Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 59 references

Planet formation and long-term stability in a very eccentric stellar binary

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read TOI 4633's habitable-zone mini-Neptune most likely survived its violently eccentric stellar binary by orbiting retrograde: in N-body simulations run to the system's 1.3 Gyr age, every prograde configuration collides with a star or is…

desk verdict A credible system-specific stability study that makes a retrograde-orbit claim for TOI 4633c plausible, but the claim is statistically weaker than the abstract suggests because each inclination is sampled only once. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.05506 v1 pith:4KD33NHP submitted 2025-01-09 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.SR

Jakob Stegmann , Evgeni Grishin , Cole Johnston , Nora L. Eisner , Stephen Justham , Selma E. de Mink , Hagai B. Perets This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EPastro-ph.SR
keywords TOI4633eccentricstellarbinarys-typeplanetretrogradeorbitN-bodysimulationslong-termdynamicalstabilityCorioliseffectvonZeipel-Lidov-Kozai
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 argues that the planet TOI 4633c, a transiting mini-Neptune in the habitable zone of one star in a very eccentric binary ($e_B = 0.91 \pm 0.03$, periapsis about 4.4 AU), must orbit its host star backward relative to the binary's motion to have survived the system's 1.3 Gyr lifetime. Direct N-body simulations varying only the unconstrained mutual inclination show that prograde orbits (0–40 degrees) are destabilized through collision or ejection well before the system's age, whereas retrograde orbits (140–180 degrees) remain stable, protected by the Coriolis force in the binary's rotating frame. The conclusion is probabilistic: from the observational posterior for the binary's semi-major axis and eccentricity, there is an 80% probability that the periapsis is small enough (below about 5 AU) for this retrograde-only stability to hold. If true, the result forces a difficult choice for formation: the eccentric companion was likely captured after the planet formed, or the planet formed in situ at sub-snow-line distances, contrary to standard core-accretion expectations. The same long-term stability analysis applied to the similar system HD 59686 yields a retrograde-only outcome, suggesting the phenomenon is not unique.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing quantity is the mutual inclination $i_{\mathrm{tot}}$ between the orbit of the circumstellar (s-type) planet around its host star and the stellar binary's orbital plane—the one parameter the transit discovery leaves unconstrained. The physical mechanisms are the Coriolis force in the frame rotating with the binary, which pushes co-rotating (prograde) planets outward and counter-rotating (retrograde) planets inward, and the von Zeipel–Lidov–Kozai resonance, which drives rapid eccentricity growth and instability for mutual inclinations between the Kozai angles (about 40 degrees and 140 degrees). The evidential machinery is direct N-body integration of the full 2+1 (and 3+1 or 2+2) system up to the estimated system age, with outcomes classified as survival, collision, or ejection.

What would settle it

A measurement of the planet's true orbital orientation relative to the binary plane, for instance by combining radial-velocity and transit or astrometric observations, that shows a prograde orbit ($i_{\mathrm{tot}} \lesssim 40^\circ$) would contradict the central claim, provided the binary periapsis is indeed below about 5 AU. Likewise, a high-confidence binary orbit with periapsis $r_{p,B} \gtrsim 5.0$ AU would remove the basis for concluding that retrograde stability is required.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that long-term survival of TOI 4633c selects a unique orbital configuration: the mutual inclination $i_{\mathrm{tot}}$ between the planet's orbit and the stellar binary plane must be $\gtrsim 140^\circ$, meaning the planet must move retrograde with respect to the binary. The evidence is a suite of direct N-body integrations that run to the system's age $t_{\mathrm{age}} = 1.3$ Gyr rather than the megayear timescales used in earlier stability studies. In these simulations, planets started on prograde orbits ($i_{\mathrm{tot}} \lesssim 40^\circ$) always collide with a star or are ejected before $t_{\mathrm{age}}$, planets in the Kozai range (40–140 degrees) are destabilized most rapidly, and retrograde orbits ($i_{\mathrm{tot}} \gtrsim 140^\circ$) survive; the retrograde survivors also match the observed planetary eccentricity. The mechanism is the Coriolis asymmetry in the binary's rotating frame, which stabilizes counter-rotating orbits. The paper further finds an 80% posterior probability that the binary periapsis is below the roughly 5 AU threshold where only retrograde orbits are stable, and shows that if the companion were wider, prograde orbits would also survive, making the retrograde claim contingent on the binary parameters.

