Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Protosolar D-to-H abundance and one part-per-billion PH$_{3}$ in the coldest brown dwarf

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Deuterium has been detected in an atmosphere outside the solar system for the first time.

desk verdict First detection of deuterium in an extrasolar atmosphere, backed by solid retrieval work on two independent datasets, but the 'protosolar D/H' headline rests on an unconstrained fractionation factor that could push the value outside the claimed range. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.14541 v2 pith:COVYHMOA submitted 2024-11-21 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.EP

Melanie J. Rowland , Caroline V. Morley , Brittany E. Miles , Genaro Suárez , Jacqueline K. Faherty , Andrew J. Skemer , Samuel A. Beiler , Michael R. Line
show 19 more authors
Gordon L. Bjoraker Jonathan J. Fortney Johanna M. Vos Sherelyn Alejandro Merchan Mark Marley Ben Burningham Richard Freedman Ehsan Gharib-Nezhad Natasha Batalha Roxana Lupu Channon Visscher Adam C. Schneider T. R. Geballe Aarynn Carter Katelyn Allers James Mang Dániel Apai Mary Anne Limbach Mikayla J. Wilson
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.EP
keywords deuteriumD/HratiobrowndwarfsYWISE0855-0714CH3DphosphineJWST
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 detection of deuterium in an atmosphere outside the solar system, made by measuring the ratio of deuterated methane (CH3D) to ordinary methane (CH4) in the spectrum of the coldest known brown dwarf, WISE 0855-0714. From that ratio the authors derive a D/H ratio of about 1.15–1.62 × $10^{-5}$, close to the protosolar value, implying the object never burned its deuterium and therefore has a mass below the roughly 12 Jupiter-mass deuterium-burning limit. The same spectra yield a well-constrained phosphine (PH3) abundance of about one part per billion, far below what vertical-mixing models predict. The result demonstrates that moderate-resolution JWST spectra can measure an isotopic ratio that traces formation and evolution in cold substellar and planetary atmospheres.

What carries the argument

The measurement hinges on the isotopologue ratio CH3D/CH4 retrieved from the 4.31–4.67 µm spectral region, where CH3D produces up to roughly 1.5% flux deficits. The authors convert the retrieved ratio to a bulk D/H by assuming the exchange reaction CH4 + HD ↔ CH3D + H2 sets the fractionation, and adopt a fractionation factor of 1.0–1.1 extrapolated from solar-system gas giants. The CH3D opacity is normalized to the terrestrial CH3D/CH4 ratio of 1:1606, so the retrieved abundance is a multiplier on that reference.

What would settle it

A direct measurement of the D/H ratio in WISE 0855 through a different carrier, such as HD rotational lines or HDO, that disagrees with the CH3D-based value by more than the quoted errors would falsify the fractionation assumption; a targeted high-resolution (R > 25,000) spectrum resolving individual CH3D lines would provide an independent check.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is a detection of deuterium in an extrasolar atmosphere through a relative measurement of CH3D and CH4 in two independent JWST NIRSpec/G395M data sets of WISE 0855-0714. The retrieved log10(CH3D/CH4) relative to the terrestrial ratio of 1:1606 is -1.09 ± 0.06 in the time-series data and -0.94 ± 0.06 in the fixed-slit data, corresponding to (D/H)_CH4 = 1.27 × $10^{-5}$ and 1.78 × $10^{-5}$, and a bulk D/H of 1.15–1.62 × $10^{-5}$ after applying a fractionation factor between 1.0 and 1.1. Models with CH3D opacity are strongly preferred (ΔBIC ≈ -45 to -55) and an injection–retrieval test confirms the information is present in the data. The paper also reports a phosphine abundance of $10^{-9}$.24 to $10^{-8}$.91 by volume, consistent with very slow vertical mixing in the atmosphere.

