Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

A Small Brown Dwarf in an Aligned Orbit around a Young, Fully-Convective M Star

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

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

Pith's one-line read A brown dwarf orbiting a young, fully convective M dwarf is aligned with the star's spin, the first such obliquity measurement for an M dwarf-brown dwarf system.

desk verdict First brown-dwarf obliquity around an M dwarf: the projected alignment is robust, but the true obliquity and edge-on claim rest on a rotation period the data cannot independently confirm. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.10402 v1 pith:AUQAHANQ submitted 2024-11-15 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.SR

M. Brady , J. Bean , G. Stefánsson , N. Brown , A. Seifahrt , R. Basant , T. Das , R. Luque
show 1 more author
J. Stürmer
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EPastro-ph.SR
keywords browndwarfsMdwarfstarsRossiter-McLaughlineffectobliquityspin-orbitalignmenttransitingfullyconvectiveradialvelocity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper reports the first measurement of the spin-orbit angle of a brown dwarf orbiting an M dwarf, using MAROON-X radial velocities of the transiting system LP 261-75. By modeling the Rossiter-McLaughlin effect, the authors find a projected obliquity of $\lambda = 5^{+11}_{-10}$ degrees and a true obliquity of $\psi = 14^{+8}_{-7}$ degrees, meaning the brown dwarf's orbit is aligned with the star's spin to within the errors. The host star is a young, fully convective M dwarf in the AB Doradus moving group, so the alignment is likely primordial rather than the result of tidal damping. The paper also notes that the brown dwarf's radius is smaller than predicted by isochrones for a roughly 100 million year old object, suggesting an unusual formation history.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Rossiter-McLaughlin (RM) effect, the Doppler anomaly seen when a transiting companion occults rotating regions of the stellar surface. The argument is carried by fitting the RM curve with the Hirano et al. (2011) model, which includes macroturbulence and instrumental line broadening, and by checking the result against three simpler RM models. The true obliquity follows from spherical geometry, $\cos\psi = \cos i_\star \cos i_C + \sin i_\star \sin i_C \cos\lambda$, where the stellar inclination $i_\star$ is obtained by jointly fitting $R_\star$, $P_{\rm rot}$, and $\cos i_\star$ rather than by inverting the projected rotation velocity alone.

What would settle it

Doppler imaging of the star's starspots, or a month-long high-cadence photometric time series, would show whether the rotational modulation repeats every 1.1 or 2.2 days; a true 1.1-day period would make the equatorial velocity about 14 km/s and substantially change the inferred true obliquity.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Using 62 MAROON-X radial velocities from a single transit of LP 261-75C, the authors model the Rossiter-McLaughlin effect with the Hirano et al. (2011) prescription and measure a projected obliquity of $\lambda = 5^{+11}_{-10}$ degrees and a true obliquity of $\psi = 14^{+8}_{-7}$ degrees. They recover a projected equatorial velocity of $v\sin i_\star = 7.00^{+0.15}_{-0.16}$ km s$^{-1}$ and, combining $R_\star = 0.308 \pm 0.005$ $R_\odot$ with $P_{\rm rot} = 2.214 \pm 0.040$ days, find that the star is inclined at about $90^\circ \pm 11^\circ$. The brown dwarf has a mass of $M_C = 67.4 \pm 2.1$ $M_J$ and a radius of $R_C = 0.903^{+0.015}_{-0.014}$ $R_J$; comparison with three sets of brown dwarf isochrones shows the radius to be consistent with a much older object than the system's likely age of about 100 million years. Because the estimated obliquity damping timescale is comparable to or longer than the system age, the authors argue the observed alignment is primordial.

