Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 91 references

Three-dimensional Transport-induced Chemistry on Temperate sub-Neptune K2-18b, Part I: the Effects of Atmospheric Dynamics

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read On the temperate sub-Neptune K2-18b, atmospheric transport, not chemistry, sets the three-dimensional distribution of long-lived molecules, with an equatorial jet producing a roughly 20% morning–evening abundance asymmetry.

desk verdict First 3D transport picture for a temperate sub-Neptune, with a genuinely new high-latitude eddy result in the 10:1 SOR case, but the quantitative tracer claims rest on an unverified conserved-tracer assumption. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.23891 v3 pith:ZQ5FGYHH submitted 2025-06-30 astro-ph.EP

Jiachen Liu , Duncan Christie , Jun Yang This is my paper
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords sub-NeptuneK2-18batmosphericcirculationpassivetracertransportsuperrotationlimbasymmetryverticalmixinggeneralmodel
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

On the temperate sub-Neptune K2-18b, the paper argues, winds and eddies—not chemical reactions—set the three-dimensional distribution of long-lived molecules in the upper atmosphere. Using a general circulation model with a passive tracer to stand in for species with very long chemical lifetimes, it finds that an equatorial eastward jet pushes material toward the evening terminator, producing a roughly 20% higher tracer abundance there than at the morning terminator. It also finds a detached convective zone between 1 and 5 bar, caused by strong CO2 and CH4 absorption, which drives vigorous vertical mixing. If true, this means one-dimensional equilibrium chemistry models cannot reliably predict the limb-resolved spectra that JWST observes, and rotation state—synchronous versus asynchronous—strongly alters where molecules accumulate.

What carries the argument

The central object is a passive tracer: a mass-mixing-ratio field q that obeys dq/dt = 0, advected by the model's resolved winds with no source, sink, or radiative feedback, initialized with a steep vertical gradient (q = 1e-5 below 10 bar, declining as (P/10 bar)^1.5 above). It is used as a diagnostic for long-lived chemical species, and the paper diagnoses transport by decomposing the zonal- and time-mean tracer budget into mean-flow, stationary-eddy, and transient-eddy terms, and by estimating an equivalent 1D vertical eddy diffusivity K_zz from the flux-gradient relation K_zz = -<rho q w>/<rho dq/dr>. The K_zz profile and the eddy-mean decomposition together carry the argument: they convert a 3D circulation into a form 1D models and spectral interpretations can use.

What would settle it

A decisive test would be a limb-resolved transmission spectrum of K2-18b comparing the evening and morning terminators: if the evening terminator is not systematically warmer and richer in methane and carbon dioxide (on the order of 20% column difference), the transport-asymmetry claim fails. A second, model-internal test would be to rerun the fastest 10:1 spin-orbit simulation with a different initial tracer profile (e.g., a shallower gradient or a deep source at a different pressure) and check whether the high-latitude transient-eddy transport and the derived K_zz remain unchanged.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that transport dominates composition on temperate sub-Neptunes: for K2-18b, where chemical timescales exceed $10^{10}$ seconds above roughly 10 bar, a passively advected tracer representing long-lived species is redistributed by atmospheric circulation faster than chemistry can act. In all simulated rotation states (synchronous, 2:1, 6:1, and 10:1 spin-orbit resonances), an equatorial superrotating jet carries tracer eastward, making the evening terminator both warmer and about 20% richer in tracer than the morning terminator. Rotation has little effect on the global-mean vertical mixing strength, yielding a universal equivalent eddy-diffusion profile that decays with pressure and is enhanced inside the 1–5 bar detached convective zone. But rotation strongly controls the latitudinal pattern: in slow-rotating cases tracer is concentrated in low- and mid-latitude upwelling branches, while in the fastest 10:1 case transient eddies at latitudes above 70 degrees lift tracer from depth even where the mean circulation is downwelling. The paper concludes that 1D models can still capture global-mean vertical structure, but any interpretation of limb-resolved or latitude-dependent spectra must account for the three-dimensional transport patterns.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a conserved tracer with an arbitrarily chosen initial depth profile and no source terms faithfully represents real long-lived chemical species, so that the derived transport statistics and the 20% terminator asymmetry are not artifacts of the tracer's initial condition or the run length.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If correct, 1D forward models of temperate sub-Neptunes should be interpreted as representing global-mean vertical structure only; they cannot reproduce limb-dependent abundance patterns.
  • Spectra that average over both terminators will mix different compositions, so retrieving abundances without accounting for the ~20% evening/morning asymmetry will bias the retrieved metallicity and C/O ratio.
  • For asynchronously rotating planets (fast spin-orbit resonances), high-latitude transport can create polar or high-latitude chemical enrichment, which would appear in spectra only if the planet is observed at favorable geometries.
  • The detached convective zone between 1 and 5 bar, driven by CO2 and CH4 absorption, implies that vertical mixing peaks at intermediate depths, and simple K_zz prescriptions should be replaced by pressure-dependent profiles like K_zz = 3e4 * (1/P_bar)^0.61 cm^2/s above 1 bar.
  • The derived equivalent K_zz can be ported directly into 1D chemical kinetics models, giving a physically grounded mixing profile for a planet that orbits an M star.

