Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 3 cited by

A Disintegrating Rocky World Shrouded in Dust and Gas: Mid-IR Observations of K2-22b using JWST

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read JWST's first mid-infrared view of a disintegrating rocky exoplanet points to mantle silicates and an unexpected gas absorber.

desk verdict The first mid-IR spectrum of a disintegrating rocky exoplanet is a genuine advance with a secure transit detection, but the 5 µm gas-absorber claim rests on one unmodeled-foldover bin and should be labeled tentative. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.08301 v2 pith:ROBEVIH3 submitted 2025-01-14 astro-ph.EP

Nick Tusay , Jason T. Wright , Thomas G. Beatty , Steve Desch , Knicole Colón , Tushar Mittal , Hugh P. Osborn , Beatriz Campos Estrada
show 7 more authors
James E. Owen Jessica Libby-Roberts Arvind F. Gupta Brad Foley Erik Meier Valdés Daniel J. Stevens Ashley Herbst
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords disintegratingexoplanetsultra-shortperiodplanetsK2-22bJWSTMIRItransmissionspectroscopyexoplanetinteriorsmid-infraredrockycomposition
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

K2-22b, an ultra-short-period rocky planet, is slowly vaporizing: it periodically releases dusty clouds that transit its host star, and those clouds carry spectral fingerprints of material from the planet's interior. The paper reports the first mid-infrared transmission spectrum of such a disintegrating rocky world, obtained with JWST's MIRI instrument across four predicted transit windows. In the wavelength range with the best precision, 4.4 to 8 microns, one transit is detected at 9.7 sigma and two at lower significance. The spectrum disfavors a featureless, iron-dominated core composition, is consistent with magnesium silicate minerals from a mantle, and shows a distinct, unexpected feature near 5 microns that matches nitric oxide or carbon dioxide gas. If these findings hold, astronomers can read the interior composition of a rocky exoplanet directly from its evaporating surface.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the transmission spectrum of the planet's transient dust-and-gas cloud, extracted from JWST MIRI low-resolution slitless spectroscopy between 4.4 and 11.8 microns, with analysis focused on 4.4 to 8 microns where the signal-to-noise is highest. The interpretation is carried by opacity models: solid-state dust opacities computed with Mie theory for plausible core, mantle, and crust minerals, and gas opacities from the gas-opacity database used in the paper for rock-vapor and ice-vapor species. The 5.1 micron feature acts as the discriminating observable: no solid mineral in the surveyed library produces it, while nitric oxide and carbon dioxide do, making it the evidence for a gaseous absorber. A second supporting mechanism is the multi-transit check: the 4.5 and 5.1 micron channels appear as the strongest features in the lower-significance transits as well, which the authors use to argue the feature is astrophysical.

What would settle it

Observe the next bright transit of K2-22b with JWST NIRSpec across 4.5-5.3 microns, where the wavelength coverage overlaps MIRI but the foldover geometry differs; if the 5.1 micron feature is absent or much weaker in NIRSpec, the mid-infrared feature is instrumental, while a matching detection would confirm the gas absorber.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the mid-infrared light blocked by K2-22b's transiting cloud is not a flat, featureless signal. Fitting the fourth transit window over the 4.4-8 micron range, the authors find that a flat spectrum is strongly disfavored (reduced chi-squared 3.56), and the wavelength-dependent depths are better matched by opacity from magnesium silicate minerals such as enstatite, forsterite, and olivine-type species than by iron, iron oxide, or iron sulfide that would signal a bare core. No solid mineral reproduces the deep feature at 5.1 microns, however, and the paper attributes it to an absorbing gas, with nitric oxide and carbon dioxide the best matches among the species surveyed. The same 4.5 and 5.1 micron channels are the most significant features in the two lower-significance transits, which the authors take as evidence that these spectral features are real rather than a statistical fluke. The central claim is that this is the first direct mid-infrared spectroscopic view of the evaporating surface material of a rocky exoplanet, pointing to mantle silicates plus a volatile-related gas phase.