Load-bearing premise

The argument that the system is aligned rests on the 2.214-day photometric period being the true stellar rotation period rather than the 1.1-day alias; if the star actually rotates in 1.1 days, the equatorial velocity would be about 14 km/s and the derived stellar inclination and true obliquity would change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • LP 261-75 joins AU Mic and K2-33 as young M dwarf systems with aligned orbits, strengthening the case that low obliquities are common around fully convective stars.
  • The system becomes another aligned member of the small ensemble of transiting brown dwarfs with obliquity measurements, most of which are consistent with alignment despite hosting stars above the Kraft break.
  • Because the tidal damping timescale is comparable to or longer than the system age, the measured alignment is evidence that this brown dwarf was formed aligned rather than realigned by tides.
  • The compact radius of LP 261-75C relative to roughly 100 million year isochrones implies that current brown dwarf evolutionary models may be missing a process that makes young brown dwarfs smaller than predicted.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the 1.1-day photometric signal is the true rotation period rather than an alias, the equatorial velocity would rise to about 14 km/s and the inferred stellar inclination and true obliquity would shift, although the projected obliquity from the RM shape would be less affected.
  • Doppler imaging of starspots or a long, high-cadence photometric campaign could directly settle whether the star's rotation period is 1.1 or 2.2 days, removing the main ambiguity in the true obliquity.
  • The apparent compactness of LP 261-75C could be tested with an independent age estimate for the system, such as lithium abundance or gyrochronology, before invoking an unusual formation history.
  • If the aligned-brown-dwarf trend holds as more M dwarf-brown dwarf systems are measured, it would suggest that disk fragmentation or early disk-star interactions produce aligned orbits more often than current tidal theory predicts.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. This paper reports new MAROON-X radial-velocity observations of a transit of the brown dwarf LP 261-75C across the fully convective M dwarf LP 261-75A. The authors model the Rossiter-McLaughlin effect with four independent model formulations, finding a projected obliquity of λ = 4.8+11.3−10.2 degrees and, after adopting the 2.214-day rotation period from Bowler et al. (2023), a true obliquity of ψ = 14+8−7 degrees and a stellar inclination of i⋆ = 90 ± 11 degrees. They interpret the system as well-aligned and likely primordially so, and they also refine the brown dwarf's orbital parameters, measure a spectroscopic v sin i⋆ of 7.78 ± 0.48 km/s, and compare the brown dwarf's radius to evolutionary isochrones, finding it more compact than expected for a 100 Myr object.

Significance. This is the first obliquity constraint for a brown dwarf around an M dwarf and one of only a handful of Rossiter-McLaughlin measurements around fully convective stars. The methodology is a strength: the authors fit four different RM models and show that the projected obliquity is stable across model choice, and they cross-check their spectroscopic broadening measurement against an independent spectral analysis from Irwin et al. (2018). If the alignment conclusion holds, the system supports the empirical trend of aligned short-period brown dwarfs and provides a test of obliquity-damping models in a young, fully convective host. The reported radius anomaly for the brown dwarf is a concrete, falsifiable target for future evolutionary-model work. The main caveat is that the true obliquity and the 'edge-on' claim rest on the adopted photometric rotation period, which the RV data do not independently confirm.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2, Section 4.3.2, Table A3] The headline claim of a well-aligned, edge-on system rests entirely on the adopted rotation period Prot = 2.214 ± 0.040 d. The projected obliquity λ is a direct RM measurement and is robust, but the true obliquity ψ and the stellar inclination i⋆ are computed from Equations (3)–(4) using this period. The competing published period Prot = 1.105 ± 0.027 d from Canto Martins et al. (2020) would give veq ≈ 14 km/s, and with the measured v sin i⋆ = 7.78 ± 0.48 km/s would imply i⋆ ≈ 34 degrees and ψ ≈ 57 degrees, reversing the central conclusion. Table A3 shows that the posterior on Prot (2.214+0.037−0.038 d) merely recovers the prior, so the RM data do not independently validate the period. The authors should either include the 1.105 d solution in a marginalized or scenario-based analysis, or clearly state the true-obliquity result as conditional on the adopted alias interpretation.
  2. [Section 4.2] The spectroscopic broadening measurement v sin i⋆ = 7.78 ± 0.48 km/s is 1.5σ above the equatorial velocity veq = 7.04 ± 0.17 km/s derived from the adopted R⋆ and Prot. The paper attributes this to activity-induced line broadening in the young star and therefore excludes this measurement from the RM priors. This is a reasonable decision, but it is an untested assumption that directly affects the derived stellar inclination and hence ψ. I ask the authors to quantify the effect of a plausible activity-driven broadening correction on i⋆ and ψ, or to report a version of the calculation that does not rely on this correction.
  3. [Section 1 and Section 5.2] The interpretation that the alignment is primordial should be softened given the possible period ambiguity. The obliquity-damping timescale estimate τCE ≈ 5×10^8 yr in Equation (5) is only a few times the system age, and the text itself acknowledges this is weak evidence. The discussion should present the comparison as inconclusive rather than as a strong argument for primordial alignment, especially because the 'primordial' claim would change if the shorter rotation period were correct.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Table 3] The rows labeled 'u2,all' appear to be duplicated, with values 0.99 and -0.51 listed for the rmfit column; please clarify which limb-darkening coefficients correspond to which instrument and model.
  2. [Section 3.2 and Figure 2] The text describes the TRES RVs as 'of limited use' for transit-phase coverage, but Table A3 lists fitted TRES parameters and the right panel of Figure 2 seems to include them. Please state explicitly whether the TRES data are included in the fiducial Hirano et al. (2011) fit.
  3. [Reproducibility] The custom numerical computation of the occulted fraction and the implementations of the four RM models are not provided as code. Given the known model-to-model differences in RM analysis, making these routines available (or pointing to a public repository) would substantially strengthen reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the projected obliquity is a free fit to the RM data, and the true obliquity is a standard geometric combination of fitted lambda, measured orbital inclination, and an externally adopted rotation period; only minor method self-citations are present.