Load-bearing premise

The reported D/H value rests on the assumption that methane and hydrogen gas in WISE 0855 fractionate deuterium by a factor of 1.0–1.1, a range borrowed from solar-system gas giants and not measured in this object.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Deuterium can now be used as a mass indicator for cold brown dwarfs: for objects older than about 100 Myr, the presence of CH3D implies a mass below the deuterium-burning limit.
  • Moderate-resolution (R ~ 1000) NIRSpec spectra with signal-to-noise above 100 are sufficient to detect CH3D in cold Y dwarfs, opening the way to D/H surveys of a larger sample.
  • The protosolar-like D/H of WISE 0855 suggests its volatile inventory is primordial and is consistent with formation through gravitational collapse rather than through a disk with heavy ice enrichment.
  • The measured PH3 abundance of about one part per billion, far below predictions from CO-inferred mixing, indicates that phosphorus chemistry in cold atmospheres is incompletely understood.
  • The detection makes CH3D a practical target for temperate giant exoplanets, where D/H would trace accretion history rather than the deuterium-burning limit.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If D/H in cold field brown dwarfs tracks the local interstellar medium, comparing this value with D/H in young planets in disks could map how deuterium is partitioned during planet formation, which the paper does not attempt.
  • The apparent discrepancy between CO-based and PH3-based mixing rates could be resolved if PH3 is removed by an unknown cold trap or photochemical sink; a testable extension is to search for PH3 in warmer T dwarfs where such a sink would be less effective.
  • The same CH3D/CH4 technique could be applied to directly imaged temperate exoplanets, where the deuterium-burning limit is irrelevant and D/H would instead trace accretion history; the required signal-to-noise may be reachable with JWST or ELT-class telescopes.
  • An independent D/H derivation from HDO rather than CH3D, possible at longer wavelengths, would test the assumed fractionation factor and is an obvious next observation.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents atmospheric retrievals of two JWST NIRSpec/G395M spectra of the coldest known Y dwarf, WISE 0855-0714: a published fixed-slit GTO spectrum and a new 11-hour time-series GO spectrum. The retrievals are used to report two main results: a detection of deuterated methane (CH3D) from which the authors infer a D/H ratio consistent with the protosolar value, and a well-constrained phosphine (PH3) abundance near one part per billion. The CH3D and PH3 detections are each supported by large ΔBIC differences over models without those opacities, and the CH3D result is further tested with an injection-recovery experiment. The paper also discusses implications for the mass of WISE 0855 relative to the deuterium-burning limit, for CH3D detectability in exoplanets, and for phosphorus chemistry in cold atmospheres.

Significance. If the D/H inference is correct, this would be the first measurement of deuterium in an atmosphere outside the solar system and the first extrasolar D/H ratio for a substellar object, with direct relevance to brown-dwarf and giant-planet formation. The manuscript has several genuine strengths: the CH3D and PH3 detections are supported by large ΔBIC values in two independent datasets, the CH3D detection is backed by an injection-recovery test, the PH3 detection has a cross-correlation S/N of 8.5, and Table 2 shows that the retrieved CH3D/CH4 ratio is robust to changes in cloud treatment, P(T) smoothing, H2O profile, and rotational broadening. These checks make the presence of CH3D and PH3 in the spectra credible. The principal weakness is that the headline 'protosolar D/H' value is not directly measured; it depends on an assumed CH3D fractionation factor, and the paper itself states that this factor is not robustly constrained for WISE 0855.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3.1, Eq. (4)] The reported bulk D/H values, (1.15–1.62)×10^-5, are obtained by dividing the retrieved (D/H)_CH4 by a fractionation factor assumed to lie between 1.0 and 1.1, with the text explicitly stating that there is no robust constraint on the CH3D quench temperature in WISE 0855. This assumption is load-bearing for the 'protosolar D/H' headline: Lecluse et al. (1996) give larger fractionation factors at lower quench temperatures, and WISE 0855 is far colder than Jupiter, for which the paper quotes a factor of 1.25. A plausible α of 1.4–1.6 would shift the GO-derived bulk D/H from 1.15×10^-5 to roughly 0.8×10^-5, outside the quoted protosolar range of 1–2×10^-5. The quoted error bars include only retrieval uncertainty, not this α ambiguity. Please quantify the sensitivity of the D/H result to α over a range spanning solar-system quench temperatures, or reframe the central claim as a measurement of CH3D/CH4 rather than a robust protosolar D/H determination.
  2. [§2.2, Eq. (3)] The CH3D abundance inference depends on the absolute normalization of the CH3D opacities, which is described only as 'CH3D cross sections were scaled to terrestrial abundances (6.227 × 10^-4 or 1:1606 relative to CH4).' If this scaling effectively fixes the band strengths to the terrestrial CH3D/CH4 ratio, then any error in the line-list normalization or in the adopted terrestrial reference ratio would propagate directly into the retrieved log10(CH3D/CH4) and hence into the D/H value. Please state the provenance of the scaling, clarify whether the final reported abundance depends on this normalization, and test the sensitivity of the retrieved CH3D/CH4 to a plausible range of normalization errors.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Appendix B] The paper's own cross-correlation analysis for CH3D is inconclusive, with prominent troughs and a CCF S/N of 3.8, as stated in Appendix B. The detection argument in the main text rests on the ΔBIC values and the injection-recovery test, which is acceptable, but the main text and conclusions should state this limitation explicitly rather than implying that the cross-correlation analysis independently confirms the CH3D detection.
  2. [Abstract and §3.2] The title and abstract say 'one part-per-billion PH3,' while the GO retrieval gives log10(VMR) = -9.24 ± 0.07, which is about 0.6 ppb; the GTO retrieval gives about 1.2 ppb. Consider saying 'sub- to one part-per-billion' or quoting the retrieved range to avoid overstating the precision of the abundance.
  3. [Figure 1] The caption says 'both PH3 or CH3D are detected in both datasets'; the wording should be 'both PH3 and CH3D' to avoid ambiguity, since each is detected separately.
  4. [§2.2] The sentence 'We modified the free temperature-pressure profile described in Line et al. (2015) to directly retrieve the temperature at 18 points' would benefit from a brief statement of how the pressure grid is spaced and how the profile is interpolated between the retrieved points, since this choice affects the derived P(T) and the effective temperature calculation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the CH3D/CH4 and PH3 abundances are fitted spectral quantities, and the D/H conversion is an explicit algebraic step with a stated physical assumption, not a circular redefinition.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are derived from atmospheric retrievals of two independent JWST datasets. The CH3D/CH4 ratio is a directly retrieved parameter with a broad prior (-3 to 3 in log10 relative to terrestrial), and the detection is supported by BIC comparisons, an injection-recovery test, and consistency across many model parameterizations. The conversion from the retrieved ratio to D/H uses Equations (3) and (4), which are algebraic definitions; the only additional input is the CH3D quench fractionation factor, which the paper explicitly states is not robustly constrained and is taken as 1.0-1.1 from solar-system extrapolation. An uncertain physical multiplier of the retrieved quantity is a model assumption, not circular reasoning, because the retrieved CH3D/CH4 does not presuppose the final D/H value. The 'protosolar D/H' framing is a comparison to an external literature value, not an input to the retrieval. The paper's many self-citations (e.g., Morley et al. 2019, 2024; Rowland et al. 2023) provide context, detectability predictions, and analysis methods, but the detection and abundance measurements do not reduce to those citations; the cited evolutionary models are independent published calculations with stated assumptions. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work, and no known result is repackaged under new coordinates. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks, and no significant circularity is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 10 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The detection of CH3D and PH3 rests on retrieved mixing ratios from a free retrieval; the D/H claim additionally depends on an assumed fractionation factor and the CH3D/CH4 line-list normalization, while the mass interpretation assumes standard evolutionary models.

