Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

The KELT-7b atmospheric thermal-inversion conundrum revisited with CHEOPS, TESS, and additional data

T0 review · 5 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that the choice between free-chemistry and thermochemical-equilibrium retrievals is the main factor deciding whether KELT-7b's atmosphere appears thermally inverted, and reports a very low geometric albedo of…

desk verdict The model-dependence argument holds up; the non-inverted T-P profile conclusion does not, because the HST data are used to constrain the equilibrium retrievals and then dismissed as activity-contaminated when they disagree with the GCM. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.20432 v1 pith:4SDXWDSX submitted 2025-06-25 astro-ph.EP

Z. Garai , A. Krenn , P.E. Cubillos , G. Bruno , A.M.S. Smith , T.G. Wilson , A. Brandeker , M.N. Günther
show 79 more authors
A. Heitzmann L. Carone V. Singh M. Lendl O.D.S. Demangeon Y. Alibert R. Alonso J. Asquier T. Bárczy D. Barrado S.C. Barros W. Baumjohann W. Benz N. Billot L. Borsato C. Broeg A. Collier Cameron A.C.M. Correia Sz. Csizmadia M.B. Davies M. Deleuil A. Deline B.-O. Demory A. Derekas B. Edwards J.A. Egger D. Ehrenreich A. Erikson J. Farinato A. Fortier L. Fossati M. Fridlund D. Gandolfi K. Gazeas M. Gillon M. Güdel Ch. Helling K.G. Isaak F. Kerschbaum L. Kiss J. Korth K.W.F. Lam J. Laskar A. Lecavelier des Etangs D. Magrin P.F.L. Maxted B. Merín C. Mordasini V. Nascimbeni G. Olofsson R. Ottensamer I. Pagano E. Pallé G. Peter D. Piazza G. Piotto D. Pollacco D. Queloz R. Ragazzoni N. Rando H. Rauer I. Ribas N.C. Santos G. Scandariato D. Ségransan A.E. Simon S.G. Sousa M. Stalport S. Sulis M. Gy. Szabó S. Udry S. Ulmer-Moll V. Van Grootel J. Venturini E. Villaver N.A. Walton S. Wolf D. Wolter T. Zingales
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords KELT-7bultrahotJupiterthermalinversionatmosphericretrievalthermochemicalequilibriumgeometricalbedosecondaryeclipsestellaractivity
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

This paper re-examines the ultrahot Jupiter KELT-7b and argues that its previously reported thermal inversion was largely a product of the retrieval's chemical framework rather than a secure atmospheric finding. Presenting joint CHEOPS and TESS photometry alongside literature HST and Spitzer spectra, the authors show that thermochemical-equilibrium retrievals return a non-inverted temperature-pressure profile, while free-chemistry retrievals return an inverted profile that demands implausibly high TiO and VO abundances. The paper also measures shallow optical occultations and derives a very low geometric albedo of $A_\mathrm{g}=0.05\pm0.06$, with a dayside brightness temperature of $T_\mathrm{day}=2387^{+123}_{-159}$ K, meaning the visible eclipse signal is almost entirely thermal emission rather than reflected starlight. If correct, the work would demote KELT-7b's inversion to a modeling artifact and add a second ultrahot Jupiter that contradicts the classic TiO/VO inversion prediction. A sympathetic reader would care because the same framework ambiguity may affect inversion claims for other ultrahot Jupiters.

What carries the argument

The argument runs on pairing two independent Bayesian retrieval codes under two mutually consistent chemistry prescriptions: thermochemical equilibrium, parameterized by metallicity and C/O ratio, versus free chemistry, parameterized by constant-with-altitude volume mixing ratios for each absorber. The temperature profile follows a two-parameter analytic parameterization, and the same assumptions are applied in both codes so that the only systematic difference left is the chemical framework. A Gaussian-process simple-harmonic-oscillator model of the 1.32-day stellar rotation signal carries the CHEOPS/TESS joint light-curve fit, and the albedo estimate comes from requiring a single gray-sky geometric albedo and dayside brightness temperature to reproduce both the CHEOPS and TESS occultation depths.

What would settle it

A re-analysis of the HST/WFC3 eclipse visits with the 1.32-day stellar rotation signal and spot contrast modeled explicitly would settle the case: if the corrected spectrum still demands the inverted profile and TiO/VO overabundance, the stellar-activity explanation fails, and if the inversion disappears, the non-inverted, equilibrium-chemistry conclusion survives.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Stated in Section 7, the paper's central conclusion is that 'the choice of a free-chemistry approach or a thermochemical-equilibrium chemistry is the main factor determining the retrieval results.' Two independent retrieval pipelines, run under matching assumptions, agree: equilibrium chemistry recovers a non-inverted T-P profile with super-solar metallicity and C/O > 1, while free chemistry recovers an inverted profile requiring TiO and VO volume mixing ratios orders of magnitude above self-consistent chemical expectations. A 3D general circulation model with TiO/VO opacities and strong magnetic drag ($\tau_\mathrm{drag}=10^4$ s) fits the CHEOPS, TESS, and Spitzer eclipse depths and produces a TiO-driven inversion, but it underestimates the HST/WFC3 flux; the paper attributes that mismatch to stellar activity and pulsations on the fast-rotating F2V host, which it does not directly model. Separately, combining the CHEOPS and TESS occultation depths under a gray-sky assumption yields $A_\mathrm{g}=0.05\pm0.06$ and $T_\mathrm{day}=2387^{+123}_{-159}$ K, with a Bond albedo consistent with zero, so the planet absorbs nearly all incoming starlight and redistributes little heat.