Load-bearing premise

The conclusion that TOI 4633c must be retrograde rests on the assumption that the binary's true periapsis is smaller than about 5 AU; if the companion is actually wider, prograde orbits also survive and the retrograde inference collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the companion was present during planet formation, TOI 4633c cannot have formed beyond the snow line: a planet started at 3 AU is ejected within about $10^4$ yr in the simulations, far faster than inward migration could bring it to its observed orbit.
  • The system's origin must be either a randomly captured stellar companion after planet formation or in-situ formation inside the snow line, and both paths challenge standard planet-formation scenarios for binary systems.
  • The 80% posterior probability that the binary periapsis is below about 5.0 AU means the retrograde conclusion is likely but not guaranteed; a wider companion is allowed at the 20% level and would permit stable prograde orbits.
  • Stability studies of fragile s-type planets in binaries need Gyr-scale integrations, because megayear-scale simulations can label doomed prograde orbits as stable.
  • The same analysis applied to HD 59686 finds only retrograde configurations stable to that system's age, indicating TOI 4633 is not an isolated case.
  • Future transit surveys combined with astrometric follow-up will find many similar systems, and radial-velocity or transit-based measurements of the planet's true orbital orientation can directly test the retrograde prediction.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the retrograde hypothesis is confirmed, it implies that among s-type planets in very eccentric binaries, surviving systems should be preferentially counter-rotating; a prograde survivor with a sub-5 AU binary periapsis would be evidence that some stabilizing process is missing from the simulations.
  • The two proposed formation paths—late binary capture versus in-situ sub-snow-line formation—could be distinguished by future observations: a captured binary would show no correlation with its birth environment, while an in-situ origin predicts a planet composition that did not require icy planetesimals from beyond the snow line.
  • Because the transit method cannot see inclination, the paper's approach of using long-term survival as an inclination diagnostic can be applied to any transiting s-type planet with a resolved eccentric companion, turning dynamical fragility into an observational tool.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. TOI 4633 is a solar-type binary with eB≈0.91 and a transiting mini-Neptune around one star. The paper uses REBOUND N-body simulations up to the 1.3 Gyr system age to map outcomes over the mutual inclination itot, which the transit method leaves unconstrained. It finds that prograde (itot≲40°) and highly inclined configurations destabilize, while most retrograde (itot≳140°) configurations survive, and combines this map with the posterior on the binary periapsis to conclude that there is an 80% probability that the binary is close enough for this retrograde-only conclusion to hold. Tests with the inner planet b, with wider binary parameters, and for HD 59686 are used to support the main claim. The paper further argues that formation beyond the snow line at 3 AU is ruled out by short destabilization times, leaving either in-situ sub-snow-line formation or late dynamical capture of the companion.

Significance. Should the conclusion withstand scrutiny, it is significant: it turns an apparently unstable observed system into a probe of retrograde dynamics and supplies a concrete testable prediction—TOI 4633c should be counter-rotating relative to the binary—which can be checked with Rossiter-McLaughlin or radial-velocity observations. The study also makes a methodological point that Myr-scale stability grids can falsely certify survival and that Gyr-scale integrations are needed. Credit is due for using a public integrator, checking selected runs with IAS15, explicitly scanning the unconstrained inclination, and exploring planet-b and binary-parameter variants, as well as for carrying the same analysis to HD 59686. The paper is clearly written and the figures convey the regimes well. Its main limitation is statistical: the stability map is one realization per initial condition, so the 'all prograde unstable' claim currently overstates the evidence.