Reading between the lines

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

  • We infer that the same transport mechanism should operate on other temperate sub-Neptunes with similar equilibrium temperatures and orbital periods, so the morning-evening asymmetry may be a general feature rather than unique to K2-18b.
  • A testable extension would be to compute synthetic transmission spectra from the 3D tracer (and later chemical) fields for both terminators separately and compare directly with time-resolved JWST transits, which would isolate the asymmetry without waiting for new observations.
  • If the 20% asymmetry survives in Part II's active-chemistry runs, it implies that retrieved CH4 and CO2 abundances from JWST are systematically offset depending on which portion of the transit is fitted, possibly explaining some of the current scatter among retrieval results.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents 3D GCM simulations of the temperate sub-Neptune K2-18b with the Met Office Unified Model, using a passive tracer to diagnose transport in four rotation states: synchronous, 2:1, 6:1, and 10:1 spin-orbit resonances. After fixed-abundance spin-up runs, the authors enable chemical kinetics and advect a conserved passive tracer with the initial profile given by Eq. (4). They report a detached convective zone at 1--5 bar, an equatorial superrotating jet in all runs, warmer evening terminators, roughly 20% higher tracer mass mixing ratios at the evening terminator, and rotation-dependent latitudinal tracer distributions. They also derive equivalent 1D Kzz profiles using the flux-gradient relation (Eq. 8) and conclude that transport, not chemistry, sets the 3D distribution of long-lived species in the upper atmosphere, with implications for limb-resolved JWST spectra.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the paper provides an important step beyond 1D equilibrium-chemistry models for temperate sub-Neptunes, and its proposed mechanism for evening/morning terminator asymmetries is directly relevant to interpreting limb-resolved transmission spectra. The study's strengths include four self-consistent rotation states, a full correlated-k radiative transfer scheme, explicit momentum-budget and tracer-budget diagnostics, and an explicit caveat that active chemistry is deferred to Part II. The paper also gives a concrete Kzz(P) parameterization that 1D models could adopt. However, the passive-tracer design carries a load-bearing assumption that is not tested, so the quantitative transport claims are not yet fully established.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.3 (Eq. 4), §3.3 (Figs. 8 and 11)] The passive tracer is initialized with Eq. (4) and evolves with dq/dt = 0, with no source, sink, or reservoir flux. For a conserved tracer in a closed domain, the only steady solution toward which the system can evolve is a globally uniform mass mixing ratio. The "quasi-steady state" invoked in §2.3 is therefore a transient set by the initial vertical gradient and the vertical mixing timescale. Figure B2(f) shows the tracer at 0.001 bar evolving through the 5100-day kinetics run, but no plateau criterion is quantified. Consequently, the ~20% evening/morning terminator contrast (Fig. 11) and the equivalent 1D Kzz profile (Fig. 8, Eq. 8) may measure the erosion of the arbitrarily chosen Pquench = 10 bar profile rather than a maintained transport equilibrium. The text in §2.3 also states that the setup represents a species "sourced uniformly from the deep atmosphere," but no source term is present; the deep reservoir is finite. This is load-bearing because the paper's central claim that transport sets the limb distribution of long-lived species is read directly off this tracer field. I recommend adding at least one sensitivity run with a different Pquench or initial slope, and reporting the time evolution of the terminator contrast and of the tracer profile against a quantitative convergence criterion.
  2. [§2.3 (insensitivity claim)] The statement that the analysis and Kzz are insensitive to the initial tracer profile, citing Komacek et al. (2019), is not supported by the manuscript. Komacek et al. studied tracers with finite chemical source/sink terms and chemical timescales up to 10^6 s, whereas the present simulations use a conserved tracer with no source/sink in a regime where tau_chem exceeds 10^19 s above 1 bar, as the paper itself notes. A citation to a different regime does not establish insensitivity here, and no sensitivity run is shown. This matters because the quantitative claims in §3.3 depend on the initial gradient remaining representative of a real long-lived species with a deep source. Please either provide the missing sensitivity test or soften the claim to state explicitly that the results are provisional on the chosen initial profile.
  3. [§3.3 (Eq. 8)] The treatment of negative Kzz values by taking the absolute value of Eq. (8) is not adequately justified. Negative flux-gradient ratios are not numerical noise; they indicate genuinely non-diffusive transport, such as the 10:1 SOR high-latitude case where tracer-rich regions coincide with downwelling. Taking absolute values can convert a downgradient-flux violation into an artificially large positive Kzz. Please quantify how often Kzz is negative, show the sensitivity of the fitted Kzz(P) = 3e4 P^-0.61 cm2/s parameterization to including versus excluding or sign-flipping those points, and discuss what the negative values imply for the validity of a 1D diffusive description in those layers.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Appendix E, Eq. (E5)] In Eq. (E5), the first term in the vertical bracket is written as partial([rho w][q] r^2)/partial t; it should be partial r, otherwise the equation is dimensionally inconsistent.
  2. [§2.2 and §3.3] Section 2.2 states that the final 330 days of the kinetics runs are averaged for analysis, while Section 3.3 says the Kzz profiles are averaged over the last 4600 days. Please clarify which averaging window is used for each result and why the two windows differ.
  3. [Fig. 6 and Fig. 7 captions] The caption of Fig. 6(c) gives units of m s^-2 for the contour lines of rho v*/[rho], which is a velocity, and the caption of Fig. 7 refers to "the black line in panel (a)" where the summed acceleration appears in panel (b). Please correct these labels.
  4. [§2.3 and Appendix D] The notation "overbars (primes) and brackets (asterisks)" is easy to misread; please write explicitly that overbars denote temporal means, primes temporal deviations, brackets zonal means, and asterisks zonal deviations. Also, "A detailed deviation" in Appendix D should read "derivation."
  5. [Fig. B2] Panel (f) of Fig. B2 is labeled "Mole fraction at 1 mbar" but the passive tracer is a mass mixing ratio; the label should be changed to avoid confusion.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: transport and Kzz results are independent GCM outputs; the tracer no-source limitation is a robustness issue, not a circular step.