Load-bearing premise

The argument stands on the untested premise that stellar spots and pulsations on the rapidly rotating host contaminate the HST/WFC3 eclipse and transmission measurements; if those data are clean, the equilibrium-chemistry, non-inverted conclusion weakens.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Inversion claims for other ultrahot Jupiters built on free-chemistry retrievals alone would need to be re-tested under equilibrium chemistry, since the framework choice flips the KELT-7b result.
  • If the non-inverted profile holds, KELT-7b becomes a second ultrahot Jupiter (after WASP-12b) that contradicts the TiO/VO-driven inversion prediction.
  • The albedo result means KELT-7b's visible occultations are essentially pure thermal emission, so future optical eclipse measurements of the planet can be read as temperature probes rather than reflection measurements.
  • A coherent stellar variability correction becomes a prerequisite for using HST/WFC3 eclipse and transmission spectra of fast-rotator hosts to anchor retrievals.
  • Gravity-darkening fits to the CHEOPS transits cannot constrain the sky-projected obliquity, so settling the spin-orbit geometry needs more photometry or a different method.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable consequence the paper leaves implicit: re-reducing the HST/WFC3 eclipse visits with a spot model phased to the 1.32-day rotation should remove the excess blue-optical flux that drives the inverted free-chemistry solution.
  • The framework-dependence result plausibly generalizes: many inversion detections in ultrahot Jupiters rest on sparse near-infrared coverage plus free chemistry, and equilibrium runs could overturn some of them.
  • A single JWST eclipse spanning 1–5 µm would arbitrate between the HST/WFC3 outlier and the CHEOPS/TESS/Spitzer-consistent GCM without sharing HST's systematics.
  • The discarded CFHT 2.2 µm point is a live anomaly: if confirmed by a new observation, no tested model would explain it, pointing to missing opacity or a genuinely non-gray dayside.
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

5 major / 3 minor

Summary. This paper revisits the atmospheric characterization of the ultrahot Jupiter KELT-7b using new CHEOPS secondary-eclipse and transit observations, TESS photometry from seven sectors, and literature HST/WFC3, Spitzer, and CFHT data. The authors jointly fit CHEOPS and TESS light curves with a Gaussian-process treatment of stellar activity and report occultation depths of 36±11 ppm in CHEOPS and 69±9 ppm in TESS. They perform emission and transmission retrievals with two independent codes, PyratBay and platon, under both thermochemical-equilibrium and free-chemistry assumptions. They find that equilibrium-chemistry retrievals yield a non-inverted T-P profile, while free-chemistry retrievals yield an inverted profile with very high TiO/VO abundances; a 3D GCM with magnetic drag supports a TiO-driven inversion but fits CHEOPS, TESS, and Spitzer while underestimating HST/WFC3. The paper reports a geometric albedo of Ag = 0.05 ± 0.06 and a dayside brightness temperature of 2387 +123/−159 K, and concludes that the choice of chemical framework is the main factor determining retrieval results.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper provides a valuable demonstration that the thermal-inversion diagnosis for KELT-7b is highly model-dependent, and it offers a careful low-albedo measurement from space-based optical occultations. The strengths include a coherent GP treatment of stellar variability across CHEOPS and TESS, cross-validation with two independent open-source retrieval codes, an independent reduction of the HST/WFC3 transmission data, and an explicit discussion of the tension between 1D retrievals and 3D GCM predictions. The central interpretive claim, however, is weakened by the asymmetric treatment of the HST/WFC3 data: the HST data are used to constrain the preferred equilibrium-chemistry retrieval, while a stellar-activity contamination hypothesis is invoked to discount HST when it conflicts with the GCM. That issue, together with the post hoc exclusion of the CFHT data point and an albedo claim that is formally consistent with zero, means the paper needs revision before its conclusions can be accepted at face value.