free parameters (10)
  • log10(CH3D/CH4) relative to terrestrial = -1.09 (+0.06, -0.07) GO; -0.94 (+0.06, -0.07) GTO
    Retrieved directly from spectra; this is the central quantity from which D/H is derived.
  • PH3 volume mixing ratio (log10) = -9.24 +/- 0.07 GO; -8.91 +/- 0.07 GTO
    Retrieved directly; supports the part-per-billion phosphine claim.
  • CH4 volume mixing ratio = Not quoted in text, see Figure 2
    Used together with CH3D/CH4 to compute the D/H ratio.
  • Temperature-pressure profile points (18 values) = Posterior distributions, not tabulated
    Free T(P) points affect the retrieved gas abundances; the paper finds deviations from self-consistent models.
  • Radius-to-distance scale factor (R/D)^2 = R = 0.85 RJup (GO), 0.70 RJup (GTO)
    Used to derive radius and mass; the low retrieved radius drives the Teff/mass tension noted in the paper.
  • log10(g) = 3.93 +/- 0.05 GO; 4.03 +/- 0.07 GTO
    Surface gravity retrieved; used in mass interpretation, not directly in the D/H derivation.
  • Errorbar inflation parameter b = Not quoted
    Accounts for underestimated uncertainties; affects the BIC comparisons.
  • Cloud base pressure, fsed, cloud VMR = Upper limit or unconstrained
    Cloud parameters are retrieved but unconstrained; the paper shows D/H is robust to cloud treatment.
  • Radial velocity = Not quoted
    Doppler shift retrieved; differs between datasets due to wavelength calibration, not central to D/H.
  • v sin i = Unconstrained
    Rotational broadening not constrained at R~1000; tested with two broadening functions without changing D/H.
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption CH3D line list is scaled to terrestrial CH3D/CH4 ratio of 1:1606.
    Section 2.2: cross sections are scaled to 6.227e-4; an incorrect normalization would bias the retrieved CH3D abundance.
  • domain assumption CH3D quench fractionation factor between (D/H)_CH4 and bulk (D/H)_H2 is 1.0-1.1.
    Section 2.2: extrapolated from solar system planets; no direct constraint for WISE 0855; directly scales the D/H result.
  • domain assumption Gas mixing ratios are uniform with altitude.
    Section 2.2: assumed for all gases; a non-uniform H2O profile was tested but not preferred, while other gases could still have gradients.
  • domain assumption D/H in H2 equals the bulk D/H of the object.
    Section 2.2: valid if the object was well mixed at least once; reasonable for a fully convective low-mass object.
  • domain assumption HDO opacity is negligible at observed wavelengths.
    Section 2.2: expected to be several orders of magnitude below dominant opacities; if wrong, it could mimic some CH3D absorption.
  • domain assumption H2O clouds follow the EDDYSED model with log-normal particle size distribution.
    Section 2.2: cloud treatment from Ackerman & Marley (2001); clouds are unconstrained in this analysis.
  • domain assumption Object age is between 1 and 10 Gyr for estimating radius from evolutionary models.
    Section 3: used to compute Teff and mass; affects the mass interpretation but not the D/H measurement.
  • domain assumption Standard JWST pipeline reductions and error propagation are accurate.
    Section 2.1: relies on pipeline 1.14.0 and CRDS context; known differences between the two data reductions remain unresolved.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Protosolar D-to-H abundance and one part-per-billion PH$_{3}$ in the coldest brown dwarf." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/COVYHMOA