full rationale

None of the paper's central claims reduces to its inputs by construction. The global-mean tracer profiles, equivalent 1D Kzz, and terminator asymmetry are numerical outputs of the GCM obtained from an explicitly stated tracer equation (dq/dt=0, Eq. 2) and initial profile (Eq. 4); the Kzz diagnostic (Eq. 8) is a flux-gradient average over the simulated tracer field, not a parameter fitted to reproduce that same field. The 180x solar metallicity and Kzz=1e6 cm2/s choices are calibrated to JWST transmission spectra (Appendix C, Table C1), but those data are used as input constraints for the model setup, not presented as a prediction of this paper, and the transport claims do not rely on a spectroscopic prediction. The abundant self-citations to the UM model family (Mayne et al. 2014; Drummond et al. 2020; Christie et al. 2022, etc.) document model provenance; they are not load-bearing for the dynamics or tracer results, which are generated by the simulation itself and rest on externally validated models. The nearest candidate concern is the assertion that the tracer analysis is insensitive to the initial tracer profile, citing Komacek et al. (2019) while the paper itself acknowledges that their tau_chem range (<=1e11 s) does not cover this study's extremely long-lifetime regime (tau_chem > 1e19 s); in addition, a conserved tracer with no source/sink has no true steady state, so the reported ~20% terminator asymmetry is a time-slice of a finite-reservoir initialization. These are genuine robustness and modeling-design limitations, but they are not circularity: the asymmetry is not fitted from the quantity it is used to explain, and the proposed dynamical mechanism (eastward jet carrying tracers from day-side upwelling to the evening terminator) is independently diagnosed from the simulated wind field. Because no specific reduction of a result to its own input or to a self-citation chain can be exhibited, the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the fidelity of the UM GCM, the calibrated composition, and the tracer proxy; no new physical entities are introduced. The main free parameters are the metallicity, the initial 1D Kzz, the tracer initialization, and the numerical damping choices, all of which could influence the reported tracer distributions.