major comments (5)
  1. [Section 6 and Section 5.3] The preferred non-inverted T-P profile rests on the thermochemical-equilibrium occultation retrieval, which is constrained primarily by the HST/WFC3 and Spitzer data, but Section 6 argues that the HST/WFC3 measurements may be contaminated by stellar spots and pulsations and states that a detailed assessment is beyond the scope of the work. This creates a use-and-dismiss inconsistency: if the HST data are reliable, the free-chemistry retrieval fits better and the inverted profile remains viable; if the HST data are contaminated, the equilibrium retrieval that establishes the non-inverted profile is also based on contaminated data. The paper should either apply an activity correction to the HST eclipse data, or demonstrate explicitly that the equilibrium-chemistry T-P conclusion is insensitive to plausible levels of HST contamination.
  2. [Section 5.6 and Eq. (5)] The headline claim of a 'very low geometric albedo of Ag = 0.05 ± 0.06' is an upper limit rather than a detection, since the value is consistent with zero at less than 1 sigma. The abstract and conclusions should phrase this as an upper limit, and the gray-sky assumption that Ag and Tday are identical in the CHEOPS and TESS passbands should be stated as a model assumption in the summary of the result.
  3. [Section 2.3 and Section 5.7] The CFHT 2.2 micron occultation depth of 400±120 ppm is discarded post hoc because it is 'very probably inconsistent with any tested model.' Excluding a data point because no model fits it removes a potentially falsifying constraint and can bias the dataset; the paper should either retain this point with an explicit systematic-error term, or provide a quantitative correlated-noise analysis justifying its exclusion.
  4. [Section 5.3 and Table 5] The free-chemistry occultation retrievals fit the observations better than the equilibrium retrievals, yet the equilibrium result is preferred on the grounds that the free-chemistry TiO and VO abundances are 'likely unphysical.' This is a physical-plausibility prior rather than a data-driven conclusion; the paper should quantify the preference with a Bayesian model comparison or explicitly state that the equilibrium preference is not statistical.
  5. [Section 5.5] The independent HST/WFC3 reduction checks only the transmission spectrum, not the eclipse spectrum used for the T-P retrievals. The stellar-activity hypothesis is therefore untested for the occultation data, which are the data that drive the inversion diagnosis; the paper should either extend the independent reduction to the eclipse visit or soften the claim that the HST discrepancy is likely due to stellar activity.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Table 3] The prior column labels 'GPU(−20,−1)' and similar entries should read 'GP', since they refer to Gaussian-process parameters rather than graphics processing units.
  2. [Table 5] In the platon free-chemistry transmission retrieval, the posterior for α_ray is listed as '496 +2.9 −3.2', which lies completely outside the stated prior U(−10,0); this appears to be a typographical error and should be corrected.
  3. [Fig. 5] The horizontal axis label 'Wl [ m]' should be 'Wavelength [μm]'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the albedo and retrieval claims are data-derived measurements, and the minor in-prep self-citation is not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are produced by direct fits to independent CHEOPS/TESS/Spitzer/HST data, not by reusing fitted parameters as predictions. The geometric albedo is solved from two measured occultation depths under an explicitly stated gray-sky assumption (Eq. 5: Fp/Fs = Docc = R(Ag) + E(Tday)), so Ag = 0.05 ± 0.06 is a derived measurement rather than a circular fit. The retrieval comparison uses two independently implemented codes (PyratBay and platon) with consistent results, and the equilibrium-chemistry scenario is additionally corroborated by the external analysis of Changeat et al. (2022); the in-prep equilibrium model cited to Cubillos et al. is therefore not load-bearing. The 3D GCM is a forward model compared with data, and its magnetic-drag choice is an explicit model-selection step ('we used the smallest τ_drag that effectively disrupts superrotation on the dayside in our GCM'), not a prediction forced by construction. The discussion's appeal to unmodeled stellar activity to question the HST/WFC3 data is a robustness caveat explicitly flagged as beyond scope ('a detailed assessment of stellar activity's impact on the HST/WFC3 measurement lies beyond the scope of this work'), not a derivation that reduces to its own inputs; the apparent use-and-dismiss inconsistency is a scientific robustness concern, not a circularity. Self-citations of analysis tools (PyratBay, TLCM, ExoRad, and the Singh et al. 2024 albedo methodology) are routine and are cross-checked by external or independent implementations, so they do not constitute load-bearing circularity. No equation in the paper is defined in terms of its own output, and no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction. Score 2 reflects only the minor in-prep self-citation, not substantive circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on a small number of assumptions: the applicability of thermochemical equilibrium, the plausibility of stellar-activity contamination of HST data, the gray-sky albedo model, and the von Zeipel gravity-darkening prescription. The free parameters are mostly retrieval and detrending parameters; the most notable one is the GCM magnetic drag timescale, chosen to match the observed eclipse depths. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • GCM magnetic drag timescale (tau_drag) = 10^4 s
    Chosen in the 3D GCM as the smallest value that suppresses superrotation and matches the observed CHEOPS, TESS, and Spitzer eclipse depths (Sect. 5.7, Appendix C).
  • GP stellar rotation period prior (Prot,s) = 1.368 ± 0.030 d
    Set from the TESS Sector 59 periodogram peak to constrain the Gaussian-process model of stellar activity (Sect. 4.2).
  • GP quality factor Q and white-noise terms = logQ = -1.15 ± 0.12, log(sigma_CHEOPS) = -9.17, log(sigma_TESS) = -8.54
    Fitted jointly with the planetary model to detrend correlated noise in CHEOPS and TESS light curves (Table 3).
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Thermochemical equilibrium describes the dayside composition of ultrahot Jupiters
    Used to justify preferring the non-inverted T-P profile from equilibrium retrievals over the free-chemistry inverted profile, because reaction rates are thought to be fast enough at >2000 K (Sect. 5.3).
  • ad hoc to paper HST/WFC3 observations of KELT-7b may be contaminated by stellar activity
    Invoked in Sect. 6 to explain why the 3D GCM and equilibrium-chemistry retrievals fit CHEOPS, TESS, and Spitzer data but underestimate the HST/WFC3 flux. The contamination is not directly modeled and is stated to lie beyond the scope of the work.
  • domain assumption Gray-sky atmosphere: the same geometric albedo and brightness temperature apply in the CHEOPS and TESS passbands
    Used in the albedo calculation (Sect. 5.6) to convert the two measured occultation depths into Ag and Tday.
  • domain assumption Von Zeipel gravity darkening applies to the host star
    Used in the TLCM gravity-darkened transit fits (Sect. 4.5). The paper itself notes deviations from the von Zeipel theorem (Claret 2012), introducing additional uncertainty in the transit-asymmetry search.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The KELT-7b atmospheric thermal-inversion conundrum revisited with CHEOPS, TESS, and additional data." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4SDXWDSX

@misc{pith2026250620432,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The KELT-7b atmospheric thermal-inversion conundrum revisited with CHEOPS, TESS, and additional data},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4SDXWDSX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.20432}
}
abstract

Ultrahot Jupiters are predicted to show inverted temperature-pressure (T-P) profiles in the presence of optical absorbers such as TiO and VO. An inverted T-P profile of KELT-7b was recently detected, in line with these predictions, but such diagnoses are known to be model-dependent. We used CHEOPS, TESS, and literature data to characterize the atmosphere of KELT-7b, reassess its T-P profile, measure its albedo, and search for distortions in its CHEOPS transit light curve due to stellar rotation. We jointly fitted CHEOPS and TESS data to measure the occultation depths and modeled CHEOPS transits including gravity darkening. Emission and transmission retrievals were performed, and the albedo was calculated in the CHEOPS and TESS passbands. Thermochemical-equilibrium retrievals yield a non-inverted T-P profile, while free-chemistry retrievals yield an inverted profile with likely unphysical TiO/VO abundances. A 3D GCM supports a TiO-driven inversion. We report a low geometric albedo of $A_\mathrm{g} = 0.05 \pm 0.06$, consistent with inefficient heat redistribution and supported by a GCM with magnetic drag. CHEOPS data provide no constraint on the sky-projected orbital obliquity. Retrieval results strongly depend on the chemical framework. Free-chemistry fits are better but risk unphysical solutions for ultrahot Jupiters. We applied a coherent stellar variability correction to CHEOPS and TESS data; future observations would benefit from similar treatment.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.20432 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Periodograms of KELT-7 TESS PDCSAP observations. The blue dashed line represents the fitted orbital period of the planet. The red dashed line represents the median value of the prior imposed on the stellar rotational period. Left panel: Periodogram of TESS Sector 59 raw data, which was used to determine the prior. Middle panel: Periodogram of the residuals of TESS Sector 45 data after removal of the transits and occ… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Phase-folded, detrended, and binned CHEOPS (top panels) and TESS (bottom panels) transit (left panels) and occultation (right panels) light curves of KELT-7b, overplotted with the best-fitting CONAN3 model. Residuals are also shown. mospheric profiles based on the occultation observations. In this work, we modeled the dayside KELT-7b atmosphere as a one-dimensional (1D) profile as a function of pressure, adopt￾ing a… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. KELT-7b atmospheric retrieval of the infrared occultations. Top left panel: Retrievals assuming thermochemical equilibrium with Pyrat Bay (blue) and platon (pink). The solid curves with shaded areas show the median and 1σ span of the posterior model spectra, displayed at a resolution of R = 150. The black circle markers with error bars show observations used to constrain the models (HST and Spitzer). The green squar… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: KELT-7b atmospheric retrieval of the transmission observations assuming thermochemical equilibrium (top panel) and free-chemistry (middle panel). The solid curves with shaded areas show the median and 1σ span of the posterior model spectra for Pyrat Bay (blue) and plat…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Geometric albedo (Ag) as a function of the dayside brightness temperature for the estimated occultation depths in CHEOPS (blue) and TESS (red) passbands. The plot shows where the two curves intersect as well as the values of the two parameters. The black concentric cur…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Left panel: Theoretically calculated dayside emission from the 3D GCM expeRT/MITgcm for KELT-7b including TiO and VO as well as high magnetic drag (blue line) compared to the observational data (black dots). The model data are binned down for better comparison with the…