full rationale

The central measurement, lambda = 4.8+11.3-10.2 deg, comes from fitting four independent RM models (Hirano et al. 2011, rmfit, Ohta et al. 2005, starry) to the MAROON-X RVs, with lambda as a free parameter and broad priors on veqsini; the different models agree on lambda, so the projected obliquity result is not equivalent to any input. The true obliquity psi is computed from Eq. (3) using the standard geometric identity, and the stellar inclination is parameterized through Eq. (4) with R* and Prot priors that are stated as coming from external photometry and literature (Section 4.3.2, Table A3). The posterior for Prot recovers the prior (2.214 +/- 0.037 d), meaning the RM data are not strongly sensitive to the period, so the 'edge-on' conclusion is conditional on the adopted 2.214 d alias interpretation from Bowler et al. (2023); however, this is an acknowledged prior/assumption, not a fitted quantity being relabeled as a prediction. The tension between the measured spectral vsini = 7.78 +/- 0.48 km/s and the photometric veq = 7.04 +/- 0.17 km/s is explicitly discussed, and the spectral value is not used as a prior for the RM fits, so the fit is not forced to agree with it. The paper's self-citations (Brady et al. 2023 for the broadening method; Stefansson et al. 2022 for rmfit) are methodological references to public tools, not load-bearing arguments, and the radius/isochrone comparison in Section 5.2 uses external evolutionary models (Baraffe et al. 2015; Phillips et al. 2020; Marley et al. 2021). I therefore find no circular step; the score of 2 reflects only the presence of minor, non-load-bearing self-citations and the strong prior dependence of the true obliquity, which is a robustness concern rather than circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper is an observational measurement. The key inputs are standard RM and transit models, prior literature values for the rotation period and moving group membership, and theoretical isochrones. The central alignment claim depends most strongly on the adopted rotation period and the chosen RM model; the secondary radius anomaly depends on the assumed age and evolutionary models.

free parameters (7)
  • Projected obliquity lambda = 4.8+11.3-10.2 deg (Hirano model)
    The central measured quantity, fitted to the MAROON-X RV time series. The claim of alignment rests on this posterior being consistent with zero.
  • Stellar rotation parameterization (R*, Prot, cos i*) = v sin i* = 7.00+0.15-0.16 km/s
    The RM fit uses R*, Prot, and cos i* as free parameters with priors from photometry and the literature; the resulting v sin i* sets the amplitude of the RM signal and the derived true obliquity.
  • Limb-darkening coefficients u1, u2 (blue, red, TRES) = u1,blue = 0.75+0.25-0.35; u2,blue = -0.07+0.48-0.31; u1,red = 0.40+0.24-0.34; u2,red = 0.01+0.48-0.24; TRES values…
    Fitted separately for each channel and spectrograph with uniform priors. These parameters affect the shape of the RM curve.
  • RV jitter per dataset = 10+8-7 m/s (blue), 9+5-5 m/s (red), 212+120-94 m/s (TRES)
    Fitted to absorb stellar activity and instrumental noise; broad uniform priors.
  • Line profile parameters gamma, zeta, beta = gamma = 0.9+0.4-0.6, zeta = 0.8+/-0.5, beta = 4.0+0.7-0.8 km/s
    Hirano model hyperparameters for velocity broadening; gamma and zeta are essentially unconstrained and recover priors; beta is anchored to MAROON-X resolution.
  • RV semi-amplitude K = 21.75 +/- 0.02 km/s
    Fitted simultaneously with the RM signal; the brown dwarf mass depends on it, but here it mainly absorbs the Keplerian slope.
  • Transit shape parameters r1, r2 and GP hyperparameters = r1 = 0.3848 +/- 0.0311; r2 = 0.2938 +/- 0.0022; rho_GP = 0.104 +/- 0.007 (TESS)
    Fitted to TESS and MEarth photometry with juliet; these determine the radius ratio and thus the stellar radius via Eq. 1.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The active-region interpretation of Bowler et al. (2023): the 2.214 day period is the true stellar rotation period, and the 1.1 day signal is a harmonic.
    Invoked in Section 2 and Section 4.3.2 to set the v sin i* prior and to convert v sin i* into the stellar inclination for the true obliquity. If false, the derived true obliquity changes.
  • domain assumption LP 261-75 is a member of the AB Doradus Moving Group with age 133 Myr (Sun et al. 2022; Gagne et al. 2018).
    Used in Section 5 to interpret the alignment as primordial and to argue the brown dwarf radius is anomalously small. The radius anomaly claim collapses if the age is much older.
  • domain assumption The circular orbit assumption for LP 261-75C (e = 0), based on e < 0.007 from Irwin et al. (2018).
    Used in the photometric fits and the stellar density relation (Eq. 1). A non-zero eccentricity would bias the derived stellar radius.
  • domain assumption The RM model of Hirano et al. (2011) with Gaussian line profiles, quadratic limb darkening, and the listed broadening parameters accurately describes the stellar surface and instrument response.
    Central to the RM fit; the paper compares four models and selects this one based on physical plausibility of the recovered parameters.
  • domain assumption Equilibrium tide theory with the empirical calibration of Albrecht et al. (2012) gives the relevant obliquity damping timescale.
    Used in Section 5 to argue that the system is too young for tidal realignment, so the alignment is primordial. The paper acknowledges the timescale is imprecise.
  • domain assumption Brown dwarf evolutionary models (Baraffe et al. 2015; Phillips et al. 2020; Marley et al. 2021) correctly predict the radius-mass-age relation.
    Used to claim the radius is inconsistent with the system's youth. The three models agree, but all are theoretical.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Small Brown Dwarf in an Aligned Orbit around a Young, Fully-Convective M Star." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AUQAHANQ

