland , A. J. 2017, , 464, 428

2017

[4] [4]

2017, , 606, A69

Alibert , Y. 2017, , 606, A69

2017

[5] [5]

Armitage , P. J. 2007, arXiv e-prints, astro

2007

[6] [6]

2004, , 419, L13

Baraffe , I., Selsis , F., Chabrier , G., et al. 2004, , 419, L13

2004

[7] [7]

Bell , K. R. & Lin , D. N. C. 1994, , 427, 987

1994

[8] [8]

2013, Stellar Structure and Evolution (Springer), 47--63

Benacquista , M. 2013, Stellar Structure and Evolution (Springer), 47--63

2013