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. Pyrat Bay 2.0: an Upgraded Framework for Exoplanet Atmosphere Modeling in the JWST Era

    astro-ph.EP 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Pyrat Bay 2.0 adds equilibrium chemistry, radiative equilibrium, and vertically varying abundance retrieval, and simulations indicate JWST-quality spectra can recover such variations.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

193 extracted references · 55 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    2004, MWRv, 132, 2845

    Adcroft , A., Campin , J.-M., Hill , C., & Marshall , J. 2004, MWRv, 132, 2845

    2004

  2. [2]

    Akinsanmi , B., Barros , S. C. C., Lendl , M., et al. 2024, , 685, A63

    2024

  3. [3]

    F., Spiegelman , F., Leininger , T., & Molliere , P

    Allard , N. F., Spiegelman , F., Leininger , T., & Molliere , P. 2019, , 628, A120

    2019

  4. [4]

    Angerhausen , D., DeLarme , E., & Morse , J. A. 2015, , 127, 1113

    2015

  5. [5]

    R., et al

    Arcangeli , J., D \'e sert , J.-M., Line , M. R., et al. 2018, , 855, L30

    2018

  6. [6]

    S., Hauschildt , P

    Barman , T. S., Hauschildt , P. H., & Allard , F. 2005, , 632, 1132

    2005

  7. [7]

    Barnes , J. W. 2009, , 705, 683

    2009

  8. [8]

    G., Madhusudhan , N., Tsiaras , A., et al

    Beatty , T. G., Madhusudhan , N., Tsiaras , A., et al. 2017, , 154, 158

    2017

Show all 193 references
  1. [9]

    Bell , T. J. & Cowan , N. B. 2018, , 857, L20

    2018

  2. [10]

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

    Bell , T. J., Welbanks , L., Schlawin , E., et al. 2023, , 623, 709

    2023

  3. [11]

    Beltz , H., Rauscher , E., Kempton , E. M. R., et al. 2022, , 164, 140

    2022

  4. [12]

    2021, ExA, 51, 109

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

    2021

  5. [13]

    Bernath , P. F. 2020, JQSRT, 240, 106687

    2020

  6. [14]

    G., et al

    Bieryla , A., Collins , K., Beatty , T. G., et al. 2015, , 150, 12

    2015

  7. [15]

    J., et al

    Bonfanti , A., Delrez , L., Hooton , M. J., et al. 2021, , 646, A157

    2021

  8. [16]

    J., Koch , D., Basri , G., et al

    Borucki , W. J., Koch , D., Basri , G., et al. 2010, Science, 327, 977

    2010

  9. [17]

    2002, , 390, 779

    Borysow , A. 2002, , 390, 779

    2002

  10. [18]

    & Frommhold , L

    Borysow , A. & Frommhold , L. 1989, , 341, 549

    1989

  11. [19]

    1989, , 336, 495

    Borysow , A., Frommhold , L., & Moraldi , M. 1989, , 336, 495

    1989

  12. [20]

    G., & Fu , Y

    Borysow , A., Jorgensen , U. G., & Fu , Y. 2001, JQSRT, 68, 235

    2001

  13. [21]

    1988, , 326, 509

    Borysow , J., Frommhold , L., & Birnbaum , G. 1988, , 326, 509

    1988

  14. [22]

    2021, The Exoplanet Characterization Toolkit (ExoCTK)

    Bourque, M., Espinoza, N., Filippazzo, J., et al. 2021, The Exoplanet Characterization Toolkit (ExoCTK)

    2021

  15. [23]

    2022, , 659, L4

    Brandeker , A., Heng , K., Lendl , M., et al. 2022, , 659, L4

    2022

  16. [24]

    2012, , 427, 127

    Bressan , A., Marigo , P., Girardi , L., et al. 2012, , 427, 127

    2012

  17. [25]

    Brown , T. M. 2001, , 553, 1006

    2001

  18. [26]

    K., Stevenson , K

    Bruno , G., Lewis , N. K., Stevenson , K. B., et al. 2018, , 155, 55

    2018

  19. [27]

    2014, , 564, A125

    Buchner , J., Georgakakis , A., Nandra , K., et al. 2014, , 564, A125

    2014

  20. [28]

    2005, , 625, L135

    Burrows , A., Hubeny , I., & Sudarsky , D. 2005, , 625, L135

    2005

  21. [29]

    S., & Sharp , C

    Burrows , A., Marley , M. S., & Sharp , C. M. 2000, , 531, 438

    2000

  22. [30]

    2020, , 496, 3582

    Carone , L., Baeyens , R., Molli \`e re , P., et al. 2020, , 496, 3582

    2020

  23. [31]

    L., May , E

    Carter , A. L., May , E. M., Espinoza , N., et al. 2024, NatAs, 8, 1008

    2024

  24. [32]

