Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

A third giant planet has been directly imaged in the β Pictoris system after eleven years of multi-instrument data.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review

2026-07-14 17:25 UTC pith:GNV2UYNH

load-bearing objection Solid multi-epoch discovery of a third, low-mass planet in β Pic; binding and coplanarity are clean, mass/Teff carry the usual hot-start caveats the authors already flag. the 1 major comments →

arxiv 2606.23801 v2 pith:GNV2UYNH submitted 2026-06-22 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.IMastro-ph.SR

Direct Imaging Discovery of Giant Exoplanet β Pictoris d: A Decade-Long Game of Hide-and-Seek

Ben J. Sutlieff , Markus J. Bonse , Valentin Christiaens , Cl\'emence Fontanive , Elisabeth C. Matthews , Luke T. Parker , Tim D. Pearce , Jayne L. Birkby
show 89 more authors
Beth A. Biller Trent J. Dupuy Emily O. Garvin Leyla Iskandarli Jens Kammerer Yifan Zhou Robert J. De Rosa Aarynn L. Carter Sasha Hinkley Matthew A. Kenworthy William O. Balmer Iain Hammond James Mang Caroline V. Morley Mark J. Neeser Olivier Absil Anthony Boccaletti Mariangela Bonavita Brendan P. Bowler Xueqing Chen Felix A. Dannert Julien H. Girard Markus Kasper Anne-Marie Lagrange Pengyu Liu Gilles Orban de Xivry Michael Poon Sascha P. Quanz Beno\^it Serra Johanna M. Vos Kevin Wagner Jason Wang Bernhard Sch\"olkopf Guido Agapito Alex Agudo Berbel D\'aniel Apai Andrea Baruffolo Martin Black Marco Bonaglia Runa Briguglio Yixian Cao Luca Carbonaro Lee Chapman Giovanni Cresci Yigit Dallilar Richard Davies Matthias Deysenroth Ivan Di Antonio Amico Di Cianno Gianluca Di Rico David Doelman Mauro Dolci Frank Eisenhauer Simone Esposito Debora Ferruzzi Helmut Feuchtgruber Natascha F\"orster-Schreiber Kyle Franson Reinhard Genzel Stefan Gillessen Eileen C. Gonzales Michael Hartl Jean Hayoz Heinrich Huber Christoph Keller Kateryna Kravchenko Jarron Leisenring John Lightfoot David Lunney Dieter Lutz Mike Macintosh Filippo Mannucci Stanimir Metchev Thomas Ott David Pearson Alfio Puglisi Sebastian Rabien Christian Rau Armando Riccardi Bernardo Salasnich Taro Shimizu Frans Snik Eckhard Sturm Genaro Su\'arez Linda Tacconi Xianyu Tan William Taylor Christopher Waring Marco Xompero
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.EP astro-ph.IMastro-ph.SR
keywords exoplanetsdirect imaginghigh contrast techniquesorbital motiondebris disksbeta Pictorismid-infrared imagingplanetary atmospheres
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper reports the discovery of β Pictoris d, a third giant planet around the well-studied star β Pictoris. The object is seen in new non-coronagraphic mid-infrared images from VLT/ERIS and is recovered in earlier JWST/NIRCam and VLT/SPHERE frames spanning eleven years. Relative astrometry shows orbital motion that rules out a background star and places the planet on a nearly edge-on orbit coplanar with the two known planets. After discarding orbit-crossing solutions, the semi-major axis is about 26 au, consistent with the planet sculpting the inner edge of the debris disk. Photometry yields colors and luminosity that match the mid-T exoplanet 51 Eri b; ATMO hot-start models then give a mass near 2.4 Jupiter masses and an effective temperature near 600 K. The result shows that a young multi-planet system can still hide lower-mass members at wider separations, and that ground-based mid-infrared imaging can reach those objects.

Core claim

β Pictoris d is a gravitationally bound third giant planet whose multi-epoch astrometry yields a semi-major axis of 26.0+2.2−6.1 au and inclination 89.0+0.7−0.6 deg after non-crossing orbits are retained; its mid-infrared contrast and colors give a mass of 2.4±0.6 MJup and Teff of 600+45−60 K under ATMO hot-start models, making it coplanar with planets b and c and consistent with sculpting the debris-disk inner edge.

What carries the argument

Joint multi-planet orbit fitting of eleven-year relative astrometry for planet d together with literature data for b and c, followed by photometric comparison to ATMO hot-start evolutionary models after a bolometric correction transferred from the analog 51 Eri b.

Load-bearing premise

The mass, radius and temperature rest on a bolometric correction taken from 51 Eri b and on hot-start evolutionary models at the adopted system age; a colder start or different age would change the mass substantially.