major comments (3)
  1. [Methods, Eq. (1) and Fig. 4a] The central claim—that the planet could only survive by orbiting retrograde—rests on the Figure 4a map in which every prograde initial condition (itot≲40°) is marked as colliding or ejecting before tage. According to the Methods, the 72 default integrations vary only Omega_Ac in 5° steps; the planet's omega_Ac and the mean anomalies of all orbits are drawn once per simulation, so each value of itot is represented by one chaotic trajectory. Survival to a fixed horizon is not a deterministic property of itot for a system the paper itself describes as chaotic; the two prograde examples in Figure 3 already show destabilization times of ~3 and ~14 Myr, i.e., order-of-magnitude variability. A single trajectory cannot establish that the prograde survival probability is zero. Please run ensembles of initial phases for each inclination (or for a representative subset) and report survival fractions, ideally with a marginalized odds ratio for retrograde versus prograde orbits.
  2. [Supplementary Figure 2 and the '80.0% probability' sentence] The passage 'we find an 80.0 % probability that rp,B is below the threshold of 5.0 AU' is a posterior probability over aB and eB only. The threshold itself comes from a grid in which each (aB,eB) point is a single prograde (itot=0°) realization, so the 80% does not at present quantify the chance that a prograde planet actually is unstable. If, as the ensemble sampling requested above may show, some prograde realizations with rp,B<5 AU survive, the wording would need to become an odds ratio over both binary parameters and planetary initial phases rather than a deterministic exclusion.
  3. [Figure 4e and the snow-line discussion] The conclusion that the planet 'could not have formed' beyond the snow line is based on the rapid (<10^4 yr) destabilization of 3 AU orbits. Because the timescales are so short, this part is less sensitive to chaotic-phase sampling than the main stability map, but the current figure still shows one outcome per inclination and per periapsis choice; please state the number of realizations and confirm that the outcomes are not phase-luck. This matters because the sub-snow-line formation constraint feeds directly into the formation-scenario discussion.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Methods, planet-b paragraph] The references to 'Figure 1, panels a and c' (and the later panel references in the same paragraph) should refer to Supplementary Figure 1; Figure 1 is the schematic of prograde, highly inclined, and retrograde orbits.
  2. [Reference [30]] The title contains the typo 'L Contraints'; it should read 'Constraints'.
  3. [Reference [36]] Reference [36] is cited as 'Nature, submitted' and is used for a quantitative ~20% claim; please provide a preprint identifier or update to the published version before final publication.
  4. [Methods, ejected-system checks] The sentence 'we repeat the simulation of several ejected systems' should read 'we repeated the simulations of several ejected systems'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the retrograde-stability conclusion is generated by new N-body integrations and is not encoded in the inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that TOI 4633c must be retrograde to survive for the system's 1.3 Gyr age. This conclusion is obtained from direct Rebound N-body integrations in which the only systematically varied input is the unconstrained mutual inclination itot (via the planet's longitude of ascending node), with survival, collision, or ejection read directly from the integration output. No equation defining stability is equivalent to the conclusion, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The 80% probability statement for rp,B < 5.0 AU combines an N-body stability threshold with the independent observational posterior distribution of Eisner et al. (2024); although the present paper shares authors with that work, the posterior is a separate observational fit and the threshold is a simulation output, so the step is not circular. The earlier Eisner et al. finding that stable configurations must be near-coplanar prograde or retrograde is used only to motivate the itot scan, not to force the retrograde-only outcome. Self-citations in the paper provide standard secular formulas, terminology, and star-formation statistics; these are independent results rather than restatements of the target claim. One genuine limitation, namely that each inclination in Figure 4a is represented by a single chaotic trajectory while survival to a fixed horizon is stochastic, is a statistical robustness issue rather than a circularity and does not fall under the enumerated circularity patterns. The core derivation is self-contained against the observed parameters and an external, tested N-body code.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central stability result rests primarily on the first three axioms: the point-mass N-body model is adequate, the observational inputs are reliable, and the binary periapsis is below the 5.0 AU threshold. The remaining axioms support secondary arguments about eccentricity consistency and formation scenarios. No new physical entities are introduced, and the only hand-chosen numerical input is the planet b radius.