@misc{pith2026241114541,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Protosolar D-to-H abundance and one part-per-billion PH$_3$ in the coldest brown dwarf},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/COVYHMOA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.14541}
}
abstract

The coldest Y spectral type brown dwarfs are similar in mass and temperature to cool and warm ($\sim$200 -- 400 K) giant exoplanets. We can therefore use their atmospheres as proxies for planetary atmospheres, testing our understanding of physics and chemistry for these complex, cool worlds. At these cold temperatures, their atmospheres are cold enough for water clouds to form, and chemical timescales increase, increasing the likelihood of disequilibrium chemistry compared to warmer classes of planets. JWST observations are revolutionizing the characterization of these worlds with high signal-to-noise, moderate resolution near- and mid-infrared spectra. The spectra have been used to measure the abundances of prominent species like water, methane, and ammonia; species that trace chemical reactions like carbon monoxide; and even isotopologues of carbon monoxide and ammonia. Here, we present atmospheric retrieval results using both published fixed-slit (GTO program 1230) and new averaged time series observations (GO program 2327) of the coldest known Y dwarf, WISE 0855-0714 (using NIRSpec G395M spectra), which has an effective temperature of $\sim$ 264 K. We present a detection of deuterium in an atmosphere outside of the solar system via a relative measurement of deuterated methane (CH$_{3}$D) and standard methane. From this, we infer the D/H ratio of a substellar object outside the solar system for the first time. We also present a well-constrained part-per-billion abundance of phosphine (PH$_{3}$). We discuss our interpretation of these results and the implications for brown dwarf and giant exoplanet formation and evolution.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.14541 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The JWST/NIRSpec G395M spectrum with error bars of WISE 0855 for GTO program 1230 (PI: Alves de Oliveira) [top] and GO program 2327 (PI: Skemer) [bottom], 1σ retrieved spectrum, and the residuals from the median retrieved spectrum are shown in black, blue, and grey. The difference between the best fit spectrum and the best fit spectrum with PH3 or CH3D opacity removed are plotted in shaded green and orange, respecti… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Left panel: The retrieved posteriors for the gas-phase abundances and log(g) for the GTO spectrum [pink] and GO spectrum [blue]. All gases are constrained with the exception of 13CO. Right Panel: The retrieved log( CH3D CH4 )E posterior from the GO spectrum [blue] and a simulated spectrum based on the best fit model with CH3D opacity set to 0. The bounded constraint from the actual data and the upper limit from the … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The corner plot of derived parameters and the and P(T) profile of the fiducial retrieval on the GTO spectrum [pink] and the time-averaged GO spectrum [blue]. The dashed lines in the P(T) plot show the normalized flux averaged contribution for each layer in the atmosphere and the opaqueness of the P(T) profile corresponds to this value, with a minimum of 20% for visibility. results and are roughly consistent with a p… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: D/H ratio as a function of object mass as mea￾sured in the ISM (grey), terrestrial planets, ice giants, gas giants (Cleeves et al. 2014; Drake 2005; Hartogh et al. 2011), and brown dwarfs as predicted from Spiegel et al. (2011) (dark grey line), with the retrieved D/H …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The PH3 abundance as a function of Teff for Y dwarfs with detections or upper limits from Hood et al. (2024), Burgasser et al. (2024), Faherty et al. (2024), Kothari et al. (2024), Beiler et al. (2024a)[*], and this work, along with the global PH3 abundance of Jupiter …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison of reduced spectra within the region most impacted by CH3D absorption. Top panel: The GTO spectrum [blue] plotted with the GO spectrum [pink]. The GO spectrum is interpolated onto the same wavelength grid as the GTO spectrum. Bottom panel: The ratio of the G…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The corner plot of a subset of retrieved parameters from the GTO spectrum [pink] and the time-averaged GO spectrum [blue]. The discrepancy between the retrieved radial velocity are believed to be due to differences in wavelength calibration in the two pipelines. An upp…