What would settle it

A new epoch of high-precision relative astrometry that places the source off the predicted non-crossing orbital track, or a spectrum that shows no CO2 absorption and colors inconsistent with a mid-T object of the claimed luminosity.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Share X LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • The β Pic system now hosts three coplanar giant planets whose outermost member can explain the observed inner edge of the debris disk.
  • Mid-infrared non-coronagraphic imaging on 8-m-class telescopes can reach ~2 MJup planets at young ages and separations of tens of au.
  • Comparative spectroscopy of β Pic d and 51 Eri b can test whether metal enhancement and CO2 absorption are common among mid-T exoplanets of the same moving group.
  • Long time baselines remain essential for confirming companions that spend years near the star or behind brighter siblings.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the luminosity is eventually shown to require a cold-start entropy, β Pic becomes the first system known to host both hot-start and cold-start giant planets.
  • The same non-coronagraphic mid-IR strategy should recover additional low-mass planets in other edge-on debris-disk systems once multi-year baselines exist.
  • Dynamical mass measurements of d will decide whether the ATMO-derived mass is accurate or whether the models systematically under- or over-estimate mass at these temperatures.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

1 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the direct-imaging discovery of β Pictoris d, a third giant planet in the β Pic system. The source is detected in non-coronagraphic VLT/ERIS L' imaging and recovered in multi-epoch JWST/NIRCam and VLT/SPHERE data spanning 11 years (Table 1, Fig. 1). Relative astrometry rules out a stationary background object at >24σ and is inconsistent with the Gaia proper-motion track; NaCo non-detections at the expected background locus further support binding (§3.3, Fig. 2). Joint multi-planet orbit fits with orvara yield a prior-independent inclination and ascending node coplanar with planets b and c, and, after discarding orbit-crossing solutions, a semi-major axis of 26.0^{+2.2}_{-6.1} au and e_d < 0.44 (2σ) (§3.4, Tables 2, 4, 5, Figs. 3–4). Photometry gives ΔL' = 12.11 ± 0.15 mag; colors and luminosity closely match 51 Eri b, and ATMO2020 hot-start models plus a bolometric correction transferred from 51 Eri b give T_eff ≈ 600 K and mass 2.4 ± 0.6 M_Jup (§3.5). The orbit is consistent with sculpting the debris-disk inner edge (§4.1, Fig. 6).

Significance. If the result holds, this is a high-impact discovery: a third, coplanar giant planet in the benchmark β Pic system, among the lowest-mass planets imaged from the ground, and a close mid-T analog of 51 Eri b. The multi-facility, multi-epoch confirmation, careful NegFC/MCMC error budgets, explicit flagging of prior-dependent orbital elements, and dynamical consistency with the disk edge are clear strengths. The work also demonstrates the discovery potential of non-coronagraphic mid-IR imaging with ERIS and, by extension, ELT/METIS. The mass and T_eff inherit standard hot-start and bolometric-correction systematics that the paper itself flags; those do not undermine the binding, orbit, or disk-sculpting claims.

major comments (1)
  1. No load-bearing technical objections. The common-proper-motion rejection (§3.3, Fig. 2), multi-instrument detections (Table 1), and prior-independent i_d and Ω_d (§3.4, Tables 2/4/5) solidly support the central discovery and orbital claims. The mass/T_eff values rest on the usual ATMO hot-start + 51 Eri b BC assumptions (§3.5); the paper already notes that the luminosity is also consistent with lower initial entropy, so this is a systematic caveat rather than an internal inconsistency.
minor comments (5)
  1. §3.2.3 / Table 1: For the 2019 and 2020 SPHERE epochs, only lower limits on flux (upper limits on magnitude) are reported because of SDI self-subtraction. A short explicit statement in the table note that a dedicated two-channel forward model is deferred would help readers avoid treating those limits as detections.
  2. §3.4 / Appendix C: The massless prior on planet d (10^{-6} ± 10^{-9} M_⊙) is justified, but a one-sentence quantitative estimate of the expected stellar acceleration from a ~2.4 M_Jup body at ~26 au would make the approximation more transparent.
  3. Fig. 1 caption: Clarify that the 2014 panel shows planet b subtracted (open circle) so that the much fainter d (arrow) is visible; the main text already states this, but the figure should stand alone.
  4. §3.5: The bolometric correction BC(L') = 0.06 ± 0.27 mag is transferred from 51 Eri b. Propagating the large BC uncertainty more explicitly into the final mass/T_eff error bars (or stating that the ±0.6 M_Jup already includes it) would strengthen the photometric section.
  5. Typographical consistency: the draft mixes β Pic / β Pictoris and occasional missing spaces after periods; a light copy-edit pass would clean these.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: multi-epoch astrometry, common-proper-motion rejection, and joint orbit fits are independent of the model-dependent mass/Teff estimates.