free parameters (7)
  • Atmospheric metallicity = 180 x solar
    Selected as best-fit to JWST K2-18b spectra in 1D ATMO runs (chi2=1.47, Table C1); sets opacities and initial composition for 3D runs.
  • Initial 1D eddy diffusion coefficient Kzz = 1e6 cm2/s
    Tuned against JWST observations among the tested 1e6 and 1e8 cm2/s cases; used to set initial chemical abundances and mean molecular weight.
  • Tracer quench pressure Pquench = 10 bar
    Chosen as the level where tau_chem exceeds tau_mix and tau_adv; controls the initial tracer gradient and the location of the deep 'source'.
  • Tracer initial abundance and slope = 1e-5 at depth, exponent 1.5
    Ad hoc steep gradient chosen to mimic a long-lived species; insensitivity is asserted but not tested.
  • Internal temperature = 60 K (3.7 W/m2)
    Adopted from Charnay et al. (2021); affects deep thermal structure and the bottom convective zone.
  • Tidal dissipation factor Q = 1e4
    Assumed from Louden et al. (2023); underpins the argument that asynchronous rotation states are plausible and motivates the SOR ensemble.
  • Numerical damping parameters = tK=4, bottom friction timescale 1 day, vertical damping in top/bottom 6 layers
    Chosen for model stability; influence vertical velocities and tracer transport near boundaries, particularly near the 1-5 bar convective zone.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption UM with SOCRATES accurately models radiative-convective dynamics of hydrogen-dominated exoplanet atmospheres
    The entire study rests on the fidelity of the UM GCM and correlated-k radiative transfer; validated in earlier hot Jupiter/sub-Neptune studies but not verified here.
  • domain assumption The Venot et al. (2019) chemical network without photodissociation is adequate for the radiative state of K2-18b's upper atmosphere
    Used in kinetics runs; photochemistry is excluded after 1D comparison with JWST, but 3D photochemistry is not tested.
  • domain assumption Clouds and hazes can be neglected
    Based on prior 1D fits to JWST spectra; if clouds exist, they would alter temperature structure, winds, and tracer transport.
  • domain assumption Zero eccentricity and obliquity
    Observed eccentricity may be about 0.2 (Cloutier et al. 2017); non-zero eccentricity would modulate diurnal heating and could change terminator asymmetries.
  • ad hoc to paper A conserved passive tracer with no source/sink is representative of real long-lived chemical species with a deep source
    Central to all tracer transport and Kzz results; no sensitivity runs are provided and a conserved tracer has no true steady state without a source.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Three-dimensional Transport-induced Chemistry on Temperate sub-Neptune K2-18b, Part I: the Effects of Atmospheric Dynamics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZQ5FGYHH

@misc{pith2026250623891,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Three-dimensional Transport-induced Chemistry on Temperate sub-Neptune K2-18b, Part I: the Effects of Atmospheric Dynamics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZQ5FGYHH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.23891}
}
abstract

The low equilibrium temperatures of temperate sub-Neptunes lead to extremely long chemical timescales in their upper atmospheres, causing the abundances of chemical species to be strongly shaped by atmospheric transport. Here, we used a three-dimensional (3D) general circulation model involving a passive tracer to investigate the atmospheric circulation and 3D transport of temperate gas-rich sub-Neptunes, using K2-18b as an example. We model K2-18b as a synchronous or asynchronous rotator, exploring spin-orbit resonances (SOR) of 2:1, 6:1, and 10:1. We find that the strong absorption of CO$_2$ and CH$_4$ induces a detached convective zone between 1 and 5 bar, resulting in strong vertical mixing at these levels. The upper atmosphere is dominated by eastward winds (an equatorial superrotating jet present in all simulations), leading to warmer evening terminators and approximately 20% higher passive tracer mass mixing ratios compared to the morning terminators. Rotation rates have minimal impact on the strength of global mean vertical mixing, but significantly influence the latitudinal distribution of passive tracers. For synchronous, 2:1 SOR, and 6:1 SOR simulations, passive tracers are more abundant in the upwelling branches at latitudes within 60$^\circ$, while for the 10:1 SOR simulation, strong transient eddies at high latitudes (>70$^\circ$) between 0.1 to 1 bar can transport passive tracers upward from the deep atmosphere, making them more abundant there, despite their alignment with the downwelling branch of the large-scale circulation. This study focuses on the atmospheric dynamics and its influence on passive tracer transport, while a follow-up paper will incorporate active chemical species.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.23891 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. compares 𝜏chem of CO, CO2, NH3, and CH4 with 𝜏mix and 𝜏adv in the synchronous fixed-abundance run. 𝜏chem is calculated us￾ing the Arrhenius-like fits provided in Zahnle & Marley (2014). 𝜏mix is estimated as 𝐻/𝑤rms, where 𝐻 is the atmospheric scale height and 𝑤rms is the horizontal root-mean-square of vertical velocity. 𝜏adv is given by 𝑅p/𝑢rms, where 𝑅p is the planetary radius and 𝑢rms is the horizontal root-mean-sq… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Global mean air temperature vertical profiles (a), global mean air temperature lapse rate profiles (b), and zonal-mean vertical velocity between 0.1 and 200 bar ((c)–(f)). We restrict the vertical velocity plots to this pressure range to better highlight the enhanced vertical motion within the detached convective zone, located between 1 and 5 bar. In panels (a) and (b), different coloured lines represent results fro… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Air temperature vertical profiles ((a)–(e)) and air temperature horizontal distribution at 0.001 bar ((f)–(i)) and 0.1 bar ((j)–(m)). The results are transforming in the heliocentric frame (keeping the substellar point at 0◦ longitude and 0◦ latitude). In panels (a)–(d), zonal-mean air temperatures at the equator (0◦ ) and the polar regions (average over 90◦S and 90◦N) are shown in red and blue lines, black and oran… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The zonal-mean zonal wind for all the simulations. -180 -90 0 90 180 90S 60S 30S 0 30N 60N 90N L a tit u d e [ ] Synchronous (a) Zonal wind -180 -90 0 90 180 90S 60S 30S 0 30N 60N 90N L a tit u d e [ ] 2:1 SOR (b) -180 -90 0 90 180 90S 60S 30S 0 30N 60N 90N L a tit u d…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Horizontal distribution of zonal wind ((a)–(d)), meridional wind ((e)–(h)), and vertical wind ((i)–(l)) at 0.001 bar. The streamlines indicate the direction of the horizontal flow. The results are transforming in the heliocentric frame to show the wind patterns more cl…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Mechanism for the formation of the equatorial superrotating jet for the synchronous simulation. (a) The zonal-mean zonal wind at 100 days. (b) Zonal-mean zonal wind accelerations at 0.001 bar due to horizontal (solid) and vertical (dashed) transient eddy (blue), statio…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Mechanisms of the formation of the equatorial superrotating jet and high-latitude jets for the 10:1 SOR simulation. (a) Zonal-mean zonal wind at 100 days. (b) Zonal-mean zonal wind accelerations at 10−4 bar due to horizontal (solid) and vertical (dashed) transient eddi…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Global mean vertical profiles of passive tracer mass mixing ratio (a) and equivalent 1D 𝐾𝑧𝑧 profiles estimated from 3D simulations using the flux-gradient relationship (b). Different coloured lines represent the results of simulations with varying rotation periods. The…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Zonal-mean passive tracer mass mixing ratio (coloured contours) and zonal-mean mass streamfunction (contour lines) for different simulations. Coloured contours represent the ratio of local passive tracer mass mixing ratio to the global mean at a given isobar. Arrows in…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Coluored contours show the horizontal distribution of vertical transient eddies ((a) and (c)) and stationary eddies ((b) and (d)) at 1 bar and 0.5 bar for the 10:1 SOR simulation. Contour lines in panels (a) and (b) represent vertical wind anomalies relative to the 33…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The horizontal distribution of passive tracers at 0.001 bar ((a)–(d)) and 0.01 bar ((e)–(h)). The results are transforming into the heliocentric frame. The black star-shaped markers indicate the location of the substellar point. Coloured contours depict the ratio of l…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