free parameters (1)
  • Planet b radius rb = 10 R_earth
    Chosen by hand in the quadruple simulations because no radius is measured for TOI 4633b; the paper states this is typical for planets of that mass (Muller et al. 2024). It affects only the collision criterion for the inner planet and does not drive the retrograde conclusion for planet c.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Point-mass Newtonian dynamics without gas, radiation, or external perturbers is sufficient for the Gyr-scale stability test.
    The Rebound integrations include only the stars and planets; the Methods section 'Sources of precession and its effects on the dynamics' estimates that GR and tidal precession rates are small (epsilon_GR about 5e-4, epsilon_tide about 2e-4) and that the inner quadrupole is captured in the four-body runs.
  • domain assumption The observed system parameters from Eisner et al. (2024) are correct, including the system age, masses, orbital elements, and the two-dimensional posterior over binary semi-major axis and eccentricity.
    All initial conditions are taken from Supplementary Table 1 and the 80% periapsis probability is computed from the posterior contours of Eisner et al. (2024, Fig. 7).
  • domain assumption The binary periapsis is below about 5.0 AU, the threshold where prograde orbits become stable; the paper assigns an 80% posterior probability to this.
    This is the load-bearing premise in the discussion of Supplementary Figure 2; if rp,B is actually larger, prograde and some inclined orbits survive and the retrograde-only conclusion fails.
  • domain assumption The current observed eccentricity of the planet can serve both as an initial condition and as a constraint on the eccentricity range over the full system age.
    The simulations initialize eAc at its observed mean value, and Figure 4c compares the simulated minimum, mean, and maximum eccentricity to the observed range; this assumes the current value is representative rather than a short-lived phase.
  • standard math The standard secular three-body results (Coriolis asymmetry and von Zeipel-Lidov-Kozai oscillations) apply to this hierarchical configuration.
    The interpretation cites Harrington (1972), Innanen (1980), von Zeipel (1909), Kozai (1962), Lidov (1962), and Grishin et al. (2017) for the inclination dependence; the paper does not derive new secular equations.
  • domain assumption The star-formation exchange statistics used to discuss late capture are correct.
    The formation discussion relies on reference [36], cited as Generozov et al., Nature, submitted (2025), for the claim that about 20% of stars experience an exchange interaction during star formation; this is an unreviewed preprint and is weaker support than a published result.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Planet formation and long-term stability in a very eccentric stellar binary." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4KD33NHP

@misc{pith2026250105506,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Planet formation and long-term stability in a very eccentric stellar binary},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4KD33NHP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.05506}
}
abstract

Planets orbiting one of the two stars in a binary are vulnerable to gravitational perturbations from the other star. Particularly, highly eccentric companion stars risk disrupting planetary orbits, such as in the extreme system TOI 4633 where close encounters between the companion and a gas giant planet in the habitable zone make it one of the most fragile systems discovered so far. Here, we report that TOI 4633's planet likely survived these encounters throughout the system's age by orbiting retrograde relative to the binary, stabilised by the Coriolis force. Using direct $N$-body simulations, we show it otherwise tends to collide with the binary stars or becomes free-floating after getting ejected. A retrograde planetary orbit has profound implications for TOI 4633's formation and evolution, suggesting an extraordinary history where its eccentric companion was likely randomly captured after planet formation in a single-star system. Alternatively, if stars and planet are born in situ from the same gas clump, we show the planet must have formed at sub-snow-line distances, contrary to the conventional core-accretion model. Our study highlights the importance of considering the long-term stability ($\gtrsim\rm Gyr$) of planets in eccentric binaries and demonstrates that the mere existence in such dynamically hostile environments places strong constraints on their orbital configuration and formation.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Eisner, N.L., Grunblatt, S.K., Barrag´ an, O., Faridani, T.H., Lintott, C., Aigrain, S., Johnston, C., Mason, I.R., Stassun, K.G., Bedell, M., Boyle, A.W., Ciardi, D.R., Clark, C.A., Hebrard, G., Hogg, D.W., Howell, S.B., Klein, B., Llama, J., Winn, J.N., Zhao, L.L., Murphy, J.M.A., Beard, C., Brinkman, C.L., Chontos, A., Cortes-Zuleta, P., Delfosse, X., ...

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    Holman, M.J., Wiegert, P.A.: Long-Term Stability of Planets in Binary Systems. Astron. J. 117(1), 621–628 (1999) https://doi.org/10.1086/300695 arXiv:astro- ph/9809315 [astro-ph]

    work page arXiv 1999

  3. [3]

    Progress of Theoretical Physics Supplement70, 35–53 (1981) https://doi.org/10.1143/PTPS

    Hayashi, C.: Structure of the Solar Nebula, Growth and Decay of Magnetic Fields and Effects of Magnetic and Turbulent Viscosities on the Nebula. Progress of Theoretical Physics Supplement70, 35–53 (1981) https://doi.org/10.1143/PTPS. 70.35

    doi:10.1143/ptps 1981

  4. [4]

    Ida, S., Lin, D.N.C.: Toward a Deterministic Model of Planetary Forma- tion. III. Mass Distribution of Short-Period Planets around Stars of Various Masses. Astrophys. J. 626(2), 1045–1060 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1086/429953 arXiv:astro-ph/0502566 [astro-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2005