full rationale

This is an observational discovery paper. The load-bearing claims (detection of a point source at consistent positions across VLT/ERIS, JWST/NIRCam and VLT/SPHERE; >24σ rejection of the stationary-background track from Gaia proper motion/parallax over an 11-year baseline; joint multi-planet orvara fits recovering prior-independent i_d ≈ 89° and Ω_d aligned with b and c without enforcing coplanarity; non-crossing a_d = 26.0^{+2.2}_{-6.1} au) rest on measured relative astrometry, literature RVs/absolute astrometry for the inner planets, and standard MCMC sampling. The mass/Teff (2.4 ± 0.6 M_Jup, 600^{+45}_{-60} K) are obtained by transferring a bolometric correction from the photometrically similar 51 Eri b and interpolating ATMO2020 hot-start isochrones at the adopted BPMG age; the paper itself flags that the luminosity is also consistent with lower-entropy (cold-start) tracks. Disk-sculpting consistency is a post-hoc comparison to an independent ALMA edge location via the SculptingPlanet geometric criterion, not an input that forces the orbit. Self-citations are limited to reduction pipelines (eristools, 4S, spaceKLIP, VIP) that do not close any scientific loop. No equation equates a claimed prediction to a fitted input by construction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors, and no ansatz is smuggled via self-citation. Score 0 is therefore required.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

Discovery rests on standard HCI reduction and common-proper-motion tests plus literature dynamical and evolutionary models. Free parameters are the usual orbit elements and the age/bolometric-correction choices that convert luminosity to mass; no new physical entities are invented.

free parameters (4)
  • orbital elements of planet d (a, e, i, Ω, ω, λ) = a=26.0^{+2.2}_{-6.1} au, e<0.44 (2σ), i=89.0^{+0.7}_{-0.6} deg
    Fitted jointly with literature data for b and c via orvara MCMC; a and e remain prior-dependent after discarding crossing orbits.
  • system age = 23±8 Myr
    Adopted 23±8 Myr from Lee et al. 2024; enters mass and Teff via evolutionary tracks.
  • bolometric correction BC(L') transferred from 51 Eri b = 0.06±0.27 mag
    Used to convert ML' to Lbol before rejection sampling on ATMO tracks (§3.5).
  • planet-d mass prior in orbit fit = ~0
    Set to essentially zero (10^{-6}±10^{-9} M☉) so that RVs and absolute astrometry are unaffected by d.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Hot-start ATMO2020 evolutionary models correctly map (Lbol, age) to mass, radius and Teff for this object.
    §3.5; paper notes luminosity is also consistent with colder starts.
  • domain assumption Non-crossing coplanar orbits are the only physically allowed subset of the posterior.
    Whitmire et al. geometric criterion applied in §3.4; 28% of samples discarded.
  • domain assumption Standard ADI/SDI/PCA/KLIP/NegFC reductions recover unbiased astrometry and photometry once self-subtraction is modeled.
    Sections 2–3 and Appendices A–B.
  • standard math Gaia DR3 parallax and proper motion of β Pic correctly predict the background track.
    Used for common-proper-motion test in §3.3.

reviewed 2026-07-14 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Direct Imaging Discovery of Giant Exoplanet $\beta$ Pictoris d: A Decade-Long Game of Hide-and-Seek." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GNV2UYNH

@misc{pith2026260623801,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Direct Imaging Discovery of Giant Exoplanet $\beta$ Pictoris d: A Decade-Long Game of Hide-and-Seek},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GNV2UYNH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2606.23801}
}
Share X LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