91 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    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.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1...

  2. [2]

    Ag \'u ndez M., Venot O., Iro N., Selsis F., Hersant F., H \'e brard E., Dobrijevic M., 2012, @doi [A&A] https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201220365 , 548, A73

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201220365 2012

  3. [3]

    Ag \'u ndez M., Parmentier V., Venot O., Hersant F., Selsis F., 2014, @doi [A&A] https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201322895 , 564, A73

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322895 2014

  4. [4]

    S., et al., 2016, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201629183 , 595, A36

    Amundsen D. S., et al., 2016, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201629183 , 595, A36

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629183 2016

  5. [5]

    G., Leovy C

    Andrews D. G., Leovy C. B., Holton J. R., 1987, Middle atmosphere dynamics. Academic press, @doi https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49711548612

    doi:10.1002/qj.49711548612 1987

  6. [6]

    Baeyens R., Decin L., Carone L., Venot O., Ag \'u ndez M., Molli \`e re P., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab1310 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.505.5603B 505, 5603

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1310 2021

  7. [7]

    Barrier E. F. L., Madhusudhan N., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staf267 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025MNRAS.538.2463B 538, 2463

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf267 2025

  8. [8]

    M., 2014, @doi [PNAS] https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1304196111 , 111, 12647

    Batalha N. M., 2014, @doi [PNAS] https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1304196111 , 111, 12647

    doi:10.1073/pnas.1304196111 2014

Show all 91 references
  1. [9]

    Benneke B., et al., 2019, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ab59dc , 887, L14

    2019 doi

  2. [10]

    Benneke B., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.03325] 10.48550/arXiv.2403.03325

    2024 doi arXiv

  3. [11]

    Blain D., Charnay B., Bézard B., 2021, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/202039072 , 646, A15

    2021 doi

  4. [12]

    Brande J., et al., 2024, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad1b5c , 961, L23

    2024 doi

  5. [13]

    Bézard B., Charnay B., Blain D., 2022, @doi [Nature Astron.] 10.1038/s41550-022-01678-z , 6, 537

    2022 doi

  6. [14]

    Charnay B., Blain D., B \'e zard B., Leconte J., Turbet M., Falco A., 2021, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/202039525 , 646, A171

    2021 doi

  7. [15]