  5. [5]

    https://exoplanet.eu/ home/

    Kral, Q.: The Encyclopaedia of Exoplanetary Systems. https://exoplanet.eu/ home/

    work page

  6. [6]

    Quarles, B., Li, G., Kostov, V., Haghighipour, N.: Orbital Stability of Circum- stellar Planets in Binary Systems. Astron. J. 159(3), 80 (2020) https://doi.org/ 10.3847/1538-3881/ab64fa arXiv:1912.11019 [astro-ph.EP]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2020

  7. [7]

    In: Lemaitre, A., 17 Libert, A.-S

    Lee, M.H., Wong, K.H., Cheng, H.W., Trifonov, T., Reffert, S., Quirrenbach, A.: Dynamics of Circumstellar Planets in Binary Star Systems. In: Lemaitre, A., 17 Libert, A.-S. (eds.) IAU Symposium. IAU Symposium, vol. 382, pp. 12–19 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743921323004787

    work page doi:10.1017/s1743921323004787 2024

  8. [8]

    Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy 82(2), 143–153 (2002) https://doi.org/10

    Pilat-Lohinger, E., Dvorak, R.: Stability of S-type Orbits in Binaries. Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy 82(2), 143–153 (2002) https://doi.org/10. 1023/A:1014586308539

    work page 2002

Show all 59 references
  1. [9]

    David, E.-M., Quintana, E.V., Fatuzzo, M., Adams, F.C.: Dynamical Stability of Earth-like Planetary Orbits in Binary Systems. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac.115(809), 825–836 (2003) https://doi.org/10.1086/376395 arXiv:astro-ph/0304561 [astro- ph]

    2003 arXiv

  2. [10]

    A study of inclined planetary orbits

    Pilat-Lohinger, E., Funk, B., Dvorak, R.: Stability limits in double stars. A study of inclined planetary orbits. Astron. Astrophys. 400, 1085–1094 (2003) https: //doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361:20021811

    2003 doi

  3. [11]

    Astrophys

    Barnes, R., Quinn, T.: The (In)stability of Planetary Systems. Astrophys. J. 611(1), 494–516 (2004) https://doi.org/10.1086/421321 arXiv:astro-ph/0401171 [astro-ph]

    2004 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Musielak, Z.E., Cuntz, M., Marshall, E.A., Stuit, T.D.: Stability of planetary orbits in binary systems. Astron. Astrophys. 434(1), 355–364 (2005) https://doi. org/10.1051/0004-6361:20040238

    2005 doi

  5. [13]

    Fatuzzo, M., Adams, F.C., Gauvin, R., Proszkow, E.M.: A Statistical Stability Analysis of Earth-like Planetary Orbits in Binary Systems. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 118(849), 1510–1527 (2006) https://doi.org/10.1086/508999 arXiv:astro- ph/0609305 [astro-ph]

    2006

  6. [14]

    Astrophys

    Marzari, F., Barbieri, M.: Planets in binary systems: is the present configuration indicative of the formation process? Astron. Astrophys. 467(1), 347–351 (2007) https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361:20077102 arXiv:astro-ph/0702342 [astro-ph]

    2007 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Quarles, B., Lissauer, J.J.: Long-term Stability of Planets in the α Centauri Sys- tem. Astron. J. 151(5), 111 (2016) https://doi.org/10.3847/0004-6256/151/5/111 arXiv:1604.04917 [astro-ph.EP]

    2016 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Trifonov, T., Lee, M.H., Reffert, S., Quirrenbach, A.: Dynamical Analysis of the Circumprimary Planet in the Eccentric Binary System HD 59686. Astron. J. 155(4), 174 (2018) https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-3881/aab439 arXiv:1803.01434 [astro-ph.EP]

    2018 arXiv

  9. [17]

    arXiv e-prints, 2407–13901 (2024) https://doi.org/10

    Quarles, B., Gautham Bhaskar, H., Li, G.: Main-sequence systems: orbital sta- bility in stellar binaries. arXiv e-prints, 2407–13901 (2024) https://doi.org/10. 48550/arXiv.2407.13901 arXiv:2407.13901 [astro-ph.EP]

    2024 doi arXiv

  10. [18]

    Rein, H., Liu, S.-F.: REBOUND: an open-source multi-purpose N-body code 18 for collisional dynamics. Astron. Astrophys. 537, 128 (2012) https://doi.org/10. 1051/0004-6361/201118085 arXiv:1110.4876 [astro-ph.EP]

    2012 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Nature Astronomy 6, 89–97 (2022) https://doi.org/10

    Miret-Roig, N., Bouy, H., Raymond, S.N., Tamura, M., Bertin, E., Barrado, D., Olivares, J., Galli, P.A.B., Cuillandre, J.-C., Sarro, L.M., Berihuete, A., Hu´ elamo, N.: A rich population of free-floating planets in the Upper Scorpius young stellar association. Nature Astronomy...