We report the direct imaging discovery of a third exoplanet in the $\beta$ Pictoris system. We detect $\beta$ Pictoris d ($\beta$ Pic d) in non-coronagraphic observations obtained with VLT/ERIS as well as multi-epoch archival datasets from JWST/NIRCam and VLT/SPHERE. Astrometric measurements over an 11-year baseline demonstrate that it is consistent with a gravitationally-bound source with orbital motion. Joint multi-planet orbit fits of all three planets in the system yield a semi-major axis of $26.0^{+2.2}_{-6.1}$ au and inclination $89.0^{+0.7}_{-0.6}$ deg for planet d. $\beta$ Pic d has a larger orbital semi-major axis than the other known planets in the system, but is coplanar with the inner two planets, and its orbit is consistent with sculpting the inner edge of the debris disk. $\beta$ Pic d has a contrast of $\Delta L^{\prime}=12.11\pm0.15$ mag, with colors and luminosity that closely match those of 51 Eri b, another exoplanet in the $\beta$ Pictoris moving group. Its VLT/ERIS and JWST/NIRCam colors are distinct from those of free-floating planetary-mass objects of a similar age and temperature. Its red $F410M-F444W$ color indicates strong CO$_2$ absorption in its atmosphere and suggests significant enhancement in metals compared to free-floating objects. From the ATMO hot-start evolutionary models, we estimate an effective temperature of $600^{+45}_{-60}$ K and mass of $2.4\pm0.6$ $M_{\rm Jup}$, which also closely matches similar estimates for 51 Eri b. $\beta$ Pic d is among the lowest-mass exoplanets imaged from the ground. This discovery highlights the deep sensitivity achievable with ground-based imaging in the mid-infrared and the discovery potential of future high-contrast observations with the Extremely Large Telescope.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.23801 by Aarynn L. Carter, Alex Agudo Berbel, Alfio Puglisi, Amico Di Cianno, Andrea Baruffolo, Anne-Marie Lagrange, Anthony Boccaletti, Armando Riccardi, Ben J. Sutlieff, Beno\^it Serra, Bernardo Salasnich, Bernhard Sch\"olkopf, Beth A. Biller, Brendan P. Bowler, Caroline V. Morley, Christian Rau, Christopher Waring, Christoph Keller, Cl\'emence Fontanive, D\'aniel Apai, David Doelman, David Lunney, David Pearson, Debora Ferruzzi, Dieter Lutz, Eckhard Sturm, Eileen C. Gonzales, Elisabeth C. Matthews, Emily O. Garvin, Felix A. Dannert, Filippo Mannucci, Frank Eisenhauer, Frans Snik, Genaro Su\'arez, Gianluca Di Rico, Gilles Orban De Xivry, Giovanni Cresci, Guido Agapito, Heinrich Huber, Helmut Feuchtgruber, Iain Hammond, Ivan Di Antonio, James Mang, Jarron Leisenring, Jason Wang, Jayne L. Birkby, Jean Hayoz, Jens Kammerer, Johanna M. Vos, John Lightfoot, Julien H. Girard, Kateryna Kravchenko, Kevin Wagner, Kyle Franson, Lee Chapman, Leyla Iskandarli, Linda Tacconi, Luca Carbonaro, Luke T. Parker, Marco Bonaglia, Marco Xompero, Mariangela Bonavita, Mark J. Neeser, Markus J. Bonse, Markus Kasper, Martin Black, Matthew A. Kenworthy, Matthias Deysenroth, Mauro Dolci, Michael Hartl, Michael Poon, Mike MacIntosh, Natascha F\"orster-Schreiber, Olivier Absil, Pengyu Liu, Reinhard Genzel, Richard Davies, Robert J. De Rosa, Runa Briguglio, Sascha P. Quanz, Sasha Hinkley, Sebastian Rabien, Simone Esposito, Stanimir Metchev, Stefan Gillessen, Taro Shimizu, Thomas Ott, Tim D. Pearce, Trent J. Dupuy, Valentin Christiaens, William O. Balmer, William Taylor, Xianyu Tan, Xueqing Chen, Yifan Zhou, Yigit Dallilar, Yixian Cao.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Gallery of images for the epochs at which β Pic d is detected (source indicated with a white arrow). The JWST/NIRCam images have been processed with a high-pass filter to reduce disk flux. The known planet β Pic b is the bright source in the North-East of the image in epochs 1–3. In epochs 4 and 5, β Pic b is within the inner mask used for data reduction. We note that for the 2014-12-08 epoch (epoch 6), β … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The astrometry of β Pic d relative to its host star at each epoch (circles) compared to its expected position if the candidate was a stationary background source (corre￾sponding crosses). The spiral line indicates the expected mo￾tion of a stationary background source, as calculated using the Gaia DR3 proper motion and parallax of β Pic and pro￾jected backwards in time from the recent VLT/ERIS epoch (2025-… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left: astrometry of β Pic d (white circles) relative to the host star (white star). We show 150 randomly drawn samples from our posteriors, color-coded by eccentricity from low to high (purple to orange) unless the sample crosses the orbit of β Pic b (light blue). The solid black line indicates the lowest-χ 2 orbit. Middle: the same information de-projected by the corresponding inclination for each orbit. … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Color-magnitude diagrams of β Pic d, shown alongside photometry for directly imaged planets in BPMG (blue stars) and around other stars (brown stars), as well as free-floating brown dwarfs in BPMG (blue circles) and the field (pink circles). While young (BPMG) and field-age brown dwarfs have similar colors as a function of magnitude, the planets are markedly fainter at F410M than brown dwarfs with comparab… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Dynamical prediction for a planet sculpting the disk inner edge (T. D. Pearce et al. 2022). The predicted planet should lie in the white region to 1σ, in agreement with our adopted parameters for β Pic d. Line 1 shows orbits within 5 Hill radii of the disk, along which the planet would lie, and line 2 is the minimum planet mass to sculpt the disk within the star’s age. Shading around lines denotes 1σ uncer… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: PSF-subtracted images obtained with annular PCA on the original 2014 VLT/SPHERE datacube (left col￾umn) and the cube resulting from the subtraction of our best estimate of β Pic b (right column), shown for 10, 20 and 40 principal components. The residuals shown are the results for the K1 filter. The ticks are spaced by 500 mas intervals. 1-FWHM aperture centred on the first-guess location of β Pic b. This … view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Marginalised posterior distributions for our orbital parameters of planets d (grey), c (red), and b (yellow) in the β Pic system. Contour lines and shaded regions in the joint posterior indicate the 1-σ and 2-σ credible regions. The posteriors for planet d include the full posterior distributions from the fits (light grey) along with the posteriors after removal of solutions crossing the orbits of the inne… view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Photometric Variability and Rotation of Beta Pictoris b from JWST NIRCam Coronagraphic Imaging