@misc{pith2026241110402,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Small Brown Dwarf in an Aligned Orbit around a Young, Fully-Convective M Star},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AUQAHANQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.10402}
}
abstract

A star's spin-orbit angle can give us insight into a system's formation and dynamical history. In this paper, we use MAROON-X observations of the Rossiter-McLaughlin (RM) effect to measure the projected obliquity of the LP 261-75 (also known as TOI-1779) system, focusing on the fully-convective M dwarf LP 261-75A and the transiting brown dwarf LP 261-75C. This is the first obliquity constraint of a brown dwarf orbiting an M dwarf and the seventh obliquity constraint of a brown dwarf overall. We measure a projected obliquity of $5^{+11}_{-10}$ degrees and a true obliquity of $14^{+8}_{-7}$ degrees for the system, meaning that the system is well-aligned and that the star is rotating very nearly edge-on, with an inclination of $90^o\,\pm\,11^o$. The system thus follows along with the trends observed in transiting brown dwarfs around hotter stars, which typically have low obliquities. The tendency for brown dwarfs to be aligned may point to some enhanced obliquity damping in brown dwarf systems, but there is also a possibility that the LP 261-75 system was simply formed aligned. In addition, we note that the brown dwarf's radius ($R_C\,=\,0.9$ R$_J$) is not consistent with the youth of the system or radius trends observed in other brown dwarfs, indicating that LP 261-75C may have an unusual formation history.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.10402 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The field around LP 261-75 in TESS sector 21, with the pipeline aperture outlined in red. Red circles in￾dicate other stars known from Gaia DR3, with their size indicating their flux relative to LP 261-75. The results from sector 48 are similar and thus not included. This figure was generated using tpfplotter. timate. LP 261-75B is around 12 arcseconds away from LP 261-75A (Reid & Walkowicz 2006) and LP 261-75C’s sh… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Left: The red- and blue-channel MAROON-X RVs of LP 261-75A. The RV uncertainties are too small to be visible in this plot. Right: All of the available RV data on LP 261-75A, with a fit model of the orbit of LP 261-75C in gray. The RV slope observed in the MAROON-X data is consistent with the brown dwarf’s orbit inferred from the TRES data. We can then solve for RA, finding RA =  (MA + MC )GP2 4π 2 1/3 aC RA −1 (… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. TESS 2-minute PDCSAP photometry of the LP 261-75 system. Outliers due to flares and transit events are removed in order to focus on the rotational modulation of the host star. LP 261-75A is quite young and active, with emissive fea￾tures in its spectrum. Systematic differences between the two spectra due to their dramatic differences in age and activity features could result in broader, noisier CCFs when they are cr… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: A comparison between the model outputs of the Hirano et al. (2011), rmfit, Ohta et al. (2005), and starry RM models. For these models, we assume λ = 0o veq sini = 7.0 km s−1 , u1 = 0.4, and u2 = 0.2. Both the Hirano et al. (2011) and rmfit models have β = 3.5 km s−1 an…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Top: Final RM fit to the MAROON-X RV data, with the Keplerian shifts subtracted out. Bottom: Residuals of the RM fit to the MAROON-X data. forces that guide this decay act on similar timescales to the tidal forces that would align LP 261-75C, it is thus likely that the…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The host star Teff vs λ for all systems with tran￾siting brown dwarfs with measured obliquities. The Kraft break is shown as an orange line, and the gray line corre￾sponds to an aligned λ = 0o . LP 261-75C is highlighted with a red star. The stellar temperatures are dr…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The mass and radius of LP 261-75C, compared to brown dwarf isochrones from Baraffe et al. (2015) (solid line), equilibrium chemistry ATMO 2020 models (Phillips et al. 2020, dot-dashed line,), and solar metallicity Sonora Bob￾cat models (Marley et al. 2021, dashed line)…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. From Misaligned Sub-Saturns to Aligned Brown Dwarfs: The Highest $M_{\rm p}/M{_*}$ Systems Exhibit Low Obliquities, Even around Hot Stars

    astro-ph.EP 2024-12 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Single-star exoplanet systems with planet-to-star mass ratios above roughly 2e-3 are preferentially spin-orbit aligned, even for hot stars, suggesting a primordial formation boundary.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