    2022 arXiv

  12. [20]

    The Astrophysical Journal 753(1), 91 (2012) https: //doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/753/1/91

    Kratter, K.M., Perets, H.B.: Star hoppers: Planet instability and capture in evolving binary systems. The Astrophysical Journal 753(1), 91 (2012) https: //doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/753/1/91

    2012 doi

  13. [21]

    Celestial Mechanics 6(3), 322–327 (1972) https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01231475

    Harrington, R.S.: Stability Criteria for Triple Stars. Celestial Mechanics 6(3), 322–327 (1972) https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01231475

    1972 doi

  14. [22]

    Innanen, K.A.: The Coriolis asymmetry in the classical restricted 3-body problem and the Jacobian integral. Astron. J. 85, 81–85 (1980) https://doi.org/10.1086/ 112642

    1980

  15. [23]

    lindstedt ` a l’´ etude du mouvement des com` etes p´ eriodiques

    Zeipel, H.V.: Sur l’application des s´ eries de m. lindstedt ` a l’´ etude du mouvement des com` etes p´ eriodiques. Astronomische Nachrichten 183(22-24), 345–418 (1909) https://doi.org/10.1002/asna.19091832202 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/asna.19091832202

    1909 doi

  16. [24]

    AJ 67, 591–598 (1962) https://doi.org/10.1086/108790

    Kozai, Y.: Secular perturbations of asteroids with high inclination and eccentric- ity. AJ 67, 591–598 (1962) https://doi.org/10.1086/108790

    1962 doi

  17. [25]

    Planetary and Space Science 9(10), 719–759 (1962) https://doi.org/10.1016/0032-0633(62)90129-0

    Lidov, M.L.: The evolution of orbits of artificial satellites of planets under the action of gravitational perturbations of external bodies. Planetary and Space Science 9(10), 719–759 (1962) https://doi.org/10.1016/0032-0633(62)90129-0

    1962 doi

  18. [26]

    Astrophys

    Perets, H.B., Kratter, K.M.: The Triple Evolution Dynamical Instability: Stellar Collisions in the Field and the Formation of Exotic Binaries. Astrophys. J.760(2), 99 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/760/2/99 arXiv:1203.2914 [astro- ph.SR]

    2012 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Grishin, E., Perets, H.B., Zenati, Y., Michaely, E.: Generalized Hill-stability cri- teria for hierarchical three-body systems at arbitrary inclinations. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 466(1), 276–285 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stw3096 arXiv:1609.05912 [astro-ph.EP]

    2017 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Tanaka, H., Takeuchi, T., Ward, W.R.: Three-Dimensional Interaction between a Planet and an Isothermal Gaseous Disk. I. Corotation and Lindblad Torques and Planet Migration. Astrophys. J. 565(2), 1257–1274 (2002) https://doi.org/ 10.1086/324713 19

    2002 doi

  21. [29]

    Progress of Theoretical Physics 64(2), 544–557 (1980) https://doi.org/10.1143/PTP.64.544

    Mizuno, H.: Formation of the Giant Planets. Progress of Theoretical Physics 64(2), 544–557 (1980) https://doi.org/10.1143/PTP.64.544

    1980 doi

  22. [30]

    Pollack, J.B.: Origin and History of the Outer Planets: Theoretical Models and Observations L Contraints. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 22, 389–424 (1984) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.aa.22.090184.002133

    1984

  23. [31]

    Lissauer, J.J.: Planet formation. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 31, 129–174 (1993) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.aa.31.090193.001021

    1993

  24. [32]

    Astrophys

    Kraus, A.L., Ireland, M.J., Hillenbrand, L.A., Martinache, F.: The Role of Multi- plicity in Disk Evolution and Planet Formation. Astrophys. J. 745(1), 19 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/745/1/19 arXiv:1109.4141 [astro-ph.EP]