Load-bearing premise

The gas-absorber result rests on the assumption that the ~5 micron channel's depth is astrophysical rather than inflated by MIRI's known short-wavelength spectral foldover (up to ~6% in that bin, per the paper's estimate); if the feature is an artifact, the gas claim disappears even though the silicate-versus-core conclusions would likely stand.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the identification holds, this is the first mid-infrared transmission spectrum of a disintegrating rocky exoplanet, establishing a direct observational route to the interior composition of ultra-short-period rocky planets.
  • A featureless iron-dominated core is disfavored; the data are consistent with magnesium silicate mantle minerals, meaning the evaporating surface is drawing on mantle material rather than exposing a bare core.
  • The ~5 micron feature, if real, requires a gaseous absorber such as NO or CO2, which are volatile species not expected from a purely rocky mantle, so the planet's progenitor must have contained a reservoir of carbon, nitrogen, or water-derived volatiles.
  • The 4.5 and 5.1 micron features appear weakly in the other transits too, suggesting the absorber is a persistent component of the outflow rather than a one-time cloud event.
  • Confirming the gas species and measuring abundances will require more precise mid-infrared spectra, and overlapping near-infrared observations with NIRSpec around 5 microns would provide an independent check.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the 5.1 micron feature is confirmed as NO, K2-22b would be the first known rocky exoplanet whose escaping atmosphere reveals nitrogen chemistry, which would strengthen the case that some close-in rocky planets form with significant volatile inventories despite their present-day high temperatures.
  • The recurrence of the 4.5 and 5.1 micron channels across four transits predicts that the next bright transit will show the same pattern; a future observation without the 5.1 micron feature would challenge the gas-absorber interpretation.
  • Because MIRI's spectral foldover is confined to the shortest channels, comparing the 5.1 micron feature with NIRSpec data at matching wavelengths would cleanly separate a real gas feature from an instrumental artifact.
  • Applying the same MIRI LRS technique to the other disintegrating planets (KIC 1255b and BD+05 4868 Ab) could reveal whether volatile-bearing gas features are common to this class or unique to K2-22b.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. This paper presents JWST MIRI LRS observations of four predicted transit windows of the disintegrating ultra-short-period rocky exoplanet K2-22b, together with simultaneous CHEOPS optical photometry. The authors detect a 9.7-sigma transit in the fourth window in combined light over 4.4-8 micron, and report lower-significance transits in two other windows. From the transmission spectrum of the fourth transit, they find that a flat spectrum is disfavored (reduced chi-square = 3.56), that iron-dominated core-like dust species are disfavored relative to magnesium-silicate mantle-like species in a BIC comparison, and that a narrow feature at about 5.1 micron is consistent with an as-yet-unidentified gaseous absorber, possibly NO and/or CO2. The analysis is supported by two independent data reduction pipelines, a red-noise assessment, and a simultaneous optical depth measurement. The paper is cautiously worded about the low S/N, but the 5.1 micron gas identification is presented as a distinct and unexpected result.