99 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    4auQ + *Zv VUQ EB Z c 3II^c 9d ˼sα a t hLF@ `2 d 4&# 0 hLF@ `2 d 4&# 0 hLF@ `2 d 4&# 0 hLF@ `2?O WNN6mڤ#GӪ^

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

    arXiv 2021

  2. [2]

    C., Horner , J., Wittenmyer , R

    Addison , B. C., Horner , J., Wittenmyer , R. A., et al. 2021, , 162, 137, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac1685

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac1685 2021

  3. [3]

    N., Johnson , J

    Albrecht , S., Winn , J. N., Johnson , J. A., et al. 2012, , 757, 18, 10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/18

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/757/1/18 2012

  4. [4]

    H., Dawson , R

    Albrecht , S. H., Dawson , R. I., & Winn , J. N. 2022, , 134, 082001, 10.1088/1538-3873/ac6c09

    doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ac6c09 2022

  5. [5]

    F., & Barcel \'o Forteza , S

    Aller , A., Lillo-Box , J., Jones , D., Miranda , L. F., & Barcel \'o Forteza , S. 2020, , 635, A128, 10.1051/0004-6361/201937118

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201937118 2020

  6. [6]

    P., Tollerud , E

    Astropy Collaboration , Robitaille , T. P., Tollerud , E. J., et al. 2013, , 558, A33, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 2013

  7. [7]

    M., Sip o cz , B

    Astropy Collaboration , Price-Whelan , A. M., Sip o cz , B. M., et al. 2018, , 156, 123, 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f 2018

  8. [8]

    M., Lim , P

    Astropy Collaboration , Price-Whelan , A. M., Lim , P. L., et al. 2022, , 935, 167, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74 2022

Show all 99 references
  1. [9]

    2015, , 577, A42, 10.1051/0004-6361/201425481

    Baraffe , I., Homeier , D., Allard , F., & Chabrier , G. 2015, , 577, A42, 10.1051/0004-6361/201425481

    2015 doi

  2. [10]

    Y., Krushinsky , V

    Benni , P., Burdanov , A. Y., Krushinsky , V. V., et al. 2021, , 505, 4956, 10.1093/mnras/stab1567

    2021 doi

  3. [11]

    2001, , 374, 733, 10.1051/0004-6361:20010730

    Bouchy , F., Pepe , F., & Queloz , D. 2001, , 374, 733, 10.1051/0004-6361:20010730

    2001 doi

  4. [12]

    Bou \'e , G., Montalto , M., Boisse , I., Oshagh , M., & Santos , N. C. 2013, , 550, A53, 10.1051/0004-6361/201220146

    2013 doi

  5. [13]

    R., Allart , R., et al

    Bourrier , V., Zapatero Osorio , M. R., Allart , R., et al. 2022, , 663, A160, 10.1051/0004-6361/202142559

    2022 doi

  6. [14]

    P., Tran , Q

    Bowler , B. P., Tran , Q. H., Zhang , Z., et al. 2023, , 165, 164, 10.3847/1538-3881/acbd34

    2023 doi

  7. [15]

    L., Seifahrt , A., et al

    Brady , M., Bean , J. L., Seifahrt , A., et al. 2023, , 165, 129, 10.3847/1538-3881/acb5f7

    2023 doi

  8. [16]

    Brown , D. J. A., Triaud , A. H. M. J., Doyle , A. P., et al. 2017, , 464, 810, 10.1093/mnras/stw2316

    2017 doi

  9. [17]

    L., Gomes , R

    Canto Martins , B. L., Gomes , R. L., Messias , Y. S., et al. 2020, , 250, 20, 10.3847/1538-4365/aba73f

    2020 doi

  10. [18]

    Carnall , A. C. 2017, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1705.05165. 1705.05165

    2017 arXiv

  11. [19]

    1997, , 327, 1039

    Chabrier , G., & Baraffe , I. 1997, , 327, 1039. astro-ph/9704118

    1997 arXiv

  12. [20]

    H., & Witte , S

    Claret , A., Hauschildt , P. H., & Witte , S. 2012, , 546, A14, 10.1051/0004-6361/201219849

    2012 doi

  13. [21]

    M., Skrutskie , M

    Cutri , R. M., Skrutskie , M. F., van Dyk , S., et al. 2003, VizieR Online Data Catalog, II/246

    2003

  14. [22]

    P., et al

    Czesla , S., Schr \"o ter , S., Schneider , C. P., et al. 2019, PyA: Python astronomy-related packages . 1906.010

    2019

  15. [23]

    B., van Roestel , J., & Rodriguez , A

    El-Badry , K., Burdge , K. B., van Roestel , J., & Rodriguez , A. C. 2023, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 6, 33, 10.21105/astro.2307.15729