    astro-ph.EP 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0

    β Pic b shows coherent sub-percent brightness cycles with a 9.00 ± 0.13 hr period in two JWST bands — interpreted as its rotation — with a spin axis consistent with edge-on viewing and spin-orbit alignment.

  2. Vector Apodizing Phase Plates for the ELT: From prototype to final optics for METIS and MICADO

    astro-ph.IM 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0

    Manufactured METIS and MICADO vAPPs achieve <1–2% polarization leakage and expected raw contrasts of a few ×10^{-5} after accounting for realistic coating and write defects.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

161 extracted references · 4 linked inside Pith · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Amara, A., & Quanz, S. P. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 948, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21918.x Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whe...

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21918.x 2012

  2. [2]

    O., Otten, G

    Balmer, W. O., Otten, G. P. P. L., & Stolker, T. 2025a, backtracks: a python package to compare relative astrometry with background helical motion: v0.6, v0.6 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.14838369

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.14838369

  3. [3]

    O., Kammerer, J., Pueyo, L., et al

    Balmer, W. O., Kammerer, J., Pueyo, L., et al. 2025b, AJ, 169, 209, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/adb1c6

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/adb1c6

  4. [4]

    O., Pueyo, L., Messier, A., et al

    Balmer, W. O., Pueyo, L., Messier, A., et al. 2026, ApJL, 1001, L26, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae374a Bardalez Gagliuffi, D. C., Balmer, W. O., Pueyo, L., et al. 2025, ApJL, 988, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ade30f

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae374a 2026

  5. [5]

    2015, A&A, 582, A83, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526332

    Baudino, J.-L., B´ ezard, B., Boccaletti, A., et al. 2015, A&A, 582, A83, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526332

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201526332 2015

  6. [6]

    A., Cushing, M

    Beiler, S. A., Cushing, M. C., Kirkpatrick, J. D., et al. 2024, ApJ, 973, 107, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6301

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad6301 2024

  7. [7]

    Best, W. M. J., Dupuy, T. J., Liu, M. C., et al. 2025, The UltracoolSheet: Photometry, Astrometry, Spectroscopy, and Multiplicity for 4000+ Ultracool Dwarfs and Imaged Exoplanets, 2.1.0 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.15802304

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.15802304 2025

  8. [8]

    2024, A&A, 683, A89, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348203

    Beust, H., Milli, J., Morbidelli, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 683, A89, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348203

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348203 2024

  9. [9]

    2019, A&A, 631, A155, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935251

    Beuzit, J.-L., Vigan, A., Mouillet, D., et al. 2019, A&A, 631, A155, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935251

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935251 2019

  10. [10]

    J., Angelo, I., et al

    Blunt, S., Wang, J. J., Angelo, I., et al. 2020, AJ, 159, 89, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab6663

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab6663 2020

  11. [11]

    2024, The Journal of Open Source Software, 9, 6756, doi: 10.21105/joss.06756

    Blunt, S., Wang, J., Hirsch, L., et al. 2024, The Journal of Open Source Software, 9, 6756, doi: 10.21105/joss.06756

    doi:10.21105/joss.06756 2024

  12. [12]

    J., Aboobaker, A

    Bock, J. J., Aboobaker, A. M., Adamo, J., et al. 2026, ApJ, 999, 139, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae2be2

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae2be2 2026

  13. [13]

    J., Kenworthy, M

    Bohn, A. J., Kenworthy, M. A., Ginski, C., et al. 2020, ApJL, 898, L16, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aba27e

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aba27e 2020

  14. [14]

    2013, A&A, 555, A107, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220838

    Bonnefoy, M., Boccaletti, A., Lagrange, A.-M., et al. 2013, A&A, 555, A107, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220838

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201220838 2013

  15. [15]

    J., Garvin, E

    Bonse, M. J., Garvin, E. O., Gebhard, T. D., et al. 2023, AJ, 166, 71, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acc93c