Significance. If confirmed, these observations constitute the first mid-infrared transmission spectrum of a disintegrating rocky exoplanet and would provide a direct spectroscopic probe of its interior composition, with the silicate-versus-core conclusion being a valuable first step. The white-light detection is robust: it is derived from two independent pipelines, the red noise is checked and found marginal, and the simultaneous CHEOPS data provide a consistent optical depth. The broad conclusion that the dust is inconsistent with featureless iron-rich core material and more consistent with magnesium-silicate minerals is supported by the BIC comparison over the 4.4-8 micron range. However, the most novel claim--a distinct 5.1 micron absorption feature attributed to a possible NO/CO2 gas absorber--is not established at the same standard, because it rests on a single bin with known but unmodeled spectral foldover, a qualitative gas model comparison, and no wavelength trials correction. The significance of the paper therefore depends on strengthening or appropriately de-emphasizing this gas claim.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.2, Figure 4, Appendix D] The 5.1 micron feature, on which the 'unknown gaseous absorber, possibly NO and/or CO2' conclusion rests, is a single binned channel (5.00-5.15 micron) for which Appendix D estimates up to about 6% spectral-foldover contamination from wavelengths below 3 micron. Spectral foldover adds contaminating flux to the aperture, so the measured transit depth in that bin is approximately D_true + c(D_short - D_true), where c is the contamination fraction. If the true transit depth at short wavelengths exceeds that at 5.1 micron--as it likely does for a blue-enhanced dust cloud--the 5.1 micron depth can be inflated by hundreds of ppm, comparable to the reported feature. The dilution argument given for the 4.52 micron bin does not apply to the 5.1 micron bin, and the contamination is not forward-modeled. The quoted 6.8-sigma significance (4.5 sigma after a 1.5x error inflation) thus does not represent a robust astrophysical detection. I request that the authors either forward-model the foldover with the measured stellar spectrum and a plausible blue dust opacity, or explicitly bound the effect and show the feature persists; otherwise the gas identification should be labeled as tentative and not appear as a headline result.
  2. [Section 3.2, Figure 4] The gas species identification is made by qualitative comparison: the text states that MgO and SiO 'poorly fit the data' and that NO and CO2 are the 'best fitting gas models', but no statistical comparison (e.g., Delta-BIC or likelihood ratio) is presented for the gas models, in contrast to the mineralogy analysis in Appendix D. The DACE search involved multiple species and a choice of temperature (2100 K) and pressure (1e-8 bar), yet no trials factor is applied for the number of species tested. A quantitative model comparison with explicit parameters (scale, offset, column abundance) and, ideally, a simple T/P sensitivity check is required before the abstract can state that the feature is 'consistent with an unknown gaseous absorber, possibly NO and/or CO2' as opposed to merely one of many possible matches.
  3. [Section 3, Figure 2, Appendix C] The reported significance of the 5.1 micron feature (6.8 sigma, or 4.5 sigma after the 1.5x uncertainty inflation) is not corrected for a look-elsewhere effect in wavelength. The 4.4-8 micron spectrum contains about 23 independent R=17 bins, and the gas feature was not predicted a priori; it was found after a search of the DACE library. The 'look elsewhere' analysis in Appendix C is applied only along the time axis, not across the spectral bins. Without a trials correction, a quoted 4.5 sigma significance substantially overstates the evidence. Additionally, the supporting evidence from transits 1-3 (Figure D8) derives from per-channel fits to light curves whose white-light detections are below 3 sigma, so it cannot independently validate the feature. The paper should either report a trials-corrected significance, adopt a Bayesian model comparison that includes the number of searched bins and species, or restrict the abstract's claim to a 'candidate feature requiring confirmation'.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Title and Abstract] The manuscript text contains a typographical error in the title and running head: 'W orld' should be 'World'.
  2. [Figure 2, middle panel caption] The caption describes 'a clear detection of a transit from 4.4-8 micron except at 4.8 micron', but the dips at 4.8 and 5.1 micron are spectral features within the transit; consider rephrasing to avoid confusion between wavelength-dependent depth and a non-detection.
  3. [Section 3.1] The grain-size distribution is fixed at 0.01-5 micron with a power-law index of 0.875 and an effective size of 1 micron; the sensitivity of the mineralogy BIC ranking to these parameters is not discussed, and a short comment or supplementary figure would make the silicate-versus-iron conclusion more robust.
  4. [Appendix C, Equation C1] Equation C1 defines the transit depth delta as a weighted sum with weights f_i / sigma_i^2, but the normalization of the model f (e.g., f=1 in transit and 0 outside, or a continuum level of 1) is not stated explicitly; please clarify.
  5. [References] The reference list includes Curry et al. 2024a and 2024b with the same journal, volume, page, and DOI; please verify whether these are distinct papers or a duplicated citation and correct accordingly.
  6. [Section 3.2] The single temperature and pressure point used for the gas opacities (2100 K, 1e-8 bar) is stated without justification; a brief motivation and a note on the sensitivity of the spectral match to T and P would help the reader assess the gas identification.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the JWST spectrum is an independent measurement, and the mineral and gas opacity comparisons rest on external laboratory data and line lists, with self-citations used only for interpretive context.