    Carter , J. A. & Winn , J. N. 2009, , 704, 51

    2009

  25. [33]

    F., et al

    Changeat , Q., Edwards , B., Al-Refaie , A. F., et al. 2022, , 260, 3

    2022

  26. [34]

    E., Megeath , S

    Charbonneau , D., Allen , L. E., Megeath , S. T., et al. 2005, , 626, 523

    2005

  27. [35]

    M., Noyes , R

    Charbonneau , D., Brown , T. M., Noyes , R. W., & Gilliland , R. L. 2002, , 568, 377

    2002

  28. [36]

    2012, , 538, A3

    Claret , A. 2012, , 538, A3

    2012

  29. [37]

    A., Yurchenko , S

    Coles , P. A., Yurchenko , S. N., & Tennyson , J. 2019, , 490, 4638

    2019

  30. [38]

    2023, , 620, 292

    Coulombe , L.-P., Benneke , B., Challener , R., et al. 2023, , 620, 292

    2023

  31. [39]

    Cowan , N. B. & Agol , E. 2011, , 729, 54

    2011

  32. [40]

    2020, , 496, 4442

    Csizmadia , S. 2020, , 496, 4442

    2020

  33. [41]

    Csizmadia , S., Smith , A. M. S., K \'a lm \'a n , S., et al. 2023, , 675, A106

    2023

  34. [42]

    J., et al

    Cubillos , P., Harrington , J., Loredo , T. J., et al. 2017, , 153, 3

    2017

  35. [43]

    Cubillos , P. E. 2017, , 850, 32

    2017

  36. [44]

    Cubillos , P. E. & Blecic , J. 2021, , 505, 2675

    2021

  37. [45]

    2006, , 458, 609

    da Silva , L., Girardi , L., Pasquini , L., et al. 2006, , 458, 609

    2006

  38. [46]

    J., Lendl , M., et al

    Deline , A., Hooton , M. J., Lendl , M., et al. 2022, , 659, A74

    2022

  39. [47]

    Demangeon , O. D. S., Cubillos , P. E., Singh , V., et al. 2024, , 684, A27

    2024

  40. [48]

    J., & Harrington , J

    Deming , D., Seager , S., Richardson , L. J., & Harrington , J. 2005, , 434, 740

    2005

  41. [49]

    2013, , 774, 95

    Deming , D., Wilkins , A., McCullough , P., et al. 2013, , 774, 95

    2013

  42. [50]

    2024, , 625, 51

    Dyrek , A., Min , M., Decin , L., et al. 2024, , 625, 51

    2024

  43. [51]

    2020, , 160, 8

    Edwards , B., Changeat , Q., Baeyens , R., et al. 2020, , 160, 8

    2020

  44. [52]

    Edwards , B., Tsiaras , A., Changeat , Q., & Yip , K. H. 2024, RASTI, 3, 415

    2024

  45. [53]

    & Jordán, A

    Espinoza, N. & Jordán, A. 2015, MNRAS, 450, 1879

    2015

  46. [54]

    J., De Mooij , E

    Esteves , L. J., De Mooij , E. J. W., & Jayawardhana , R. 2013, , 772, 51

    2013

  47. [55]

    J., De Mooij , E

    Esteves , L. J., De Mooij , E. J. W., & Jayawardhana , R. 2015, , 804, 150

    2015

  48. [56]

    M., Sing , D

    Evans , T. M., Sing , D. K., Kataria , T., et al. 2017, , 548, 58

    2017

  49. [57]

    M., Sing , D

    Evans , T. M., Sing , D. K., Wakeford , H. R., et al. 2016, , 822, L4

    2016

  50. [58]

    G., Hora , J

    Fazio , G. G., Hora , J. L., Allen , L. E., et al. 2004, , 154, 10

    2004

  51. [59]

    & Hobson , M

    Feroz , F. & Hobson , M. P. 2008, , 384, 449

    2008

  52. [60]

    P., & Bridges , M

    Feroz , F., Hobson , M. P., & Bridges , M. 2009, , 398, 1601

    2009

  53. [61]

    P., Cameron , E., & Pettitt , A

    Feroz , F., Hobson , M. P., Cameron , E., & Pettitt , A. N. 2019, OJAp, 2, 10

    2019

  54. [62]

    2018, RNAAS, 2, 31

    Foreman-Mackey , D. 2018, RNAAS, 2, 31

    2018

  55. [63]

    2017, , 154, 220

    Foreman-Mackey , D., Agol , E., Ambikasaran , S., & Angus , R. 2017, , 154, 220

    2017

  56. [64]

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

    Foreman-Mackey , D., Hogg , D. W., Lang , D., & Goodman , J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306

    2013

  57. [65]

    E., Broeg , C., et al

    Fortier , A., Simon , A. E., Broeg , C., et al. 2024, , 687, A302

    2024

  58. [66]

    Fortney , J. J. 2005, , 364, 649

    2005

  59. [67]

    J., Lodders , K., Marley , M

    Fortney , J. J., Lodders , K., Marley , M. S., & Freedman , R. S. 2008, , 678, 1419

    2008

  60. [68]

    2025, , 539, 422

    Fournier-Tondreau , M., Pan , Y., Morel , K., et al. 2025, , 539, 422

    2025

  61. [69]

    B., Lewis , N

    Fowler , J., Stevenson , K. B., Lewis , N. K., et al. 2018, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 232, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts \#232, 111.03

    2018

  62. [70]

    2024, , 632, 752

    Fu , G., Welbanks , L., Deming , D., et al. 2024, , 632, 752

    2024

  63. [71]

    2020, , 159, 137

    Garhart , E., Deming , D., Mandell , A., et al. 2020, , 159, 137

    2020

  64. [72]

    & Rubin , D

    Gelman , A. & Rubin , D. B. 1992, StaSc, 7, 457

    1992

  65. [73]

    & Weare , J

    Goodman , J. & Weare , J. 2010, CAMCoS, 5, 65

    2010

  66. [74]

    H., et al

    Gressier , A., Espinoza , N., Allen , N. H., et al. 2024, , 975, L10

    2024

  67. [75]