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/acc93c 2023

  16. [16]

    J., Gebhard, T

    Bonse, M. J., Gebhard, T. D., Dannert, F. A., et al. 2025, AJ, 169, 194, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/adab79

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/adab79 2025

  17. [17]

    N., Augereau, J.-C., & Ormel, C

    Bonsor, A., Raymond, S. N., Augereau, J.-C., & Ormel, C. W. 2014, MNRAS, 441, 2380, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu721 Discovery ofβPic d from the ground & space23

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stu721 2014

  18. [18]

    2021, The Messenger, 182, 22, doi: 10.18727/0722-6691/5218

    Brandl, B., Bettonvil, F., van Boekel, R., et al. 2021, The Messenger, 182, 22, doi: 10.18727/0722-6691/5218

    doi:10.18727/0722-6691/5218 2021

  19. [19]

    2021, AJ, 161, 179, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abdc2e

    Michalik, D. 2021, AJ, 161, 179, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abdc2e

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abdc2e 2021

  20. [20]

    Brandt, T. D. 2021, ApJS, 254, 42, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abf93c

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/abf93c 2021

  21. [21]

    D., Dupuy, T

    Brandt, T. D., Dupuy, T. J., Li, Y., et al. 2021, AJ, 162, 186, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac042e

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac042e 2021

  22. [22]

    B., Maire, A.-L., Molli` ere, P., et al

    Brown-Sevilla, S. B., Maire, A.-L., Molli` ere, P., et al. 2023, A&A, 673, A98, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244826

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244826 2023

  23. [23]

    A., et al

    Bryden, G., Llop-Sayson, J., Beichman, C. A., et al. 2026, AJ, 171, 301, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ae43e8

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ae43e8 2026

  24. [24]

    J., Krist, J

    Burrows, C. J., Krist, J. E., Stapelfeldt, K. R., & WFPC2 Investigation Definition Team. 1995, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 187, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, 32.05

    1995

  25. [25]

    2024, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Cantalloube, F., Christiaens, V., Cantero, C., et al. 2024, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 13097, Adaptive Optics Systems IX, ed. K. J. Jackson, D. Schmidt, & E. Vernet, 1309713, doi: 10.1117/12.3020278

    doi:10.1117/12.3020278 2024

  26. [26]

    L., Hinkley, S., Kammerer, J., et al

    Carter, A. L., Hinkley, S., Kammerer, J., et al. 2023, ApJL, 951, L20, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acd93e

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acd93e 2023

  27. [27]

    2018, ApJ, 854, 172, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaac7d

    Charnay, B., B´ ezard, B., Baudino, J.-L., et al. 2018, ApJ, 854, 172, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaac7d

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaac7d 2018

  28. [28]

    2012, A&A, 542, A41, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201118346

    Chauvin, G., Lagrange, A.-M., Beust, H., et al. 2012, A&A, 542, A41, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201118346

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201118346 2012

  29. [29]

    C., Samland, M., Brems, S

    Cheetham, A. C., Samland, M., Brems, S. S., et al. 2019, A&A, 622, A80, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834112

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201834112 2019

  30. [30]

    J., et al

    Chilcote, J., Pueyo, L., De Rosa, R. J., et al. 2017, AJ, 153, 182, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa63e9

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa63e9 2017

  31. [31]

    2019, MNRAS, 486, 5819

    Christiaens, V., Casassus, S., Absil, O., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 486, 5819

    2019

  32. [32]

    L., McElroy, D

    Christiansen, J. L., McElroy, D. L., Harbut, M., et al. 2025, PSJ, 6, 186, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/ade3c2

    doi:10.3847/psj/ade3c2 2025

  33. [33]

    U., Turatto, M., Gratton, R

    Claudi, R. U., Turatto, M., Gratton, R. G., et al. 2008, in Proc. SPIE, Vol. 7014, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy II, 70143E

    2008

  34. [34]

    M., van Capelleveen, R

    Close, L. M., van Capelleveen, R. F., Weible, G., et al. 2025, ApJL, 990, L9, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adf7a5

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adf7a5 2025

  35. [35]

    A., Carter, A

    Crotts, K. A., Carter, A. L., Lawson, K., et al. 2025, ApJL, 987, L41, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ade798

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ade798 2025

  36. [36]

    2023a, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Currie, T., Biller, B., Lagrange, A., et al. 2023a, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y. Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura, 799, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2205.05696

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2205.05696

  37. [37]

    J., Plavchan, P., et al

    Currie, T., Lada, C. J., Plavchan, P., et al. 2009, ApJ, 698, 1, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/698/1/1

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/698/1/1 2009

  38. [38]

    2011, ApJL, 736, L33, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/736/2/L33