    2023 arXiv

  16. [24]

    G., & Guinan , E

    Engle , S. G., & Guinan , E. F. 2023, , 954, L50, 10.3847/2041-8213/acf472

    2023 doi

  17. [25]

    2018, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 2, 209, 10.3847/2515-5172/aaef38

    Espinoza , N. 2018, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 2, 209, 10.3847/2515-5172/aaef38

    2018 doi

  18. [26]

    2019, , 490, 2262, 10.1093/mnras/stz2688

    Espinoza , N., Kossakowski , D., & Brahm , R. 2019, , 490, 2262, 10.1093/mnras/stz2688

    2019 doi

  19. [27]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.00725, 10.48550/arXiv.2408.00725

    Ferreira , T., Rice , M., Wang , X.-Y., & Wang , S. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.00725, 10.48550/arXiv.2408.00725

    2024 doi arXiv

  20. [28]

    2017, ArXiv

    Foreman-Mackey , D., Agol , E., Angus , R., & Ambikasaran , S. 2017, ArXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.09710

    2017 arXiv

  21. [29]

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

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

    2013 doi

  22. [30]

    Gagn \'e , J., Fontaine , G., Simon , A., & Faherty , J. K. 2018, , 861, L13, 10.3847/2041-8213/aacdff

    2018 doi

  23. [31]

    2020, VizieR Online Data Catalog, I/350

    Gaia Collaboration . 2020, VizieR Online Data Catalog, I/350

    2020

  24. [32]

    2021, , 649, A6, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039498

    ---. 2021, , 649, A6, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039498

    2021 doi

  25. [33]

    X., Dai , F., et al

    Gan , T., Wang , S. X., Dai , F., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2406.12798, 10.48550/arXiv.2406.12798

    2024 doi arXiv

  26. [34]

    J., et al

    Giacalone , S., Dai , F., Zanazzi , J. J., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.21235, 10.48550/arXiv.2407.21235

    2024 doi arXiv

  27. [35]

    Gray , D. F. 2005, The Observation and Analysis of Stellar Photospheres (Cambridge University Press)

    2005

  28. [36]

    Grether , D., & Lineweaver , C. H. 2006, , 640, 1051, 10.1086/500161

    2006 doi

  29. [37]

    R., Millman, K

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

    2020 doi

  30. [38]

    2019, , 623, A39, 10.1051/0004-6361/201834672

    Hippke , M., & Heller , R. 2019, , 623, A39, 10.1051/0004-6361/201834672

    2019 doi

  31. [39]

    2010, , 709, 458, 10.1088/0004-637X/709/1/458

    Hirano , T., Suto , Y., Taruya , A., et al. 2010, , 709, 458, 10.1088/0004-637X/709/1/458

    2010 doi

  32. [40]

    N., et al

    Hirano , T., Suto , Y., Winn , J. N., et al. 2011, , 742, 69, 10.1088/0004-637X/742/2/69

    2011 doi

  33. [41]

    N., et al

    Hirano , T., Gaidos , E., Winn , J. N., et al. 2020, , 890, L27, 10.3847/2041-8213/ab74dc

    2020 doi

  34. [42]

    2024, , 530, 3117, 10.1093/mnras/stae998

    Hirano , T., Gaidos , E., Harakawa , H., et al. 2024, , 530, 3117, 10.1093/mnras/stae998

    2024 doi

  35. [43]

    M., Charbonneau , D., Esquerdo , G

    Irwin , J. M., Charbonneau , D., Esquerdo , G. A., et al. 2018, , 156, 140, 10.3847/1538-3881/aad9a3

    2018 doi

  36. [44]

    Jackman , J. A. G., Wheatley , P. J., Bayliss , D., et al. 2019, , 489, 5146, 10.1093/mnras/stz2496

    2019 doi

  37. [45]

    M., Twicken , J

    Jenkins , J. M., Twicken , J. D., McCauliff , S., et al. 2016, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9913, Software and Cyberinfrastructure for Astronomy IV, ed. G. Chiozzi & J. C. Guzman , 99133E, 10.1117/12.2233418

    2016 doi

  38. [46]

    M., & Chiang , E

    Jennings , R. M., & Chiang , E. 2021, , 507, 5187, 10.1093/mnras/stab2429

    2021 doi

  39. [47]

    Kipping , D. M. 2013, , 435, 2152, 10.1093/mnras/stt1435

    2013 doi

  40. [48]

    D., Henry , T

    Kirkpatrick , J. D., Henry , T. J., & McCarthy , Donald W., J. 1991, , 77, 417, 10.1086/191611

    1991 doi

  41. [49]

    Kraft , R. P. 1967, , 150, 551, 10.1086/149359

    1967 doi

  42. [50]

    2015, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 127, 1161, 10.1086/683602

