Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 55 references

A systematic bias in template-based RV extraction algorithms

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Template-based RV measurements drift downward by up to tens of meters per second per hour when the stellar template comes from a single night.

desk verdict A genuine, template-linked intra-night RV bias that deserves a serious referee, provided the CCF reference baseline gets quantified. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.23261 v1 pith:HDGBWIRT submitted 2025-06-29 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.IMastro-ph.SR

André M. Silva , N. C. Santos , J. P. Faria , J. H. C. Martins , E. A. S. Cristo , S. G. Sousa , P. T. P. Viana , É. Artigau
show 25 more authors
K. Al Moulla A. Castro-González D. F. M. Folha P. Figueira T. Schmidt F. Pepe X. Dumusque O. D. S. Demangeon T. L. Campante X. Delfosse B. Wehbe J. Lillo-Box A. R. Costa Silva J. Rodrigues J. I. González Hernández T. Azevedo Silva S. Cristiani H. M. Tabernero E. Palle B. Lavie A. Suárez Mascareño P. Di Marcantonio C. J. A. P. Martins N. J. Nunes A. Sozzetti
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EPastro-ph.IMastro-ph.SR
keywords radialvelocitytemplatematchingline-by-lineRVscross-correlationfunctiontelluriccontaminationstellarsystematicbiasasteroseismology
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 identifies a systematic bias: when all spectra of a star are gathered within a few hours, template-matching (TM) and line-by-line (LBL) radial-velocity algorithms produce a quasi-linear, always-negative velocity drift that grows through the night. Slopes in the sample range from about $-0.3$ to $-52\,\mathrm{m\,s^{-1}\,h^{-1}}$, and the effect appears in two TM pipelines, one LBL pipeline, and data from two spectrographs, while CCF velocities from the same spectra show no such trend. The paper argues the origin lies in the data-driven stellar template itself: when the template is built from observations with little barycentric-velocity spread, residual micro-telluric lines and correlated detector noise stay coherent and imprint a false drift on the extracted velocities. A reader should care because short-baseline RV work — asteroseismology, transit and atmospheric studies including the Rossiter-McLaughlin effect, and ultra-short-period planet searches — relies precisely on the intra-night measurements that this bias corrupts.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the data-driven stellar template built by stacking individual spectra. Within a single night the barycentric Earth radial velocity (BERV) wanders by less than the mean pixel size, so any telluric or fixed-pattern contamination sits at nearly the same detector position in every exposure; when the spectra are averaged into a template the contamination is not diluted, and it later shifts coherently against the stellar lines during the RV fit. In multi-night or multi-year templates the same features average out. The argument is carried by three instruments of comparison: residuals between s-BART and CCF RVs, with CCF used as the fixed-mask reference that is not contaminated; telluric masks generated with Telfit and expanded to the maximum yearly BERV variation; and the controlled tau Ceti template-construction experiments that vary which observations enter the stellar model.

What would settle it

Find archival nights where the intra-night BERV slope is positive rather than negative and run the same single-night template extraction: the micro-telluric and fixed-pattern picture predicts the RV slope should flip sign, while a stellar or instrumental drift independent of BERV direction would not. Alternatively, apply a much deeper telluric mask together with a full telluric-correction model on the same nights: if the bias persists unchanged, the micro-telluric component of the explanation is refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that template-based RV extraction carries a time-correlated systematic bias that appears exactly when the stellar template and the observations share a short time baseline. The paper demonstrates that the slope of the residual between s-BART velocities and CCF velocities is systematically negative across 38 single nights of ESPRESSO data on 19 stars, and reproduces the bias with SERVAL and ARVE. The decisive experiment is the five-year ESPRESSO dataset of the star HD10700 (tau Ceti): templates built from a single night produce night-by-night slopes down to $-1.5\,\mathrm{m\,s^{-1}\,h^{-1}}$ with a median near $-0.53\,\mathrm{m\,s^{-1}\,h^{-1}}$, whereas a template built from all 2000-plus observations gives a median slope of about $0\,\mathrm{m\,s^{-1}\,h^{-1}}$. Adding nights sequentially to the template progressively erases the drift, and relaxing the telluric-rejection threshold amplifies it, which leads the paper to attribute the effect to micro-telluric contamination and correlated noise imprinted on the single-night template. The paper also finds that the bias grows at lower signal-to-noise, is stronger in the red detector, and concludes that standard multi-month exoplanet monitoring is unaffected while intra-night science cases can be severely damaged.