    Currie, T., Thalmann, C., Matsumura, S., et al. 2011, ApJL, 736, L33, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/736/2/L33

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/736/2/l33 2011

  39. [39]

    2013, ApJ, 776, 15, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/776/1/15

    Currie, T., Burrows, A., Madhusudhan, N., et al. 2013, ApJ, 776, 15, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/776/1/15

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/776/1/15 2013

  40. [40]

    M., Brandt, T

    Currie, T., Brandt, G. M., Brandt, T. D., et al. 2023b, Science, 380, 198, doi: 10.1126/science.abo6192

    doi:10.1126/science.abo6192

  41. [41]

    2023, A&A, 674, A207, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346559 De Rosa, R

    Davies, R., Absil, O., Agapito, G., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A207, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346559 De Rosa, R. J., Nielsen, E. L., Wahhaj, Z., et al. 2023, A&A, 672, A94, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202345877

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346559 2023

  42. [42]

    2026, A&A, 707, L13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202658862

    Denis, A., Vigan, A., Chauvin, G., et al. 2026, A&A, 707, L13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202658862

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202658862 2026

  43. [43]

    Dent, W. R. F., Wyatt, M. C., Roberge, A., et al. 2014, Science, 343, 1490, doi: 10.1126/science.1248726

    doi:10.1126/science.1248726 2014

  44. [44]

    S., Snik, F., Por, E

    Doelman, D. S., Snik, F., Por, E. H., et al. 2021, ApOpt, 60, D52, doi: 10.1364/AO.422155

    doi:10.1364/ao.422155 2021

  45. [45]

    2008, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Dohlen, K., Langlois, M., Saisse, M., et al. 2008, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 7014, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy II, ed. I. S. McLean & M. M. Casali, 70143L, doi: 10.1117/12.789786

    doi:10.1117/12.789786 2008

  46. [46]

    J., Brandt, G

    Dupuy, T. J., Brandt, G. M., & Brandt, T. D. 2022, MNRAS, 509, 4411, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3148

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3148 2022

  47. [47]

    J., Liu, M

    Dupuy, T. J., Liu, M. C., Evans, E. L., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 1688, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3557

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3557 2023

  48. [48]

    H., Boss, A

    Durisen, R. H., Boss, A. P., Mayer, L., et al. 2007, in Protostars and Planets V, ed. B. Reipurth, D. Jewitt, & K. Keil, 607, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0603179

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/0603179 2007

  49. [49]

    2014, A&A, 563, A72, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322469

    Faramaz, V., Beust, H., Th´ ebault, P., et al. 2014, A&A, 563, A72, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322469

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322469 2014

  50. [50]

    M., & Vidal-Madjar, A

    Ferlet, R., Hobbs, L. M., & Vidal-Madjar, A. 1987, A&A, 185, 267

    1987

  51. [51]

    W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306, doi: 10.1086/670067

    doi:10.1086/670067 2013

  52. [52]

    P., Zhou, Y., et al

    Franson, K., Bowler, B. P., Zhou, Y., et al. 2023, ApJL, 950, L19, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acd6f6

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acd6f6 2023

  53. [53]

    O., Bowler, B

    Franson, K., Balmer, W. O., Bowler, B. P., et al. 2024, ApJL, 974, L11, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad736a Gagn´ e, J., Mamajek, E. E., Malo, L., et al. 2018, ApJ, 856, 23, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaae09 Gagn´ e, J., Faherty, J. K., Ruiz Diaz, A., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2604.22012, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2604.22012 24B. J. Sutlieff & M. J. Bonse et al....

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad736a 2024

  54. [54]

    P., Mather, J

    Gardner, J. P., Mather, J. C., Clampin, M., et al. 2006, SSRv, 123, 485, doi: 10.1007/s11214-006-8315-7

    doi:10.1007/s11214-006-8315-7 2006

  55. [55]

    P., Mather, J

    Gardner, J. P., Mather, J. C., Abbott, R., et al. 2023, PASP, 135, 068001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/acd1b5

    doi:10.1088/1538-3873/acd1b5 2023

  56. [56]

    D., Bonse, M

    Gebhard, T. D., Bonse, M. J., Quanz, S. P., & Sch¨ olkopf, B. 2022, A&A, 666, A9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142529

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142529 2022

  57. [57]

    M., Brasseur, C

    Ginsburg, A., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., Brasseur, C. E., et al. 2019, AJ, 157, 98, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aafc33

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aafc33 2019

  58. [58]

    H., Leisenring, J., Kammerer, J., et al

    Girard, J. H., Leisenring, J., Kammerer, J., et al. 2022, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 12180, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2022: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, ed. L. E. Coyle, S. Matsuura, & M. D. Perrin, 121803Q, doi: 10.1117/12.2629636

    doi:10.1117/12.2629636 2022

  59. [59]