    A., et al., 2021, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stab2027 , 506, 4500

    Christie D. A., et al., 2021, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stab2027 , 506, 4500

    2021 doi

  8. [16]

    A., Mayne N

    Christie D. A., Mayne N. J., Gillard R. M., Manners J., Hébrard E., Lines S., Kohary K., 2022, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stac2763 , 517, 1407

    2022 doi

  9. [17]

    Christie D., Mayne N., Zamyatina M., Baskett H., Evans-Soma T., Wood N., Kohary K., 2024, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stae1408 , 532, 3001

    2024 doi

  10. [18]

    Cloutier R., et al., 2017, @doi [A&A] https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201731558 , 608, A35

    2017 doi

  11. [19]

    J., Madhusudhan N., 2024, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8cda , 977, 209

    Cooke G. J., Madhusudhan N., 2024, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8cda , 977, 209

    2024 doi

  12. [20]

    S., Mayne N

    Drummond B., Tremblin P., Baraffe I., Amundsen D. S., Mayne N. J., Venot O., Goyal J., 2016, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201628799 , 594, A69

    2016 doi

  13. [21]

    J., Baraffe I., Tremblin P., Manners J., Amundsen D

    Drummond B., Mayne N. J., Baraffe I., Tremblin P., Manners J., Amundsen D. S., Goyal J., Acreman D., 2018a, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201732010 , 612, A105

    doi

  14. [22]

    Drummond B., et al., 2018b, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aab209 , 855, L31

    doi

  15. [23]

    Drummond B., et al., 2020, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201937153 , 636, A68

    2020 doi

  16. [24]

    H., Yu X., Ohno K., Zhang X., Fortney J

    Dymont A. H., Yu X., Ohno K., Zhang X., Fortney J. J., Thorngren D., Dickinson C., 2022, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7f40 , 937, 90

    2022 doi

  17. [25]

    Edwards J., 1996, @doi [J. Atmos. Sci.] 10.1175/1520-0469(1996)053<1921:ECOIFA>2.0.CO;2 , 53, 1921

    1996 doi

  18. [26]

    Edwards J., Slingo A., 1996, @doi [Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc.] 10.1002/qj.49712253107 , 122, 689

    1996 doi

  19. [27]

    G., Guinan E

    Engle S. G., Guinan E. F., 2018, @doi [Research Notes of the AAS] 10.3847/2515-5172/aab1f8 , 2, 34

    2018 doi

  20. [28]

    France K., et al., 2016, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/0004-637X/820/2/89 , 820, 89

    2016 doi

  21. [29]

    J., Petigura E

    Fulton B. J., Petigura E. A., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aae828 , 156, 264

    2018 doi

  22. [30]

    Guillot T., Burrows A., Hubbard W., Lunine J., Saumon D., 1996, @doi [ApJ] 10.1086/309935 , 459, L35

    1996 doi

  23. [31]

    Hindmarsh A., 1983, Scientific Computing (IMACS Transactions on Scientific Computation vol 1) ed RS Stepleman et al

    1983

  24. [32]

    Holmberg M., Madhusudhan N., 2024, A&A, 683, L2

    2024

  25. [33]

    R., 1986, @doi [J

    Holton J. R., 1986, @doi [J. Geophys. Res.: Atmospheres] 10.1029/JD091iD02p02681 , 91, 2681

    1986 doi

  26. [34]

    R., Hakim G

    Holton J. R., Hakim G. J., 2013, An introduction to dynamic meteorology. Academic press

    2013

  27. [35]

    Cycle 1, ID

    Hu R., Damiano M., 2021, Deep Characterization of the Atmosphere of a Temperate Sub-Neptune , JWST Proposal. Cycle 1, ID. \#2372

    2021

  28. [36]

    Hu R., Damiano M., Scheucher M., Kite E., Seager S., Rauer H., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ac1f92 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...921L...8H 921, L8

    2021 doi

  29. [37]

    T., 2022, @doi [ApJ] https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ac4887 , 927, 38

    Innes H., Pierrehumbert R. T., 2022, @doi [ApJ] https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ac4887 , 927, 38

    2022 doi

  30. [38]

    Iro N., B \'e zard B., Guillot T., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20048344 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005A&A...436..719I 436, 719

    2005 doi

  31. [39]

    F., Whitmire D

    Kasting J. F., Whitmire D. P., Reynolds R. T., 1993, @doi [Icarus] 10.1006/icar.1993.1010 , 101, 108

    1993

  32. [40]

    D., Showman A

    Komacek T. D., Showman A. P., Parmentier V., 2019, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab338b , 881, 152

    2019 doi

  33. [41]

    K., et al., 2013, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/765/2/131 , 765, 131

    Kopparapu R. K., et al., 2013, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/765/2/131 , 765, 131