full rationale

I find no step in which a claimed prediction is equivalent to an input by construction. The transit depths are measured directly from the MIRI time series via Equations C1 and C2, and the 9.7-sigma white-light detection in transit window 4 is independent of any composition model. The spectral comparisons use Mie scattering with optical constants from published laboratory sources (Table E1) and gas opacities from the DACE database (Grimm et al. 2021); the BIC comparison in Appendix D fits only a scale and offset per solid opacity model, which is standard model comparison rather than a fitted input renamed as a prediction. The Bodman et al. (2018) and Campos Estrada et al. (2024) models are partially self-cited by overlapping authors, but they are used only to select plausible mineral species and to frame prior expectations; the conclusion that iron-dominated core material is disfavored comes from the independent BIC comparison to the measured spectrum, not from the self-citations. The tentative NO/CO2 identification is a post-hoc match to the 5.1 micron feature and carries a real robustness risk from MIRI LRS spectral foldover (Appendix D), but that is a systematic-uncertainty concern rather than circular reasoning. Accordingly, no specific circular step is exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard radiative transfer assumptions (Mie theory, optically thin cloud) and on lab-measured optical constants and gas line lists. The two most influential hand-set numbers are the dust grain-size distribution and the gas temperature and pressure; neither is constrained by the JWST data. The mineralogy BIC comparison fits a scale and offset per model, which slightly weakens the model comparison. No invented entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • dust grain size power-law index and size range = p=0.875, 0.01-5 um, effective 1 um
    Adopted in Section 3.1 to compute Mie opacities of solid dust; based on prior morphological modeling (Sanchis-Ojeda et al. 2015; van Lieshout et al. 2016; Schlawin et al. 2021), not fit to the JWST spectrum.
  • gas temperature and pressure for opacity models = T=2100 K, P=10^-8 bar
    Chosen in Section 3.2 as expected conditions for a vaporizing rocky planet; not constrained by the data.
  • mineralogy model scale and offset in BIC comparison = not reported
    Two parameters per mineral model used to fit the observed spectrum in the Delta-BIC comparison (Appendix D, Figure D7); fitted values not tabulated.
  • noise inflation factor for look-elsewhere analysis = 1.5x (spectral channels), 1.1x (white light)
    Chosen in Appendices C and D to account for red noise and look-elsewhere effects; not derived from a formal noise model.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Mie scattering theory describes the extinction of the dust grains in the transiting cloud.
    Used in Section 3.1 to compute solid-state opacities from optical constants.
  • domain assumption Laboratory optical constants of the chosen minerals and amorphous forms (Table E1) are representative of the actual condensates in K2-22b's cloud.
    The mineral discrimination in Section 3.1 and Figure D7 depends on these constants.
  • domain assumption Gas opacity cross-sections from the DACE database at 2100 K and 10^-8 bar correctly represent the absorbing gases.
    Used in Section 3.2 to identify the 5 micron feature with NO or CO2.
  • domain assumption The transiting cloud is optically thin in transmission, so the measured depth scales linearly with wavelength-dependent opacity.
    Standard transmission spectroscopy assumption; underlies interpretation of the depth spectrum in Section 3.
  • domain assumption The Schlawin et al. (2021) ephemeris is accurate enough that the four observed windows correspond to actual transits.
    Used to define transit windows in Tables 1 and 2; validated by the high-significance detection in window 4 but assumed for windows 1-3.
  • domain assumption Baseline flux outside 1.5 times the 46-minute transit duration represents the unocculted stellar flux.
    Used in Appendix C to normalize lightcurves; if the cloud extends beyond this window, depths are biased.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Disintegrating Rocky World Shrouded in Dust and Gas: Mid-IR Observations of K2-22b using JWST." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ROBEVIH3

@misc{pith2026250108301,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Disintegrating Rocky World Shrouded in Dust and Gas: Mid-IR Observations of K2-22b using JWST},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ROBEVIH3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.08301}
}
abstract

The disintegrating ultra-short period rocky exoplanet K2-22b periodically emits dusty clouds in a dynamically chaotic process resulting in a variable transit depth from 0-1.3%. The effluents that sublimate off the surface and condense out in space are probably representative of the formerly interior layers convectively transported to the molten surface. Transmission spectroscopy of these transiting clouds reveal spectral fingerprints of the interior composition of this rocky world. We used JWST's Mid-Infrared Instrument (MIRI) as a low-resolution slitless spectrograph to observe four predicted transit windows for K2-22b. For each observation, we extracted a transmission spectrum over the spectral range of 4.4-11.8 $\mu$m. Over the spectral range of 4.4-8 $\mu$m, where the spectral precision is highest, we detect one transit at high significance and two at low significance. While the S/N of the spectrum limits our ability to draw firm conclusions, we find that the data: 1) disfavor featureless, iron-dominated core material, 2) are consistent with some form of magnesium silicate minerals, likely from mantle material, and 3) show a distinct and unexpected feature at $\sim$5 $\mu$m. The unexpected feature, also seen weakly in the low-significance transits, is consistent with an unknown gaseous absorber, possibly NO and/or CO$_2$. These findings warrant further study to improve the constraints on the composition of this disintegrating rocky world.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.08301 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. MIRI verification image of K2-22 and its smaller companion star, at ∼2 ′′ separation. The direction of dispersion (DoD) is included as well, showing enough separation between the binary that contamination is minimal. The DoD is ∼175◦ East of North. The roll angle of the telescope was such that the dispersion of the light was not contaminated by the companion star, spatially separated by about 2′′ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:f… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Results from JWST Cycle 2 GO Program 3315. Top: Lightcurve of the second half of the phase curve, collected on April 28, 2024, showing a clear transit at the predicted ephemeris. The unbinned time series data (at a cadence of 72 seconds) is plotted in grey in the background. The blue points are binned to a time resolution of 8 minutes. The average 46-minute duration drawn from Sanchis-Ojeda et al. (2015) is shown as… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Opacities calculated from optical properties of solid dust species using Mie scattering theory with an effective dust grain size of 1 µm for a power law (p = 0.875) distribution of dust grains. Representative models for core, mantle and crust mineralogy are included. This spectrum disfavors purely featureless iron compounds indicative of a bare core. None of these solid dust opacities simultaneously account for all … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Gas opacities of rock and ice vapor overlaid with the MIRI data. The two most theoretically plausible species with significant mid-infrared features that are expected from typical mantle material are shown: MgO and SiO (Booth et al. 2023). These poorly fit the data, su…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Silicate mineralogy and bulk composition of exoplanetary material in polluted white dwarfs

    astro-ph.EP 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    New ultraviolet abundances for two white dwarfs, combined with a re-analysis of eight systems, support a tentative correlation between the Mg/Si ratio of accreted exoplanetary material and whether its dust is olivine-...