    Girard, J. H. V., O’Neal, J., Mawet, D., et al. 2012, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 8447, Adaptive Optics Systems III, ed. B. L. Ellerbroek, E. Marchetti, & J.-P. V´ eran, 84470L, doi: 10.1117/12.925660

    doi:10.1117/12.925660 2012

  60. [60]

    A., Ardila, D

    Golimowski, D. A., Ardila, D. R., Krist, J. E., et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 3109, doi: 10.1086/503801 Gomez Gonzalez, C. A., Wertz, O., Absil, O., et al. 2017, AJ, 154, 7 GRAVITY Collaboration, Nowak, M., Lacour, S., et al. 2020, A&A, 633, A110, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936898

    doi:10.1086/503801 2006

  61. [61]

    Y., Bohn, A

    Haffert, S. Y., Bohn, A. J., de Boer, J., et al. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 749, doi: 10.1038/s41550-019-0780-5

    doi:10.1038/s41550-019-0780-5 2019

  62. [62]

    C., & Dent, W

    Han, Y., Wyatt, M. C., & Dent, W. R. F. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 3257, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3769

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3769 2023

  63. [63]

    2026, A&A, 705, A196, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556450

    Han, Y., Mansell, E., Jennings, J., et al. 2026, A&A, 705, A196, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556450

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556450 2026

  64. [64]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 2020

  65. [65]

    R., Lindler, D

    Heap, S. R., Lindler, D. J., Lanz, T. M., et al. 2000, ApJ, 539, 435, doi: 10.1086/309188

    doi:10.1086/309188 2000

  66. [66]

    2023, A&A, 671, L5, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244727 Houll´ e, M., Millour, F., Berio, P., et al

    Hinkley, S., Lacour, S., Marleau, G.-D., et al. 2023, A&A, 671, L5, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244727 Houll´ e, M., Millour, F., Berio, P., et al. 2025, A&A, 704, A182, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453323

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244727 2023

  67. [67]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 2007

  68. [68]

    A., & Mandel, E

    Joye, W. A., & Mandel, E. 2003, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 295, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XII, ed. H. E

    2003

  69. [69]

    L., et al

    Kammerer, J., Girard, J., Carter, A. L., et al. 2022, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 12180, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2022: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, ed. L. E. Coyle, S. Matsuura, & M. D. Perrin, 121803N, doi: 10.1117/12.2628865

    doi:10.1117/12.2628865 2022

  70. [70]

    D., et al

    Kammerer, J., Lawson, K., Perrin, M. D., et al. 2024, AJ, 168, 51, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad4ffe

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad4ffe 2024

  71. [71]

    O., Lacour, S., et al

    Kammerer, J., Winterhalder, T. O., Lacour, S., et al. 2025, A&A, 704, A318, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556860

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556860 2025

  72. [72]

    2025, A&A, 701, A104, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556170

    Kenworthy, M., Stolker, T., Kammerer, J., et al. 2025, A&A, 701, A104, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556170

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556170 2025

  73. [73]

    A., Mellon, S

    Kenworthy, M. A., Mellon, S. N., Bailey, J. I., et al. 2021, A&A, 648, A15, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202040060

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202040060 2021

  74. [74]

    A., Dannert, F

    Kenworthy, M. A., Dannert, F. A., Hayoz, J., et al. 2026, A&A, 708, A239, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202558510

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202558510 2026

  75. [75]

    2018, A&A, 617, A44, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201832957

    Keppler, M., Benisty, M., M¨ uller, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 617, A44, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201832957

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201832957 2018

  76. [76]

    D., Gelino, C

    Kirkpatrick, J. D., Gelino, C. R., Faherty, J. K., et al. 2021, ApJS, 253, 7, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abd107

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/abd107 2021

  77. [77]

    E., Golimowski, D

    Krist, J. E., Golimowski, D. A., Schroeder, D. J., & Henry, T. J. 1998, PASP, 110, 1046, doi: 10.1086/316221

    doi:10.1086/316221 1998

  78. [78]

    J., Rodet, L., et al

    Lacour, S., Wang, J. J., Rodet, L., et al. 2021, A&A, 654, L2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141889

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141889 2021

  79. [79]

    2025, A&A, 694, A236, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452632

    Lacquement, A., Beust, H., Faramaz-Gorka, V., & Duchˆ ene, G. 2025, A&A, 694, A236, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452632

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452632 2025

  80. [80]

    2009, A&A, 493, L21, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200811325

    Lagrange, A.-M., Gratadour, D., Chauvin, G., et al. 2009, A&A, 493, L21, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200811325

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:200811325 2009

Showing first 80 references.

This paper was first reviewed by grok-4.5 on July 14, 2026.