    Kreidberg , L. 2015, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 127, 1161, 10.1086/683602

    2015 doi

  43. [51]

    Lai , D., Foucart , F., & Lin , D. N. C. 2011, , 412, 2790, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.18127.x

    2011

  44. [52]

    Lightkurve Collaboration , Cardoso , J. V. d. M., Hedges , C., et al. 2018, Lightkurve: Kepler and TESS time series analysis in Python , Astrophysics Source Code Library. 1812.013

    2018

  45. [53]

    2019, , 157, 64, 10.3847/1538-3881/aae8e5

    Luger , R., Agol , E., Foreman-Mackey , D., et al. 2019, , 157, 64, 10.3847/1538-3881/aae8e5

    2019 doi

  46. [54]

    2021, rodluger/starry: v1.2.0, v1.2.0, Zenodo, 10.5281/zenodo.5567781

    Luger, R., Agol, E., Foreman-Mackey, D., et al. 2021, rodluger/starry: v1.2.0, v1.2.0, Zenodo, 10.5281/zenodo.5567781

    2021 doi

  47. [55]

    2014, , 439, 2781, 10.1093/mnras/stu134

    Ma , B., & Ge , J. 2014, , 439, 2781, 10.1093/mnras/stu134

    2014 doi

  48. [56]

    E., & Bell , C

    Mamajek , E. E., & Bell , C. P. M. 2014, , 445, 2169, 10.1093/mnras/stu1894

    2014 doi

  49. [57]

    W., Feiden , G

    Mann , A. W., Feiden , G. A., Gaidos , E., Boyajian , T., & von Braun , K. 2015, , 804, 64, 10.1088/0004-637X/804/1/64

    2015 doi

  50. [58]

    W., Newton , E

    Mann , A. W., Newton , E. R., Rizzuto , A. C., et al. 2016, , 152, 61, 10.3847/0004-6256/152/3/61

    2016 doi

  51. [59]

    L., & Albrecht , S

    Marcussen , M. L., & Albrecht , S. H. 2022, , 933, 227, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac75c2

    2022 doi

  52. [60]

    S., Saumon , D., Visscher , C., et al

    Marley , M. S., Saumon , D., Visscher , C., et al. 2021, , 920, 85, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac141d

    2021 doi

  53. [61]

    2021, TESS Light Curves - All Sectors, STScI/MAST, 10.17909/T9-NMC8-F686

    MAST Team . 2021, TESS Light Curves - All Sectors, STScI/MAST, 10.17909/T9-NMC8-F686

    2021 doi

  54. [62]

    Masuda , K., & Winn , J. N. 2020, , 159, 81, 10.3847/1538-3881/ab65be

    2020 doi

  55. [63]

    McLaughlin , D. B. 1924, , 60, 22, 10.1086/142826

    1924 doi

  56. [64]

    2008, , 120, 317, 10.1086/533420

    Nutzman , P., & Charbonneau , D. 2008, , 120, 317, 10.1086/533420

    2008 doi

  57. [65]

    2005, , 622, 1118, 10.1086/428344

    Ohta , Y., Taruya , A., & Suto , Y. 2005, , 622, 1118, 10.1086/428344

    2005 doi

  58. [66]

    G., Collins , K

    Paegert , M., Stassun , K. G., Collins , K. A., et al. 2021, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2108.04778. 2108.04778

    2021 arXiv

  59. [67]

    R., et al

    Palle , E., Luque , R., Zapatero Osorio , M. R., et al. 2021, , 650, A55, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039937

    2021 doi

  60. [68]

    W., Tremblin , P., Baraffe , I., et al

    Phillips , M. W., Tremblin , P., Baraffe , I., et al. 2020, , 637, A38, 10.1051/0004-6361/201937381

    2020 doi

  61. [69]

    2000, , 359, L13, 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0006213

    Queloz , D., Eggenberger , A., Mayor , M., et al. 2000, , 359, L13, 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0006213

    2000 doi arXiv

  62. [70]

    N., & Walkowicz , L

    Reid , I. N., & Walkowicz , L. M. 2006, , 118, 671, 10.1086/503446

    2006 doi

  63. [71]

    R., Winn , J

    Ricker , G. R., Winn , J. N., Vanderspek , R., et al. 2015, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 1, 014003, 10.1117/1.JATIS.1.1.014003

    2015 doi

  64. [72]

    Rossiter , R. A. 1924, , 60, 15, 10.1086/142825

    1924 doi

  65. [73]

    R., G \"a nsicke , B

    Schreiber , M. R., G \"a nsicke , B. T., Rebassa-Mansergas , A., et al. 2010, , 513, L7, 10.1051/0004-6361/201013990

    2010 doi

  66. [74]

    L., & Schwab , C

    Seifahrt , A., St \"u rmer , J., Bean , J. L., & Schwab , C. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 10702, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy VII, ed. C. J. Evans , L. Simard , & H. Takami , 107026D, 10.1...