  2. Highlights from Exoplanet Observations by the James Webb Space Telescope

    astro-ph.EP 2025-05 unverdicted novelty 3.0 of 10

    A review chapter of JWST exoplanet highlights with a compiled target database and reproducible figures.

  3. Exploration of Exoplanet Atmospheres with the James Webb Space Telescope

    astro-ph.EP 2026-08 unverdicted novelty 1.0 of 10

    A review of JWST's first cycles of exoplanet atmosphere observations, spanning direct imaging, transit spectroscopy, and the prospect of a ~10,000-hour population survey.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

88 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    y )9 B! I I I I I I I 2p I I ICd*I I I IU I I I I I I

    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

  4. [4]

    G., et al

    Adibekyan , V., Dorn , C., Sousa , S. G., et al. 2021, Science, 374, 330, 10.1126/science.abg8794

    doi:10.1126/science.abg8794 2021

  5. [5]

    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

  6. [6]

    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

  7. [7]

    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

  8. [8]

    D., & Noack , L

    Ballmer , M. D., & Noack , L. 2021, Elements, 17, 245, 10.2138/gselements.17.4.245

    doi:10.2138/gselements.17.4.245 2021

Show all 88 references
  1. [9]

    G., Welbanks , L., Schlawin , E., et al

    Beatty , T. G., Welbanks , L., Schlawin , E., et al. 2024, , 970, L10, 10.3847/2041-8213/ad55e9

    2024 doi

  2. [10]

    1997, , 476, 199, 10.1086/303597

    Begemann , B., Dorschner , J., Henning , T., et al. 1997, , 476, 199, 10.1086/303597

    1997 doi

  3. [11]

    J., Ahrer, E.-M., Brande, J., et al

    Bell, T. J., Ahrer, E.-M., Brande, J., et al. 2022, Journal of Open Source Software, 7, 4503, 10.21105/joss.04503

    2022 doi

  4. [12]

    J., Kreidberg , L., Kendrew , S., et al

    Bell , T. J., Kreidberg , L., Kendrew , S., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2301.06350, 10.48550/arXiv.2301.06350

    2023 doi arXiv

  5. [13]

    2021, Experimental Astronomy, 51, 109

    Benz, W., Broeg, C., Fortier, A., et al. 2021, Experimental Astronomy, 51, 109

    2021

  6. [14]

    H., Wright, J

    Bodman, E. H., Wright, J. T., Desch, S. J., & Lisse, C. M. 2018, The Astronomical Journal, 156, 173

    2018

  7. [15]

    A., Owen , J

    Booth , R. A., Owen , J. E., & Schulik , M. 2023, , 518, 1761, 10.1093/mnras/stac3121

    2023 doi

  8. [16]

    O., et al

    Bouchet , P., Gastaud , R., Lagage , P. O., et al. 2022, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 12180, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2022: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, ed. L. E. Coyle , S. Matsuura , & M. D. Perri...

    2022 doi

  9. [17]

    P., et al

    Bouwman , J., Kendrew , S., Greene , T. P., et al. 2023, , 135, 038002, 10.1088/1538-3873/acbc49

    2023 doi

  10. [18]

    2023, , 521, 5746, 10.1093/mnras/stad932

    Bromley , J., & Chiang , E. 2023, , 521, 5746, 10.1093/mnras/stad932

    2023 doi

  11. [19]

    2022, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 657, A120

    Bulak, M., Paardekooper, D., Fedoseev, G., et al. 2022, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 657, A120

    2022

  12. [20]

    E., Jankovic , M

    Campos Estrada , B., Owen , J. E., Jankovic , M. R., Wilson , A., & Helling , C. 2024, , 528, 1249, 10.1093/mnras/stae095

    2024 doi

  13. [21]

    D., Hesse , M

    Carnahan , E., Vance , S. D., Hesse , M. A., Journaux , B., & Sotin , C. 2022, , 49, e97602, 10.1029/2021GL097602