    2010, , 520, A27

    Guillot , T. 2010, , 520, A27

    2010

  68. [76]

    J., Bernath , P

    Hargreaves , R. J., Bernath , P. F., Bailey , J., & Dulick , M. 2015, , 813, 12

    2015

  69. [77]

    J., Larner , F

    Harris , G. J., Larner , F. C., Tennyson , J., et al. 2008, , 390, 143

    2008

  70. [78]

    J., Tennyson , J., Kaminsky , B

    Harris , G. J., Tennyson , J., Kaminsky , B. M., Pavlenko , Y. V., & Jones , H. R. A. 2006, , 367, 400

    2006

  71. [79]

    M., Madhusudhan , N., Deming , D., & Knutson , H

    Haynes , K., Mandell , A. M., Madhusudhan , N., Deming , D., & Knutson , H. 2015, , 806, 146

    2015

  72. [80]

    2019, , 631, A79

    Helling , C., Iro , N., Corrales , L., et al. 2019, , 631, A79

    2019

  73. [81]

    2023, , 671, A122

    Helling , C., Samra , D., Lewis , D., et al. 2023, , 671, A122

    2023

  74. [82]

    2021, , 648, A80

    Helling , C., Worters , M., Samra , D., Molaverdikhani , K., & Iro , N. 2021, , 648, A80

    2021

  75. [83]

    & Demory , B.-O

    Heng , K. & Demory , B.-O. 2013, , 777, 100

    2013

  76. [84]

    Heng , K., Menou , K., & Phillipps , P. J. 2011, , 413, 2380

    2011

  77. [85]

    J., de Mooij , E

    Hooton , M. J., de Mooij , E. J. W., Watson , C. A., et al. 2019, , 486, 2397

    2019

  78. [86]

    J., Hoyer , S., Kitzmann , D., et al

    Hooton , M. J., Hoyer , S., Kitzmann , D., et al. 2022, , 658, A75

    2022

  79. [87]

    2020, , 635, A24

    Hoyer , S., Guterman , P., Demangeon , O., et al. 2020, , 635, A24

    2020

  80. [88]

    2003, , 594, 1011

    Hubeny , I., Burrows , A., & Sudarsky , D. 2003, , 594, 1011

    2003

  81. [89]

    O., Wende-von Berg , S., Dreizler , S., et al

    Husser , T. O., Wende-von Berg , S., Dreizler , S., et al. 2013, , 553, A6

    2013

  82. [90]

    M., Twicken , J

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

    2016

  83. [91]

    John , T. L. 1988, , 193, 189

    1988

  84. [92]

    M., Demory , B

    Jones , K., Morris , B. M., Demory , B. O., et al. 2022, , 666, A118

    2022

  85. [93]

    G., Hammer , D., Borysow , A., & Falkesgaard , J

    J rgensen , U. G., Hammer , D., Borysow , A., & Falkesgaard , J. 2000, , 361, 283

    2000

  86. [94]

    2023, , 614, 649

    JWST Transiting Exoplanet Community Early Release Science Team , Ahrer , E.-M., Alderson , L., et al. 2023, , 614, 649

    2023

  87. [95]

    2022, , 660, L2

    K \'a lm \'a n , S., B \'o kon , A., Derekas , A., et al. 2022, , 660, L2

    2022

  88. [96]

    Y., Snellen , I

    Kesseli , A. Y., Snellen , I. A. G., Alonso-Floriano , F. J., Molli \`e re , P., & Serindag , D. B. 2020, , 160, 228

    2020

  89. [97]

    k., Kasting , J

    Kopparapu , R. k., Kasting , J. F., & Zahnle , K. J. 2012, , 745, 77

    2012

  90. [98]

    2015, , 127, 1161

    Kreidberg , L. 2015, , 127, 1161

    2015

  91. [99]

    L., D \'e sert , J.-M., et al

    Kreidberg , L., Bean , J. L., D \'e sert , J.-M., et al. 2014, , 793, L27

    2014

  92. [100]

    R., Parmentier , V., et al

    Kreidberg , L., Line , M. R., Parmentier , V., et al. 2018, , 156, 17

    2018

  93. [101]

    F., Lendl , M., Patel , J

    Krenn , A. F., Lendl , M., Patel , J. A., et al. 2023, , 672, A24

    2023

  94. [102]

    Kurucz , R. L. 1970, SAO Special Report, 309

    1970

  95. [103]

    Kurucz , R. L. 1979, , 40, 1

    1979

  96. [104]

    2008, , 481, L83

    Lecavelier Des Etangs , A., Pont , F., Vidal-Madjar , A., & Sing , D. 2008, , 481, L83

    2008

  97. [105]

    S., Cheng , E

    Leckrone , D. S., Cheng , E. S., Feinberg , L. D., et al. 1998, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 192, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts \#192, 35.08

    1998

  98. [106]

    2020 a , , 492, 1761

    Lendl , M., Bouchy , F., Gill , S., et al. 2020 a , , 492, 1761

    2020

  99. [107]

    2020 b , , 643, A94

    Lendl , M., Csizmadia , S., Deline , A., et al. 2020 b , , 643, A94

    2020

  100. [108]

    E., Hagelberg , J., et al

    Lendl , M., Cubillos , P. E., Hagelberg , J., et al. 2017, , 606, A18

    2017

  101. [109]

    E., Rothman , L

    Li , G., Gordon , I. E., Rothman , L. S., et al. 2015, , 216, 15

    2015

  102. [110]

    R., Stevenson , K

    Line , M. R., Stevenson , K. B., Bean , J., et al. 2016, , 152, 203

    2016

  103. [111]

    D., Barman , T., & Koskinen , T

    Lothringer , J. D., Barman , T., & Koskinen , T. 2018, , 866, 27

    2018

  104. [112]

    R., Mullens , E., Alderson , L., et al

    Louie , D. R., Mullens , E., Alderson , L., et al. 2025, , 169, 86

    2025

  105. [113]

    MacDonald , R. J. & Madhusudhan , N. 2017, , 850, L15

    2017

  106. [114]