    2013 doi

  34. [42]

    Leconte J., Forget F., Charnay B., Wordsworth R., Selsis F., Millour E., Spiga A., 2013, @doi [A&A] https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201321042 , 554, A69

    2013 doi

  35. [43]

    Leconte J., Selsis F., Hersant F., Guillot T., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201629140 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...598A..98L 598, A98

    2017 doi

  36. [44]

    Leconte J., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202348928 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...686A.131L 686, A131

    2024 doi

  37. [45]

    M., Laughlin G

    Louden E. M., Laughlin G. P., Millholland S. C., 2023, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad0843 , 958, L21

    2023 doi

  38. [46]

    Luque R., Pallé E., 2022, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.abl7164 , 377, 1211

    2022 doi

  39. [47]

    L., Samra D., Steinrueck M

    Luque R., Piaulet-Ghorayeb C., Radica M., Xue Q., Zhang M., Bean J. L., Samra D., Steinrueck M. E., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2505.13407

    2025 doi arXiv

  40. [48]

    C., Welbanks L., Piette A

    Madhusudhan N., Nixon M. C., Welbanks L., Piette A. A. A., Booth R. A., 2020, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ab7229 , 891, L7

    2020 doi

  41. [49]

    Madhusudhan N., Sarkar S., Constantinou S., Holmberg M., Piette A. A. A., Moses J. I., 2023, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/2041-8213/acf577 , 956, L13

    2023 doi

  42. [50]

    A., Moses J

    Madhusudhan N., Constantinou S., Holmberg M., Sarkar S., Piette A. A., Moses J. I., 2025, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/2041-8213/adc1c8 , 983, L40

    2025 doi

  43. [51]

    Marley M., Robinson T., 2015, @doi [ARA&A] 10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122522 , 53, 279

    2015 doi

  44. [52]

    J., et al., 2014, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322174 , 561, A1

    Mayne N. J., et al., 2014, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322174 , 561, A1

    2014 doi

  45. [53]

    J., et al., 2017, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201730465 , 604, A79

    Mayne N. J., et al., 2017, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201730465 , 604, A79

    2017 doi

  46. [54]

    Mayne N., Drummond B., Debras F., Jaupart E., Manners J., Boutle I., Baraffe I., Kohary K., 2019, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf6e9 , 871, 56

    2019 doi

  47. [55]

    E., 2021, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stab895 , 503, 5658

    Misener W., Schlichting H. E., 2021, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stab895 , 503, 5658

    2021 doi

  48. [56]

    T., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/809/1/25 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...809...25M 809, 25

    Montet B. T., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/809/1/25 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...809...25M 809, 25

    2015 doi

  49. [57]

    I., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/737/1/15 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...737...15M 737, 15

    Moses J. I., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/737/1/15 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...737...15M 737, 15

    2011 doi

  50. [58]

    C., Madhusudhan N., 2021, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stab1500 , 505, 3414

    Nixon M. C., Madhusudhan N., 2021, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stab1500 , 505, 3414

    2021 doi

  51. [59]

    P., Lian Y., 2013, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201321132 , 558, A91

    Parmentier V., Showman A. P., Lian Y., 2013, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201321132 , 558, A91

    2013 doi

  52. [60]

    Piette A. A. A., Madhusudhan N., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abbfb1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...904..154P 904, 154

    2020 doi

  53. [61]

    Plumb R., Mahlman J., 1987, @doi [J. Atmos. Sci.] https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1987)044<0298:TZATCO>2.0.CO;2 , 44, 298

    1987 doi

  54. [62]

    arXiv:2503.19908

    Sairam L., Madhusudhan N., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2503.19908 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250319908S p. arXiv:2503.19908

    2025 doi arXiv

  55. [63]

    Sarkis P., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aac108 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018AJ....155..257S 155, 257

    2018 doi

  56. [64]

    P., et al., 2025, @doi [arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.18477] https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2501.18477

    Schmidt S. P., et al., 2025, @doi [arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.18477] https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2501.18477

    2025 doi arXiv

  57. [65]

    J., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2504.12946 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250412946S p

    Seager S., Welbanks L., Ellerbroek L., Bains W., Petkowski J. J., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2504.12946 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250412946S p. arXiv:2504.12946

    2025 doi

  58. [66]

    J., 2024, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad206e , 962, L8

    Shorttle O., Jordan S., Nicholls H., Lichtenberg T., Bower D. J., 2024, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad206e , 962, L8

    2024 doi

  59. [67]

    P., Polvani L

    Showman A. P., Polvani L. M., 2011, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/738/1/71 , 738, 71

    2011 doi

  60. [68]