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. The ESO SupJup Survey V: Exploring Atmospheric Variability and Orbit of the Super-Jupiter AB Pictoris b with CRIRES+

    astro-ph.EP 2025-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Four nights of CRIRES+ spectra of AB Pictoris b give a solar C/O ratio (0.59±0.01), a 12C/13C ratio of 102±8, and a low rotation of 3.7 km/s, with tentative nightly variability.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

96 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    S., & Marley, M

    Ackerman, A. S., & Marley, M. S. 2001, ApJ, 556, 872, doi: 10.1086/321540 Alves de Oliveira, C., Birkmann, S. M., B¨ oker, T., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 10704, Observatory Operations: Strategies, Processes, and Systems VII, 107040Q, doi: 10.1117/12.2313839

    doi:10.1086/321540 2001

  2. [2]

    Azzam, A. A. A., Lodi, L., Yurchenko, S. N., & Tennyson, J. 2015, JQSRT, 161, 41, doi: 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2015.03.029

    doi:10.1016/j.jqsrt.2015.03.029 2015

  3. [3]

    2023, Nature, 624, 263, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06813-y

    Barrado, D., Molli` ere, P., Patapis, P., et al. 2023, Nature, 624, 263, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06813-y

    doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06813-y 2023

  4. [4]

    Bate, M. R. 2019, MNRAS, 484, 2341, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz103

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz103 2019

  5. [5]

    B., Norton, R

    Beer, R., Farmer, C. B., Norton, R. H., Martonchik, J. V., & Barnes, T. G. 1972, Science, 175, 1360, doi: 10.1126/science.175.4028.1360

    arXiv 1972

  6. [6]

    Beer, R., & Taylor, F. W. 1973, ApJ, 179, 309, doi: 10.1086/151870

    work page doi:10.1086/151870 1973

  7. [7]

    A., Cushing, M

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

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad6301

  8. [8]

    A., Mukherjee, S., Cushing, M

    Beiler, S. A., Mukherjee, S., Cushing, M. C., et al. 2024b, ApJ, 973, 60, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6759

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad6759

Show all 96 references
  1. [9]

    A., Cleeves, L

    Bergin, E. A., Cleeves, L. I., Gorti, U., et al. 2013, Nature, 493, 644, doi: 10.1038/nature11805

    2013 doi

  2. [10]

    A., Bosman, A., Teague, R., et al

    Bergin, E. A., Bosman, A., Teague, R., et al. 2024, ApJ, 965, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3443 B¨ oker, T., Beck, T. L., Birkmann, S. M., et al. 2023, PASP, 135, 038001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/acb846

    2024 doi

  3. [11]

    J., Bezanson, R., Labbe, I., et al

    Burgasser, A. J., Bezanson, R., Labbe, I., et al. 2024, ApJ, 962, 177, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad206f

    2024 doi

  4. [12]

    K., Gonzales, E

    Burningham, B., Faherty, J. K., Gonzales, E. C., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 1944, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1361

    2021 doi

  5. [13]

    B., et al

    Burrows, A., Marley, M., Hubbard, W. B., et al. 1997, ApJ, 491, 856, doi: 10.1086/305002

    1997 doi

  6. [14]

    2024, JWST Calibration Pipeline, 1.15.1, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.12692459

    Bushouse, H., Eisenhamer, J., Dencheva, N., et al. 2024, JWST Calibration Pipeline, 1.15.1, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.12692459

    2024 doi

  7. [15]

    K., Visscher, C., et al

    Calamari, E., Faherty, J. K., Visscher, C., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 67, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1f6d

    2024 doi

  8. [16]

    Carvalho, A., & Johns-Krull, C. M. 2023, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 7, 91, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/acd37e

    2023 doi

  9. [17]

    2000, ARA&A, 38, 337, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.38.1.337

    Chabrier, G., & Baraffe, I. 2000, ARA&A, 38, 337, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.38.1.337

    2000 doi

  10. [18]

    2000, ApJL, 542, L119, doi: 10.1086/312941

    Chabrier, G., Baraffe, I., Allard, F., & Hauschildt, P. 2000, ApJL, 542, L119, doi: 10.1086/312941

    2000 doi

  11. [19]

    2024, ApJ, 967, 139, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3e77

    Cherubim, C., Wordsworth, R., Hu, R., & Shkolnik, E. 2024, ApJ, 967, 139, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3e77

    2024 doi

  12. [20]

    I., Bergin, E

    Cleeves, L. I., Bergin, E. A., Alexander, C. M. O. D., et al. 2014, Science, 345, 1590, doi: 10.1126/science.1258055

    2014 doi

  13. [21]