    2012 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Kraus, A.L., Ireland, M.J., Huber, D., Mann, A.W., Dupuy, T.J.: The Impact of Stellar Multiplicity on Planetary Systems. I. The Ruinous Influence of Close Binary Companions. Astron. J. 152(1), 8 (2016) https://doi.org/10.3847/ 0004-6256/152/1/8 arXiv:1604.05744 [astro-ph.EP]

    2016 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Xie, J.-W., Zhou, J.-L., Ge, J.: Planetesimal Accretion in Binary Systems: Could Planets Form Around α Centauri B? Astrophys. J. 708(2), 1566–1578 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/708/2/1566 arXiv:1001.2614 [astro-ph.EP]

    2010 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Rafikov, R.R., Silsbee, K.: Planet Formation in Stellar Binaries. II. Overcoming the Fragmentation Barrier inα Centauri and γ Cephei-like Systems. Astrophys. J. 798(2), 70 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/798/2/70 arXiv:1408.4819 [astro-ph.EP]

    2015 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Nature, submitted (2025)

    Generozov, A., Offner, S.S.R., Kratter, K.M., Perets, H.B., Guszejnov, D., Grudi’c, M.Y.: Stellar Binaries are Bound from Birth. Nature, submitted (2025)

    2025

  29. [37]

    Heggie, D.C.: Binary evolution in stellar dynamics. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 173, 729–787 (1975) https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/173.3.729

    1975 doi

  30. [38]

    Astrophys

    Ostriker, E.C.: Capture and Induced Disk Accretion in Young Star Encounters. Astrophys. J. 424, 292 (1994) https://doi.org/10.1086/173890

    1994 doi

  31. [39]

    Mardling, R.A., Aarseth, S.J.: Tidal interactions in star cluster simulations. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 321(3), 398–420 (2001) https://doi.org/10.1046/j. 1365-8711.2001.03974.x

    2001

  32. [40]

    Nature 473(7346), 187–189 (2011) https: //doi.org/10.1038/nature10076 arXiv:1011.2501 [astro-ph.EP]

    Naoz, S., Farr, W.M., Lithwick, Y., Rasio, F.A., Teyssandier, J.: Hot Jupiters from secular planet-planet interactions. Nature 473(7346), 187–189 (2011) https: //doi.org/10.1038/nature10076 arXiv:1011.2501 [astro-ph.EP]

    2011 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Gong, Y.-X., Ji, J.: Formation of S-type planets in close binaries: scattering-induced tidal capture of circumbinary planets. Mon. Not. R. 20 Astron. Soc. 478(4), 4565–4574 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty1300 arXiv:1805.05868 [astro-ph.EP]

    2018 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Ortiz, M., Reffert, S., Trifonov, T., Quirrenbach, A., Mitchell, D.S., Nowak, G., Buenzli, E., Zimmerman, N., Bonnefoy, M., Skemer, A., Defr` ere, D., Lee, M.H., Fischer, D.A., Hinz, P.M.: Precise radial velocities of giant stars. IX. HD 59686 Ab: a massive circumstellar plane...

    2016 arXiv

  35. [43]

    arXiv e-prints, 1001–0581 (2010) https: //doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1001.0581 arXiv:1001.0581 [astro-ph.EP]

    Perets, H.B.: Second generation planets. arXiv e-prints, 1001–0581 (2010) https: //doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1001.0581 arXiv:1001.0581 [astro-ph.EP]

    2010 doi arXiv

  36. [44]

    Astronomy Reports 56(4), 305–314 (2012) https://doi

    Tutukov, A.V., Fedorova, A.V.: Formation of planets during the evolution of single and binary stars. Astronomy Reports 56(4), 305–314 (2012) https://doi. org/10.1134/S1063772912040075

    2012 doi

  37. [45]

    ESA- SCI 2017/1, European Space Agency (ESA) (April 2017)

    European Space Agency (ESA): Plato definition study report (red book). ESA- SCI 2017/1, European Space Agency (ESA) (April 2017). https://sci.esa.int/s/ 8rPypEw

    2017

  38. [46]

    In: Inutsuka, S., Aikawa, Y., Muto, T., Tomida, K., Tamura, M

    Offner, S.S.R., Moe, M., Kratter, K.M., Sadavoy, S.I., Jensen, E.L.N., Tobin, J.J.: The Origin and Evolution of Multiple Star Systems. In: Inutsuka, S., Aikawa, Y., Muto, T., Tomida, K., Tamura, M. (eds.) Protostars and Planets VII. Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conferen...