    2012, , 758, 36

    Madhusudhan , N. 2012, , 758, 36

    2012

  107. [115]

    I., & Hu , Y

    Madhusudhan , N., Ag \'u ndez , M., Moses , J. I., & Hu , Y. 2016, SSRv, 205, 285

    2016

  108. [116]

    J., & Barman , T

    Madhusudhan , N., Knutson , H., Fortney , J. J., & Barman , T. 2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed. H. Beuther , R. S. Klessen , C. P. Dullemond , & T. Henning , 739--762

    2014

  109. [117]

    2023, , 956, L13

    Madhusudhan , N., Sarkar , S., Constantinou , S., et al. 2023, , 956, L13

    2023

  110. [118]

    & Seager , S

    Madhusudhan , N. & Seager , S. 2009, , 707, 24

    2009

  111. [119]

    L., Line , M

    Mansfield , M., Bean , J. L., Line , M. R., et al. 2018, , 156, 10

    2018

  112. [120]

    D., Angerhausen , D., et al

    Martioli , E., Col \'o n , K. D., Angerhausen , D., et al. 2018, , 474, 4264

    2018

  113. [121]

    W., Fortenbach , C

    Mayo , A. W., Fortenbach , C. D., Louie , D. R., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.00609

    2024 arXiv

  114. [122]

    K., Masseron , T., Hoeijmakers , H

    McKemmish , L. K., Masseron , T., Hoeijmakers , H. J., et al. 2019, , 488, 2836

    2019

  115. [123]

    K., Yurchenko , S

    McKemmish , L. K., Yurchenko , S. N., & Tennyson , J. 2016, , 463, 771

    2016

  116. [124]

    K., Goyal , J

    Mikal-Evans , T., Sing , D. K., Goyal , J. M., et al. 2019, , 488, 2222

    2019

  117. [125]

    P., van Boekel , R., et al

    Molli \`e re , P., Wardenier , J. P., van Boekel , R., et al. 2019, , 627, A67

    2019

  118. [126]

    Moses , J. I. 2014, RSPTA, 372, 20130073

    2014

  119. [127]

    2020, , 641, A158

    Murgas , F., Chen , G., Nortmann , L., Palle , E., & Nowak , G. 2020, , 641, A158

    2020

  120. [128]

    K., Fortney , J

    Nikolov , N., Sing , D. K., Fortney , J. J., et al. 2018, , 557, 526

    2018

  121. [129]

    2024, , 682, A102

    Pagano , I., Scandariato , G., Singh , V., et al. 2024, , 682, A102

    2024

  122. [130]

    J., & Marley , M

    Parmentier , V., Guillot , T., Fortney , J. J., & Marley , M. S. 2015, , 574, A35

    2015

  123. [131]

    R., Bean , J

    Parmentier , V., Line , M. R., Bean , J. L., et al. 2018, , 617, A110

    2018

  124. [132]

    P., & Lian , Y

    Parmentier , V., Showman , A. P., & Lian , Y. 2013, , 558, A91

    2013

  125. [133]

    2020, , 894, L27

    Pino , L., D \'e sert , J.-M., Brogi , M., et al. 2020, , 894, L27

    2020

  126. [134]

    2020, , 160, 112

    Pluriel , W., Whiteford , N., Edwards , B., et al. 2020, , 160, 112

    2020

  127. [135]

    L., Kyuberis , A

    Polyansky , O. L., Kyuberis , A. A., Zobov , N. F., et al. 2018, , 480, 2597

    2018

  128. [136]

    D., Lee , E

    Powell , D., Feinstein , A. D., Lee , E. K. H., et al. 2024, , 626, 979

    2024

  129. [137]

    2004, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Puget , P., Stadler , E., Doyon , R., et al. 2004, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 5492, Ground-based Instrumentation for Astronomy, ed. A. F. M. Moorwood & M. Iye , 978--987

    2004

  130. [138]

    & Menou , K

    Rauscher , E. & Menou , K. 2013, , 764, 103

    2013

  131. [139]

    D., & Koesterke , L

    Redfield , S., Endl , M., Cochran , W. D., & Koesterke , L. 2008, , 673, L87

    2008

  132. [140]

    R., Winn , J

    Ricker , G. R., Winn , J. N., Vanderspek , R., et al. 2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9143, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2014: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, ed. J. Oschmann , Jacobus M., M. Clampin , ...

    2014

  133. [141]

    2024, , 531, 1056

    Roth , A., Parmentier , V., & Hammond , M. 2024, , 531, 1056

    2024

  134. [142]

    S., Gordon , I

    Rothman , L. S., Gordon , I. E., Barber , R. J., et al. 2010, JQSRT, 111, 2139

    2010

  135. [143]

    Russell , H. N. 1916, , 43, 173

    1916

  136. [144]

    H., et al

    Saba , A., Thompson , A., Yip , K. H., et al. 2025, , 276, 70

    2025

  137. [145]

    C., Cristo , E., Demangeon , O., et al

    Santos , N. C., Cristo , E., Demangeon , O., et al. 2020, , 644, A51

    2020

  138. [146]

    2022, , 668, A17

    Scandariato , G., Singh , V., Kitzmann , D., et al. 2022, , 668, A17

    2022

  139. [147]

    D., Carone , L., Decin , L., et al

    Schneider , A. D., Carone , L., Decin , L., et al. 2022, , 664, A56

    2022

  140. [148]

    2010, Exoplanet Atmospheres: Physical Processes

    Seager , S. 2010, Exoplanet Atmospheres: Physical Processes

    2010

  141. [149]

    J., Hansen , B

    Seager , S., Richardson , L. J., Hansen , B. M. S., et al. 2005, , 632, 1122

    2005

  142. [150]

    & Sasselov , D

    Seager , S. & Sasselov , D. D. 2000, , 537, 916

    2000

  143. [151]

    Sedaghati , E., Boffin , H. M. J., MacDonald , R. J., et al. 2017, , 549, 238

    2017

  144. [152]

    P., Fortney , J

    Showman , A. P., Fortney , J. J., Lian , Y., et al. 2009, , 699, 564

    2009

  145. [153]