    2022 doi

  14. [22]

    2018, Chemical Engineering Journal, 342, 171

    Chazallon, B., & Pirim, C. 2018, Chemical Engineering Journal, 342, 171

    2018

  15. [23]

    S., Simons , M., Castillo-Rogez , J., et al

    Cockell , C. S., Simons , M., Castillo-Rogez , J., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 675, 10.1038/s41550-024-02196-w

    2024 doi

  16. [24]

    D., Zhou, G., Shporer, A., et al

    Col \'o n, K. D., Zhou, G., Shporer, A., et al. 2018, The Astronomical Journal, 156, 227

    2018

  17. [26]

    2024 b , , 528, 4314, 10.1093/mnras/stae191

    ---. 2024 b , , 528, 4314, 10.1093/mnras/stae191

    2024 doi

  18. [27]

    C., Ammannito, E., Carrozzo, F., et al

    De Sanctis, M. C., Ammannito, E., Carrozzo, F., et al. 2024, Communications Earth & Environment, 5, 131

    2024

  19. [28]

    M., & Castillo-Rogez, J

    Diab, J., Daswani, M. M., & Castillo-Rogez, J. 2023, Icarus, 391, 115339

    2023

  20. [29]

    2015, , 577, A83, 10.1051/0004-6361/201424915

    Dorn , C., Khan , A., Heng , K., et al. 2015, , 577, A83, 10.1051/0004-6361/201424915

    2015 doi

  21. [30]

    2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 688, A223

    Egger, J., Osborn, H., Kubyshkina, D., et al. 2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 688, A223

    2024

  22. [31]

    Foley , B. J. 2024, Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry, 90, 559, 10.2138/rmg.2024.90.15

    2024 doi

  23. [32]

    2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.01716

    Fortier, A., Simon, A., Broeg, C., et al. 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.01716

    2024 arXiv

  24. [33]

    2024, , 688, L34, 10.1051/0004-6361/202451332

    Gaidos , E., Parviainen , H., Esparza-Borges , E., et al. 2024, , 688, L34, 10.1051/0004-6361/202451332

    2024 doi

  25. [34]

    L., Malik , M., Kitzmann , D., et al

    Grimm , S. L., Malik , M., Kitzmann , D., et al. 2021, , 253, 30, 10.3847/1538-4365/abd773

    2021 doi

  26. [35]

    1995, , 112, 143

    Henning , T., Begemann , B., Mutschke , H., & Dorschner , J. 1995, , 112, 143

    1995

  27. [36]

    1997, , 327, 743

    Henning , T., & Mutschke , H. 1997, , 327, 743

    1997

  28. [37]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.05431, 10.48550/arXiv.2501.05431

    Hon , M., Rappaport , S., Shporer , A., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.05431, 10.48550/arXiv.2501.05431

    2025 doi arXiv

  29. [38]

    M., Duch \^e ne , G., & Matthews , B

    Hughes , A. M., Duch \^e ne , G., & Matthews , B. C. 2018, , 56, 541, 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-052035

    2018 doi

  30. [39]

    2003, , 408, 193, 10.1051/0004-6361:20030916

    J \"a ger , C., Dorschner , J., Mutschke , H., Posch , T., & Henning , T. 2003, , 408, 193, 10.1051/0004-6361:20030916

    2003 doi

  31. [40]

    2015, Earth-Science Reviews, 148, 150

    Johnson, B., & Goldblatt, C. 2015, Earth-Science Reviews, 148, 150

    2015

  32. [41]

    2020, , 216, 7, 10.1007/s11214-019-0633-7

    Journaux , B., Kalousov \'a , K., Sotin , C., et al. 2020, , 216, 7, 10.1007/s11214-019-0633-7

    2020 doi

  33. [42]

    Jura , M., & Young , E. D. 2014, Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 42, 45, 10.1146/annurev-earth-060313-054740

    2014 doi

  34. [43]

    S., & Lewis , J

    Kargel , J. S., & Lewis , J. S. 1993, , 105, 1, 10.1006/icar.1993.1108

    1993

  35. [44]

    2013, , 776, L6, 10.1088/2041-8205/776/1/L6

    Kawahara , H., Hirano , T., Kurosaki , K., Ito , Y., & Ikoma , M. 2013, , 776, L6, 10.1088/2041-8205/776/1/L6

    2013 doi

  36. [45]

    1965, , 207, 745, 10.1038/207745a0

    Keil , K. 1965, , 207, 745, 10.1038/207745a0

    1965 doi

  37. [46]