    2023 doi arXiv

  39. [47]

    Astrophys

    Rossiter, R.A.: On the detection of an effect of rotation during eclipse in the velocity of the brigher component of beta Lyrae, and on the constancy of velocity of this system. Astrophys. J. 60, 15–21 (1924) https://doi.org/10.1086/142825

    1924 doi

  40. [48]

    Astrophys

    McLaughlin, D.B.: Some results of a spectrographic study of the Algol system. Astrophys. J. 60, 22–31 (1924) https://doi.org/10.1086/142826

    1924 doi

  41. [49]

    Albrecht, S.H., Dawson, R.I., Winn, J.N.: Stellar Obliquities in Exoplanetary Systems. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 134(1038), 082001 (2022) https://doi.org/10. 1088/1538-3873/ac6c09 arXiv:2203.05460 [astro-ph.EP]

    2022 arXiv

  42. [50]

    SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis 2, 384–403 (1965) https://doi.org/10.1137/ 0702030

    Gragg, W.B.: On Extrapolation Algorithms for Ordinary Initial Value Problems. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis 2, 384–403 (1965) https://doi.org/10.1137/ 0702030

    1965

  43. [51]

    Numerische Mathematik 8(1), 1–13 (1966)

    Bulirsch, R., Stoer, J.: Numerical treatment of ordinary differential equations by extrapolation methods. Numerische Mathematik 8(1), 1–13 (1966)

    1966

  44. [52]

    In: Carusi, A., Valsecchi, G.B

    Everhart, E.: An efficient integrator that uses Gauss-Radau spacings. In: Carusi, A., Valsecchi, G.B. (eds.) IAU Colloq. 83: Dynamics of Comets: Their Origin 21 and Evolution. Astrophysics and Space Science Library, vol. 115, p. 185 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-5400-7 17

    1985 doi

  45. [53]

    Rein, H., Spiegel, D.S.: IAS15: a fast, adaptive, high-order integrator for gravita- tional dynamics, accurate to machine precision over a billion orbits. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 446(2), 1424–1437 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stu2164 arXiv:1409.4779 [astro-ph.EP]

    2015 arXiv

  46. [54]

    M¨ uller, S., Baron, J., Helled, R., Bouchy, F., Parc, L.: The mass-radius relation of exoplanets revisited. Astron. Astrophys. 686, 296 (2024) https://doi.org/10. 1051/0004-6361/202348690 arXiv:2311.12593 [astro-ph.EP]

    2024 arXiv

  47. [56]

    Liu, B., Mu˜ noz, D.J., Lai, D.: Suppression of extreme orbital evolution in triple systems with short-range forces. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 447(1), 747–764 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stu2396 arXiv:1409.6717 [astro-ph.EP]

    2015 arXiv

  48. [57]

    Astrophys

    Mangipudi, A., Grishin, E., Trani, A.A., Mandel, I.: Extreme Eccentricities of Triple Systems: Analytic Results. Astrophys. J. 934(1), 44 (2022) https://doi. org/10.3847/1538-4357/ac7958 arXiv:2205.08703 [astro-ph.EP]

    2022 arXiv

  49. [58]

    Grishin, E., Perets, H.B.: Chaotic dynamics of wide triples induced by galactic tides: a novel channel for producing compact binaries, mergers, and collisions. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 512(4), 4993–5009 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1093/ mnras/stac706 arXiv:2112.11475 [astro-ph.SR]

    2022 arXiv

  50. [59]

    Grishin, E., Lai, D., Perets, H.B.: Chaotic quadruple secular evolution and the production of misaligned exomoons and Warm Jupiters in stellar multiples. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 474(3), 3547–3556 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/ stx3005 arXiv:1710.05920 [astro-ph.EP]

    2018 arXiv

  51. [60]

    Nature 580(7804), 463–466 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2194-z arXiv:2003.01720 [astro-ph.EP] 22

    Grishin, E., Malamud, U., Perets, H.B., Wandel, O., Sch¨ afer, C.M.: The wide- binary origin of (2014) MU69-like Kuiper belt contact binaries. Nature 580(7804), 463–466 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2194-z arXiv:2003.01720 [astro-ph.EP] 22

    2014 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.