    C., Kirkpatrick, J

    Cushing, M. C., Kirkpatrick, J. D., Gelino, C. R., et al. 2011, ApJ, 743, 50, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/743/1/50

    2011 doi

  14. [22]

    P., et al

    Czesla, S., Schr¨ oter, S., Schneider, C. P., et al. 2019, PyA: Python astronomy-related packages, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1906.010

    2019

  15. [23]

    Drake, M. J. 2005, M&PS, 40, 519, doi: 10.1111/j.1945-5100.2005.tb00960.x

    2005

  16. [24]

    1994, A&A, 286, 149

    Dutrey, A., Guilloteau, S., & Simon, M. 1994, A&A, 286, 149

    1994

  17. [25]

    L., Luhman, K

    Esplin, T. L., Luhman, K. L., Cushing, M. C., et al. 2016, ApJ, 832, 58, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/832/1/58

    2016 doi

  18. [26]

    K., Burningham, B., Gagn´ e, J., et al

    Faherty, J. K., Burningham, B., Gagn´ e, J., et al. 2024, Nature, 628, 511, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07190-w

    2024 doi

  19. [27]

    Fegley, B., & Prinn, R. G. 1988, ApJ, 326, 490, doi: 10.1086/166111

    1988 doi

  20. [28]

    2022, A&A, 661, A81, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142673

    Ferruit, P., Jakobsen, P., Giardino, G., et al. 2022, A&A, 661, A81, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142673

    2022 doi

  21. [29]

    2013, A&A, 551, A126, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220857

    Feuchtgruber, H., Lellouch, E., Orton, G., et al. 2013, A&A, 551, A126, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220857

    2013 doi

  22. [30]

    2023, AJ, 166, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acda91

    Finnerty, L., Schofield, T., Sappey, B., et al. 2023, AJ, 166, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acda91

    2023 doi

  23. [31]

    W., Xin, Y., et al

    Finnerty, L., Xuan, J. W., Xin, Y., et al. 2024, AJ, 167, 43, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad1180

    2024 doi

  24. [32]

    N., Orton, G

    Fletcher, L. N., Orton, G. S., Teanby, N. A., & Irwin, P. G. J. 2009, Icarus, 202, 543, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2009.03.023

    2009 doi

  25. [33]

    2016, The Journal of Open Source Software, 1, 24, doi: 10.21105/joss.00024

    Foreman-Mackey, D. 2016, The Journal of Open Source Software, 1, 24, doi: 10.21105/joss.00024

    2016 doi

  26. [34]

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

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

    2013 doi

  27. [35]

    2023, ApJL, 957, L36, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad07e2

    Gandhi, S., de Regt, S., Snellen, I., et al. 2023, ApJL, 957, L36, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad07e2

    2023 doi

  28. [36]

    C., Burningham, B., Faherty, J

    Gonzales, E. C., Burningham, B., Faherty, J. K., et al. 2020, ApJ, 905, 46, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abbee2 Gonz´ alez Picos, D., Snellen, I. A. G., de Regt, S., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, A212, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450028

    2020 doi

  29. [37]

    2023, ApJL, 953, L27, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acee01

    Gu, P.-G., & Chen, H. 2023, ApJL, 953, L27, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acee01

    2023 doi

  30. [38]

    2013, A&A, 549, A92, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220298

    Guilloteau, S., Di Folco, E., Dutrey, A., et al. 2013, A&A, 549, A92, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220298

    2013 doi

  31. [39]

    V., Veits, I

    Gurvich, L. V., Veits, I. V., & Alcock, C. B. 1989, Thermodynamics properties of individual substances. Volume 1 - Elements O, H/D, T/, F, Cl, Br, I, He, Ne,

    1989

  32. [40]

    J., Gordon, I

    Hargreaves, R. J., Gordon, I. E., Rey, M., et al. 2020, ApJS, 247, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab7a1a

    2020 doi

  33. [41]

    C., Bockel´ ee-Morvan, D., et al

    Hartogh, P., Lis, D. C., Bockel´ ee-Morvan, D., et al. 2011, Nature, 478, 218, doi: 10.1038/nature10519

    2011 doi

  34. [42]

    E., Fortney, J

    Hood, C. E., Fortney, J. J., Line, M. R., & Faherty, J. K. 2023, ApJ, 953, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace32e

    2023 doi

  35. [43]

    E., Mukherjee, S., Fortney, J

    Hood, C. E., Mukherjee, S., Fortney, J. J., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2402.05345, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2402.05345

    2024 doi arXiv

  36. [44]

    I., Qi, C., et al

    Huang, J., ¨Oberg, K. I., Qi, C., et al. 2017, ApJ, 835, 231, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/231

    2017 doi

  37. [45]