    P., Wordsworth R

    Showman A. P., Wordsworth R. D., Merlis T. M., Kaspi Y., 2013, in Mackwell S. J., Simon-Miller A. A., Harder J. W., Bullock M. A., eds, , Comparative Climatology of Terrestrial Planets. pp 277--327, @doi 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816530595-ch012

    2013 doi

  61. [69]

    P., Tan X., Parmentier V., 2020, @doi [Space Sci

    Showman A. P., Tan X., Parmentier V., 2020, @doi [Space Sci. Rev] 10.1007/s11214-020-00758-8 , 216, 139

    2020 doi

  62. [70]

    arXiv:2504.15916

    Taylor J., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2504.15916 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250415916T p. arXiv:2504.15916

    2025 doi arXiv

  63. [71]

    S., Mourier P., Baraffe I., Chabrier G., Drummond B., Homeier D., Venot O., 2015, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/2041-8205/804/1/L17 , 804, L17

    Tremblin P., Amundsen D. S., Mourier P., Baraffe I., Chabrier G., Drummond B., Homeier D., Venot O., 2015, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/2041-8205/804/1/L17 , 804, L17

    2015 doi

  64. [72]

    S., Chabrier G., Baraffe I., Drummond B., Hinkley S., Mourier P., Venot O., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8205/817/2/L19 , 817, L19

    Tremblin P., Amundsen D. S., Chabrier G., Baraffe I., Drummond B., Hinkley S., Mourier P., Venot O., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8205/817/2/L19 , 817, L19

    2016 doi

  65. [73]

    Tsai S.-M., Innes H., Lichtenberg T., Taylor J., Malik M., Chubb K., Pierrehumbert R., 2021, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ac399a , 922, L27

    2021 doi

  66. [74]

    Venot O., Hébrard E., Agúndez M., Dobrijevic M., Selsis F., Hersant F., Iro N., Bounaceur R., 2012, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201219310 , 546, A43

    2012 doi

  67. [75]

    Venot O., Bounaceur R., Dobrijevic M., H \'e brard E., Cavali \'e T., Tremblin P., Drummond B., Charnay B., 2019, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834861 , 624, A58

    2019 doi

  68. [76]

    Visscher C., 2012, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/5 , 757, 5

    2012 doi

  69. [77]

    I., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/738/1/72 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...738...72V 738, 72

    Visscher C., Moses J. I., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/738/1/72 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...738...72V 738, 72

    2011 doi

  70. [78]

    Wang H., Wordsworth R., 2020, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab6dcc , 891, 7

    2020 doi

  71. [79]

    arXiv:2504.21788

    Welbanks L., et al., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2504.21788 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250421788W p. arXiv:2504.21788

    2025 doi

  72. [80]

    F., Batalha N

    Wogan N. F., Batalha N. E., Zahnle K. J., Krissansen-Totton J., Tsai S.-M., Hu R., 2024, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad2616 , 963, L7

    2024 doi

  73. [81]

    Wood N., et al., 2014, @doi [Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc.] 10.1002/qj.2235 , 140, 1505

    2014 doi

  74. [82]

    Yu X., et al., 2021a, @doi [Nature Astron.] 10.1038/s41550-021-01375-3 , 5, 822

    doi

  75. [83]

    I., Fortney J

    Yu X., Moses J. I., Fortney J. J., Zhang X., 2021b, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abfdc7 , 914, 38

    doi

  76. [84]

    M., Freedman R

    Yurchenko S., Mellor T. M., Freedman R. S., Tennyson J., 2020, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/staa1874 , 496, 5282

    2020 doi

  77. [85]

    N., Owens A., Kefala K., Tennyson J., 2024, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stae148 , 528, 3719

    Yurchenko S. N., Owens A., Kefala K., Tennyson J., 2024, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stae148 , 528, 3719

    2024 doi

  78. [86]

    J., Marley M

    Zahnle K. J., Marley M. S., 2014, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/797/1/41 , 797, 41

    2014 doi

  79. [87]

    Zamyatina M., et al., 2022, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stac3432 , 519, 3129

    2022 doi

  80. [88]

    Zamyatina M., et al., 2024, @doi [MNRAS] 10.1093/mnras/stae600 , 529, 1776

    2024 doi

  81. [89]

    Zeng L., et al., 2019, @doi [PNAS] 10.1073/pnas.1812905116 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019PNAS..116.9723Z 116, 9723

    2019 doi

  82. [90]

    P., 2018a, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aada85 , 866, 1

    Zhang X., Showman A. P., 2018a, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aada85 , 866, 1

    doi

  83. [91]

    P., 2018b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aada7c , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...866....2Z 866, 2

    Zhang X., Showman A. P., 2018b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aada7c , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...866....2Z 866, 2

    doi

Pith tools

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