    M., Rengel , M., & N \`e mec , N

    Shulyak , D., Lara , L. M., Rengel , M., & N \`e mec , N. E. 2020, , 639, A48

    2020

  146. [154]

    2025, , 693, A316

    Sicilia , D., Malavolta , L., Scandariato , G., et al. 2025, , 693, A316

    2025

  147. [155]

    K., Lecavelier des Etangs , A., Fortney , J

    Sing , D. K., Lecavelier des Etangs , A., Fortney , J. J., et al. 2013, , 436, 2956

    2013

  148. [156]

    K., Wakeford , H

    Sing , D. K., Wakeford , H. R., Showman , A. P., et al. 2015, , 446, 2428

    2015

  149. [157]

    Singh , V., Scandariato , G., Smith , A. M. S., et al. 2024, , 683, A1

    2024

  150. [158]

    C., Stumpe , M

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

    2012

  151. [159]

    Snellen , I. A. G., Albrecht , S., de Mooij , E. J. W., & Le Poole , R. S. 2008, , 487, 357

    2008

  152. [160]

    Snellen , I. A. G., de Kok , R. J., de Mooij , E. J. W., & Albrecht , S. 2010, , 465, 1049

    2010

  153. [161]

    S., Silverio , K., & Burrows , A

    Spiegel , D. S., Silverio , K., & Burrows , A. 2009, , 699, 1487

    2009

  154. [162]

    2022, , 662, A101

    Stangret , M., Casasayas-Barris , N., Pall \'e , E., et al. 2022, , 662, A101

    2022

  155. [163]

    K., et al

    Stevenson , K., Fowler , J., Lewis , N. K., et al. 2018, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 231, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts \#231, 148.14

    2018

  156. [164]

    B., Bean , J

    Stevenson , K. B., Bean , J. L., Fabrycky , D., & Kreidberg , L. 2014 a , , 796, 32

    2014

  157. [165]

    B., D \'e sert , J.-M., Line , M

    Stevenson , K. B., D \'e sert , J.-M., Line , M. R., et al. 2014 b , Science, 346, 838

    2014

  158. [166]

    C., Smith , J

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

    2014

  159. [167]

    C., Smith , J

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

    2012

  160. [168]

    R., Tinetti , G., Vasisht , G., et al

    Swain , M. R., Tinetti , G., Vasisht , G., et al. 2009, , 704, 1616

    2009

  161. [169]

    R., Vasisht , G., & Tinetti , G

    Swain , M. R., Vasisht , G., & Tinetti , G. 2008, , 452, 329

    2008

  162. [170]

    M., Szab \'o , R., Benk o , J

    Szab \'o , G. M., Szab \'o , R., Benk o , J. M., et al. 2011, , 736, L4

    2011

  163. [171]

    M., Marfil , E., Montes , D., & Gonz \'a lez Hern \'a ndez , J

    Tabernero , H. M., Marfil , E., Montes , D., & Gonz \'a lez Hern \'a ndez , J. I. 2022 a , , 657, A66

    2022

  164. [172]

    M., Zapatero Osorio , M

    Tabernero , H. M., Zapatero Osorio , M. R., Allende Prieto , C., et al. 2022 b , , 515, 1247

    2022

  165. [173]

    & Komacek , T

    Tan , X. & Komacek , T. D. 2019, , 886, 26

    2019

  166. [174]

    N., Al-Refaie , A

    Tennyson , J., Yurchenko , S. N., Al-Refaie , A. F., et al. 2016, JMoSp, 327, 73

    2016

  167. [175]

    N., Al-Refaie , A

    Tennyson , J., Yurchenko , S. N., Al-Refaie , A. F., et al. 2020, JQSRT, 255, 107228

    2020

  168. [176]

    Thorngren , D., Gao , P., & Fortney , J. J. 2019, , 884, L6

    2019

  169. [177]

    Tsai , S.-M., Lee , E. K. H., Powell , D., et al. 2023, , 617, 483

    2023

  170. [178]

    2018, ExA, 46, 101

    Venot , O., Drummond , B., Miguel , Y., et al. 2018, ExA, 46, 101

    2018

  171. [179]

    1924 a , , 84, 665

    von Zeipel , H. 1924 a , , 84, 665

    1924

  172. [180]

    1924 b , , 84, 684

    von Zeipel , H. 1924 b , , 84, 684

    1924

  173. [181]

    P., Parmentier , V., Line , M

    Wardenier , J. P., Parmentier , V., Line , M. R., & Lee , E. K. H. 2023, , 525, 4942

    2023

  174. [182]

    W., Roellig , T

    Werner , M. W., Roellig , T. L., Low , F. J., et al. 2004, , 154, 1

    2004

  175. [183]

    P., Nikolov , N., et al

    Wilson , J., Gibson , N. P., Nikolov , N., et al. 2020, , 497, 5155

    2020

  176. [184]

    A., Sing , D

    Wilson , P. A., Sing , D. K., Nikolov , N., et al. 2015, , 450, 192

    2015

  177. [185]

    2021, , 162, 127

    Wong , I., Kitzmann , D., Shporer , A., et al. 2021, , 162, 127

    2021

  178. [186]

    2020, , 160, 88

    Wong , I., Shporer , A., Kitzmann , D., et al. 2020, , 160, 88

    2020

  179. [187]

    H., Changeat , Q., Edwards , B., et al

    Yip , K. H., Changeat , Q., Edwards , B., et al. 2021, , 161, 4

    2021

  180. [188]

    Yurchenko , S. N. 2015, JQSRT, 152, 28

    2015

  181. [189]

    T., Swain , M

    Zellem , R. T., Swain , M. R., Roudier , G., et al. 2017, , 844, 27

    2017

  182. [190]

    L., et al

    Zhang , M., Paragas , K., Bean , J. L., et al. 2025, , 169, 38

    2025

  183. [191]

    W., Bieryla , A., et al

    Zhou , G., Latham , D. W., Bieryla , A., et al. 2016, , 460, 3376

    2016

  184. [192]

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

    ENTRY address archiveprefix author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution eprint journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sent...

  185. [193]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 gl...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.