    R., Freedman, R

    Huang, X., Gamache, R. R., Freedman, R. S., Schwenke, D. W., & Lee, T. J. 2014, JQSRT, 147, 134, doi: 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2014.05.015

    2014 doi

  38. [46]

    2019, A&A, 624, A28, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834556

    Ida, S., Yamamura, T., & Okuzumi, S. 2019, A&A, 624, A28, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834556

    2019 doi

  39. [47]

    E., & Raftery, A

    Kass, R. E., & Raftery, A. E. 1995, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 773, doi: 10.2307/2291091

    1995 doi

  40. [48]

    Kirkpatrick, J. D. 2005, ARA&A, 43, 195, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.42.053102.134017

    2005

  41. [49]

    D., Gelino, C

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

    2021 doi

  42. [50]

    2020, ApJ, 890, 174, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab6d71

    Kitzmann, D., Heng, K., Oreshenko, M., et al. 2020, ApJ, 890, 174, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab6d71

    2020 doi

  43. [51]

    C., Burningham, B., et al

    Kothari, H., Cushing, M. C., Burningham, B., et al. 2024, ApJ, 971, 121, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad583b

    2024 doi

  44. [52]

    P., Fink, U., Smith, H

    Larson, H. P., Fink, U., Smith, H. A., & Davis, D. S. 1980, ApJ, 240, 327, doi: 10.1086/158236

    1980 doi

  45. [53]

    P., Treffers, R

    Larson, H. P., Treffers, R. R., & Fink, U. 1977, ApJ, 211, 972, doi: 10.1086/155009

    1977 doi

  46. [54]

    1996, Planet

    Lecluse, C., Robert, F., Gautier, D., & Guiraud, M. 1996, Planet. Space Sci., 44, 1579, doi: 10.1016/S0032-0633(96)00070-0

    1996 doi

  47. [55]

    K., Tremblin, P., Esplin, T

    Leggett, S. K., Tremblin, P., Esplin, T. L., Luhman, K. L., & Morley, C. V. 2017, ApJ, 842, 118, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6fb5

    2017 doi

  48. [56]

    K., Tremblin, P., Phillips, M

    Leggett, S. K., Tremblin, P., Phillips, M. W., et al. 2021, ApJ, 918, 11, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac0cfe

    2021 doi

  49. [57]

    2001, A&A, 370, 610, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20010259

    Lellouch, E., B´ ezard, B., Fouchet, T., et al. 2001, A&A, 370, 610, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20010259

    2001 doi

  50. [58]

    Lew, B. W. P., Roellig, T., Batalha, N. E., et al. 2024, AJ, 167, 237, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad3425

    2024 doi

  51. [59]

    E., Rothman, L

    Li, G., Gordon, I. E., Rothman, L. S., et al. 2015, ApJS, 216, 15, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/216/1/15

    2015 doi

  52. [60]

    Marley, M. S. 2015, ApJ, 807, 183, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/807/2/183

    2015 doi

  53. [61]

    R., Wolf, A

    Line, M. R., Wolf, A. S., Zhang, X., et al. 2013, ApJ, 775, 137, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/775/2/137

    2013 doi

  54. [62]

    R., Marley, M

    Line, M. R., Marley, M. S., Liu, M. C., et al. 2017, ApJ, 848, 83, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7ff0

    2017 doi

  55. [63]

    R., Brogi, M., Bean, J

    Line, M. R., Brogi, M., Bean, J. L., et al. 2021, Nature, 598, 580, doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03912-6

    2021 doi

  56. [64]

    Luhman, K. L. 2014, ApJL, 786, L18, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/786/2/L18

    2014 doi

  57. [65]

    L., Joergens, V., Lada, C., et al

    Luhman, K. L., Joergens, V., Lada, C., et al. 2007, in Protostars and Planets V, ed. B. Reipurth, D. Jewitt, & K. Keil, 443, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0608546

    2007 doi arXiv

  58. [66]

    L., Tremblin, P., Alves de Oliveira, C., et al

    Luhman, K. L., Tremblin, P., Alves de Oliveira, C., et al. 2024, AJ, 167, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad0b72

    2024 doi

  59. [67]

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

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

    2021 doi

  60. [68]

    E., Skemer, A

    Miles, B. E., Skemer, A. J. I., Morley, C. V., et al. 2020, AJ, 160, 63, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab9114 Molli` ere, P., & Snellen, I. A. G. 2019, A&A, 622, A139, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834169

    2020 doi

  61. [69]

    V., Skemer, A

    Morley, C. V., Skemer, A. J., Miles, B. E., et al. 2019, ApJL, 882, L29, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab3c65

    2019 doi

  62. [70]

    V., Skemer, A

    Morley, C. V., Skemer, A. J., Allers, K. N., et al. 2018, ApJ, 858, 97, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aabe8b