    S., Fegley , Bruce, J., Schaefer , L., & Gaidos , E

    Kite , E. S., Fegley , Bruce, J., Schaefer , L., & Gaidos , E. 2016, , 828, 80, 10.3847/0004-637X/828/2/80

    2016 doi

  38. [47]

    2018, , 475, 94, 10.1093/mnras/stx3141

    Kitzmann , D., & Heng , K. 2018, , 475, 94, 10.1093/mnras/stx3141

    2018 doi

  39. [48]

    1995, , 114, 203, 10.1006/icar.1995.1055

    Koike , C., Kaito , C., Yamamoto , T., et al. 1995, , 114, 203, 10.1006/icar.1995.1055

    1995

  40. [49]

    M., Wampfler , S

    Kulterer , B. M., Wampfler , S. F., Ligterink , N. F. W., et al. 2024, , 691, A281, 10.1051/0004-6361/202450792

    2024 doi

  41. [50]

    Laor , A., & Draine , B. T. 1993, , 402, 441, 10.1086/172149

    1993 doi

  42. [51]

    R., Russell , S

    Lee , M. R., Russell , S. S., Arden , J. W., & Pillinger , C. T. 1995, Meteoritics, 30, 387, 10.1111/j.1945-5100.1995.tb01142.x

    1995

  43. [52]

    2004, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 109

    Marsh, D., Solomon, S., & Reynolds, A. 2004, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 109

    2004

  44. [53]

    P., Johnson , R

    Matsuo , T., Greene , T. P., Johnson , R. R., et al. 2019, , 131, 124502, 10.1088/1538-3873/ab42f1

    2019 doi

  45. [54]

    F., & Sun , S

    McDonough , W. F., & Sun , S. s. 1995, Chemical Geology, 120, 223, 10.1016/0009-2541(94)00140-4

    1995 doi

  46. [55]

    K., Hook , S

    Meerdink , S. K., Hook , S. J., Roberts , D. A., & Abbott , E. A. 2019, Remote Sensing of Environment, 230, 111196, 10.1016/j.rse.2019.05.015

    2019 doi

  47. [56]

    A., & Hor \'a nyi , M

    Mendis , D. A., & Hor \'a nyi , M. 2013, Reviews of Geophysics, 51, 53, 10.1002/rog.20005

    2013 doi

  48. [57]

    1908, Annalen der Physik, 330, 377, 10.1002/andp.19083300302

    Mie , G. 1908, Annalen der Physik, 330, 377, 10.1002/andp.19083300302

    1908 doi

  49. [58]

    2011, , 742, L19, 10.1088/2041-8205/742/2/L19

    Miguel , Y., Kaltenegger , L., Fegley , B., & Schaefer , L. 2011, , 742, L19, 10.1088/2041-8205/742/2/L19

    2011 doi

  50. [59]

    2019, Progress in Earth and Planetary Science, 6, 1

    Mysen, B. 2019, Progress in Earth and Planetary Science, 6, 1

    2019

  51. [60]

    2024, Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets, 129, e2023JE008150

    Nathues, A., Hoffmann, M., Sarkar, R., et al. 2024, Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets, 129, e2023JE008150

    2024

  52. [61]

    O'Neill, H. S. C., & Palme, H. 1998, Composition of the Silicate Earth: Implications for Accretion and Core Formation (Cambridge University Press), 3 -- 126, 10.1017/CBO9780511573101.004

    1998 doi

  53. [62]

    Palik , E. D. 1985, Handbook of optical constants of solids

    1985

  54. [63]

    1991, Handbook of optical constants of solids II

    ---. 1991, Handbook of optical constants of solids II

    1991

  55. [64]

    Perez-Becker , D. A. 2013, PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley

    2013

  56. [65]

    B., Hollenbach , D., Beckwith , S., et al

    Pollack , J. B., Hollenbach , D., Beckwith , S., et al. 1994, , 421, 615, 10.1086/173677

    1994 doi

  57. [66]

    2003, , 149, 437, 10.1086/379167

    Posch , T., Kerschbaum , F., Fabian , D., et al. 2003, , 149, 437, 10.1086/379167

    2003 doi

  58. [67]

    2014, , 784, 40, 10.1088/0004-637X/784/1/40

    Rappaport , S., Barclay , T., DeVore , J., et al. 2014, , 784, 40, 10.1088/0004-637X/784/1/40

    2014 doi

  59. [68]

    2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 752, 1, 10.1088/0004-637x/752/1/1

    Rappaport, S., Levine, A., Chiang, E., et al. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 752, 1, 10.1088/0004-637x/752/1/1

    2012 doi

  60. [69]