    2018 doi

  67. [75]

    L., Kasper , D., et al

    Seifahrt , A., Bean , J. L., Kasper , D., et al. 2022, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 12184, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy IX, ed. C. J. Evans , J. J. Bryant , & K. Motohara , 121841G, 10.1117/12.2629428

    2022 doi

  68. [76]

    J., Beatty, T

    Siverd, R. J., Beatty, T. G., Pepper, J., et al. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 761, 123, 10.1088/0004-637X/761/2/123

    2012 doi

  69. [77]

    C., Stumpe , M

    Smith , J. C., Stumpe , M. C., Van Cleve , J. E., et al. 2012, , 124, 1000, 10.1086/667697

    2012 doi

  70. [78]

    G., & Jenkins , J

    Soto , M. G., & Jenkins , J. S. 2018, , 615, A76, 10.1051/0004-6361/201731533

    2018 doi

  71. [79]

    Speagle , J. S. 2020, , 493, 3132, 10.1093/mnras/staa278

    2020 doi

  72. [80]

    G., Oelkers , R

    Stassun , K. G., Oelkers , R. J., Paegert , M., et al. 2019, , 158, 138, 10.3847/1538-3881/ab3467

    2019 doi

  73. [81]

    2020, , 160, 192, 10.3847/1538-3881/abb13a

    Stef \`a nsson , G., Mahadevan , S., Maney , M., et al. 2020, , 160, 192, 10.3847/1538-3881/abb13a

    2020 doi

  74. [82]

    2022, , 931, L15, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac6e3c

    Stefánsson , G., Mahadevan , S., Petrovich , C., et al. 2022, , 931, L15, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac6e3c

    2022 doi

  75. [83]

    C., Smith , J

    Stumpe , M. C., Smith , J. C., Catanzarite , J. H., et al. 2014, , 126, 100, 10.1086/674989

    2014 doi

  76. [84]

    C., Smith , J

    Stumpe , M. C., Smith , J. C., Van Cleve , J. E., et al. 2012, , 124, 985, 10.1086/667698

    2012 doi

  77. [85]

    Sun , Q., Xuesong Wang , S., Gan , T., & Mann , A. W. 2022, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 22, 075008, 10.1088/1674-4527/ac6fb9

    2022 doi

  78. [86]

    2020, , 492, 5641, 10.1093/mnras/staa179

    Takaishi , D., Tsukamoto , Y., & Suto , Y. 2020, , 492, 5641, 10.1093/mnras/staa179

    2020 doi

  79. [87]

    C., Keen , A., Oda , K., et al

    Terrien , R. C., Keen , A., Oda , K., et al. 2022, , 927, L11, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac4fc8

    2022 doi

  80. [88]

    P., & Fortney , J

    Thorngren , D. P., & Fortney , J. J. 2018, , 155, 214, 10.3847/1538-3881/aaba13

    2018 doi

  81. [89]

    Triaud , A. H. M. J., Queloz , D., Bouchy , F., et al. 2009, , 506, 377, 10.1051/0004-6361/200911897

    2009 doi

  82. [90]

    Triaud , A. H. M. J., Hebb , L., Anderson , D. R., et al. 2013, , 549, A18, 10.1051/0004-6361/201219643

    2013 doi

  83. [91]

    D., Catanzarite , J

    Twicken , J. D., Catanzarite , J. H., Clarke , B. D., et al. 2018, , 130, 064502, 10.1088/1538-3873/aab694

    2018 doi

  84. [92]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    2020 doi

  85. [93]

    Winn , J. N. 2010, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1001.2010. 1001.2010

    2010 arXiv

  86. [94]

    N., Fabrycky , D., Albrecht , S., & Johnson , J

    Winn , J. N., Fabrycky , D., Albrecht , S., & Johnson , J. A. 2010, , 718, L145, 10.1088/2041-8205/718/2/L145

    2010 doi

  87. [95]

    N., Noyes , R

    Winn , J. N., Noyes , R. W., Holman , M. J., et al. 2005, , 631, 1215, 10.1086/432571

    2005 doi

  88. [96]

    N., Johnson , J

    Winn , J. N., Johnson , J. A., Marcy , G. W., et al. 2006, , 653, L69, 10.1086/510528

    2006 doi

  89. [97]

    Zahn , J. P. 1977, , 57, 383

    1977

  90. [98]

    J., et al

    Zechmeister , M., Reiners , A., Amado , P. J., et al. 2020, SERVAL: SpEctrum Radial Velocity AnaLyser , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2006.011. 2006.011

    2020

  91. [99]

    \'A ., Bayliss , D., et al

    Zhou , G., Bakos , G. \'A ., Bayliss , D., et al. 2019, , 157, 31, 10.3847/1538-3881/aaf1bb

    2019 doi

Pith tools

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