    2018 doi

  63. [71]

    V., Mukherjee, S., Marley, M

    Morley, C. V., Mukherjee, S., Marley, M. S., et al. 2024, ApJ, 975, 59, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad71d5

    2024 doi

  64. [72]

    J., Batalha, N

    Mukherjee, S., Fortney, J. J., Batalha, N. E., et al. 2022, ApJ, 938, 107, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8dfb

    2022 doi

  65. [73]

    J., Morley, C

    Mukherjee, S., Fortney, J. J., Morley, C. V., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 73, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad18c2

    2024 doi

  66. [74]

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

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

    2020 doi

  67. [75]

    2024, A&A, 688, L22, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450742

    Podio, L., Ceccarelli, C., Codella, C., et al. 2024, A&A, 688, L22, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450742

    2024 doi

  68. [76]

    L., Kyuberis, A

    Polyansky, O. L., Kyuberis, A. A., Zobov, N. F., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 2597, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1877

    2018 doi

  69. [77]

    T., Wallace, L., & Smith, G

    Ridgway, S. T., Wallace, L., & Smith, G. R. 1976, ApJ, 207, 1002, doi: 10.1086/154570

    1976 doi

  70. [78]

    S., Gordon, I

    Rothman, L. S., Gordon, I. E., Barber, R. J., et al. 2010, JQSRT, 111, 2139, doi: 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2010.05.001

    2010 doi

  71. [79]

    J., Morley, C

    Rowland, M. J., Morley, C. V., & Line, M. R. 2023, ApJ, 947, 6, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acbb07

    2023 doi

  72. [80]

    Saumon, D., & Marley, M. S. 2008, ApJ, 689, 1327, doi: 10.1086/592734

    2008 doi

  73. [81]

    J., Morley, C

    Skemer, A. J., Morley, C. V., Allers, K. N., et al. 2016, ApJL, 826, L17, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/826/2/L17

    2016 doi

  74. [82]

    Smith, P. C. B., Line, M. R., Bean, J. L., et al. 2024, AJ, 167, 110, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad17bf

    2024 doi

  75. [83]

    Yurchenko, S. N. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 2337, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2246

    2015 doi

  76. [84]

    S., Burrows, A., & Milsom, J

    Spiegel, D. S., Burrows, A., & Milsom, J. A. 2011, ApJ, 727, 57, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/727/1/57 Protosolar D-to-H Abundance and One Part-per-Billion PH 3 in WISE 0855 17

    2011 doi

  77. [85]

    Tennyson, J., & Yurchenko, S. N. 2012, MNRAS, 425, 21, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21440.x

    2012

  78. [86]

    J., van’t Hoff, M

    Tobin, J. J., van’t Hoff, M. L. R., Leemker, M., et al. 2023, Nature, 615, 227, doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05676-z

    2023 doi

  79. [87]

    Santhanam, K. 1989, J. Geophys. Res., 94, 16287, doi: 10.1029/JD094iD13p16287

    1989 doi

  80. [88]

    2006, ApJ, 648, 1181, doi: 10.1086/506245

    Visscher, C., Lodders, K., & Fegley, Bruce, J. 2006, ApJ, 648, 1181, doi: 10.1086/506245

    2006 doi

  81. [89]

    W., Wang, J., Finnerty, L., et al

    Xuan, J. W., Wang, J., Finnerty, L., et al. 2024a, ApJ, 962, 10, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1243

    doi

  82. [90]

    W., Hsu, C.-C., Finnerty, L., et al

    Xuan, J. W., Hsu, C.-C., Finnerty, L., et al. 2024b, ApJ, 970, 71, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4796

    doi

  83. [91]

    D., Shahar, A., & Schlichting, H

    Young, E. D., Shahar, A., & Schlichting, H. E. 2023, Nature, 616, 306, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-05823-0

    2023 doi

  84. [92]

    N., Barber, R

    Yurchenko, S. N., Barber, R. J., & Tennyson, J. 2011, MNRAS, 413, 1828, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18261.x

    2011

  85. [93]

    A., Line, M

    Zalesky, J. A., Line, M. R., Schneider, A. C., & Patience, J. 2019, ApJ, 877, 24, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab16db

    2019 doi

  86. [94]

    A., Saboi, K., Line, M

    Zalesky, J. A., Saboi, K., Line, M. R., et al. 2022, ApJ, 936, 44, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac786c

    2022 doi

  87. [95]

    Zhang, Y., Snellen, I. A. G., & Molli` ere, P. 2021a, A&A, 656, A76, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141502

    doi

  88. [96]

    Zhang, Y., Snellen, I. A. G., Bohn, A. J., et al. 2021b, Nature, 595, 370, doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03616-x

    doi

Pith tools

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