    S., Gordon , I

    Rothman , L. S., Gordon , I. E., Barbe , A., et al. 2009, , 110, 533, 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2009.02.013

    2009 doi

  61. [70]

    2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 812, 112

    Sanchis-Ojeda, R., Rappaport, S., Pall \`e , E., et al. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 812, 112

    2015

  62. [71]

    I., & Giggenbach, W

    Scarpa, R., Tilling, R. I., & Giggenbach, W. 1996, Monitoring and mitigation of volcano hazards, 221

    1996

  63. [72]

    2009, , 703, L113, 10.1088/0004-637X/703/2/L113

    Schaefer , L., & Fegley , B. 2009, , 703, L113, 10.1088/0004-637X/703/2/L113

    2009 doi

  64. [73]

    K., & Chen , H

    Schlawin , E., Herter , T., Zhao , M., Teske , J. K., & Chen , H. 2016, , 826, 156, 10.3847/0004-637X/826/2/156

    2016 doi

  65. [74]

    2018, , 156, 281, 10.3847/1538-3881/aaeb32

    Schlawin , E., Hirano , T., Kawahara , H., et al. 2018, , 156, 281, 10.3847/1538-3881/aaeb32

    2018 doi

  66. [75]

    Schlawin , E., Su , K. Y. L., Herter , T., Ridden-Harper , A., & Apai , D. 2021, , 162, 57, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac0b41

    2021 doi

  67. [76]

    2024 a , , 168, 104, 10.3847/1538-3881/ad58e0

    Schlawin , E., Mukherjee , S., Ohno , K., et al. 2024 a , , 168, 104, 10.3847/1538-3881/ad58e0

    2024 doi

  68. [77]

    J., et al

    Schlawin , E., Ohno , K., Bell , T. J., et al. 2024 b , , 974, L33, 10.3847/2041-8213/ad7fef

    2024 doi

  69. [78]

    A., & Militzer , B

    Seager , S., Kuchner , M., Hier-Majumder , C. A., & Militzer , B. 2007, , 669, 1279, 10.1086/521346

    2007 doi

  70. [79]

    2012, Surveys in Geophysics, 33, 1281

    Sinnhuber, M., Nieder, H., & Wieters, N. 2012, Surveys in Geophysics, 33, 1281

    2012

  71. [80]

    R., Hasegawa , Y., Thorngren , D

    Swain , M. R., Hasegawa , Y., Thorngren , D. P., & Roudier , G. M. 2024, , 220, 61, 10.1007/s11214-024-01098-7

    2024 doi

  72. [81]

    2015, , 580, A30, 10.1051/0004-6361/201525963

    Thiabaud , A., Marboeuf , U., Alibert , Y., Leya , I., & Mezger , K. 2015, , 580, A30, 10.1051/0004-6361/201525963

    2015 doi

  73. [82]

    1998, Journal of Physics Condensed Matter, 10, 3669, 10.1088/0953-8984/10/16/018

    Ueda , K., Yanagi , H., Noshiro , R., Hosono , H., & Kawazoe , H. 1998, Journal of Physics Condensed Matter, 10, 3669, 10.1088/0953-8984/10/16/018

    1998 doi

  74. [83]

    2014, , 572, A76, 10.1051/0004-6361/201424876

    van Lieshout , R., Min , M., & Dominik , C. 2014, , 572, A76, 10.1051/0004-6361/201424876

    2014 doi

  75. [84]

    2016, , 596, A32, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629250

    van Lieshout , R., Min , M., Dominik , C., et al. 2016, , 596, A32, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629250

    2016 doi

  76. [85]

    A., Rappaport , S., et al

    Vanderburg , A., Johnson , J. A., Rappaport , S., et al. 2015, , 526, 546, 10.1038/nature15527

    2015 doi

  77. [86]

    S., Liu , F., Ireland , T

    Wang , H. S., Liu , F., Ireland , T. R., et al. 2019, , 482, 2222, 10.1093/mnras/sty2749

    2019 doi

  78. [87]

    J., Beatty , T

    Welbanks , L., Bell , T. J., Beatty , T. G., et al. 2024, , 630, 836, 10.1038/s41586-024-07514-w

    2024 doi

  79. [88]

    C., Dewberry, J

    Wu, S. C., Dewberry, J. W., & Fuller, J. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 963, 34

    2024

  80. [89]

    2011, , 526, A68, 10.1051/0004-6361/201015219

    Zeidler , S., Posch , T., Mutschke , H., Richter , H., & Wehrhan , O. 2011, , 526, A68, 10.1051/0004-6361/201015219

    2011 doi

Pith tools

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