Load-bearing premise

The measurement treats CCF radial velocities as the unbiased reference, since the bias is defined as the slope of the s-BART-minus-CCF residual, so if CCF velocities themselves contained a time-correlated drift the claimed isolation of a template-matching bias would not be clean.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Asteroseismic RV campaigns on K dwarfs, whose oscillation amplitudes are a few $\mathrm{cm\,s^{-1}}$, will see the meter-per-second-per-hour drift swamp or mimic p-mode signals unless templates are built from multi-night data.
  • Transit and atmospheric studies that build a template from the same night as the in-transit exposures inherit the bias, potentially corrupting Rossiter-McLaughlin curves and transmission spectra.
  • Exoplanet detection and characterization over multi-month baselines are not affected: the bias averages out of the template and falls below the current instrumental noise floor.
  • The drift can be mitigated by constructing the stellar template from observations spread over many months, by imposing a time separation of roughly three weeks between template and data, or by using a template built from a similar star.
  • The effect is a property of the template-based analysis recipe rather than of any single code, since it appears in s-BART, SERVAL, and ARVE with both ESPRESSO and HARPS data.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the BERV-direction picture is right, the sign of the bias should follow the sign of the intra-night BERV slope: on nights when the Earth's motion makes BERV increase, the residual RV slope should flip positive, which is directly testable on archival nights with positive BERV slopes.
  • A practical diagnostic for future campaigns would be to compare single-night template RVs against CCF RVs for a few bright stars every night; the slope distribution of those residuals could serve as a live quality metric for template contamination.
  • The fixed-pattern-noise component could be probed by extracting RVs from the same exposures with deliberately different calibration-frame choices, and by injecting synthetic micro-telluric lines at known depths to see whether the observed slope-amplitude scaling is reproduced.
  • Because the drift is quasi-linear over a night, a simple first-order correction in BERV or time within each night may remove most of the contamination while preserving signals with different frequency content, though the paper itself does not test such a correction.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper reports a systematic, quasi-linear, time-correlated bias in radial velocities (RVs) extracted with template-matching (TM) and line-by-line (LBL) algorithms when all observations of a star are collected within a short time span (hours to a few days). Using the s-BART pipeline on ESPRESSO and HARPS data, the authors measure residuals between TM RVs and CCF RVs and find slopes ranging from -0.3 to -52 m/s/h across 38 nights of 19 stars. The effect is reproduced with SERVAL and ARVE, appears in both blue and red detector orders (stronger in the red), and is linked to the construction of the stellar template: templates built from a single night produce the trend, while templates built from multi-year observations do not. BERV-binning experiments and telluric-threshold variations are used to probe the origin, and the authors hypothesize a combination of micro-telluric features and correlated detector noise. They argue the bias does not affect typical exoplanet detection but can severely impact short-baseline science such as asteroseismology, transit, and atmospheric characterization.

Significance. If confirmed, this is an important result for the RV community: it identifies a previously unrecognized, multi-m/s, time-correlated systematic in two popular TM pipelines and one LBL pipeline, across two major spectrographs, with direct implications for short-cadence science. The detection is strengthened by the multi-pipeline and multi-instrument reproduction, the large sample, the template-selection controls (Section 5.1, Figure 7), and the BERV-binning test. The paper also provides a clear, practical mitigation: build templates from observations spanning a wide BERV range. The main weakness is that the quantitative claim rests on treating CCF RVs as an unbiased reference, and the paper does not provide a full quantitative demonstration that CCF RVs are slope-free across the entire sample. This is a correctable gap rather than a refutation.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4.1, Fig. 2, Table C.1] The quantitative claim that the bias is absent in CCF RVs is not supported by the evidence presented. All quoted slopes are fits to residuals between s-BART and CCF RVs (Section 4.1), and the only direct display of a flat CCF series is a single night for HD40307 (Figure 1). The structural argument that the CCF mask is fixed and avoids telluric regions does not rule out intra-night CCF drifts from residual drift-correction error or telluric contamination of mask lines. I request a quantitative control: for all 38 nights, compute linear slopes of the CCF RVs alone (and, for completeness, of the s-BART RVs alone), present their distribution, and demonstrate consistency with zero within the reported uncertainties. Without this control, the slope range [-0.3, -52] m/s/h and the 'always negative' sign are properties of the residual time-series, not of the template-based RVs independently.
  2. [§6.1 and Appendix F] The telluric-threshold experiment (Section 6.1) is presented as evidence that micro-telluric contamination contributes to the bias, yet Appendix F shows that applying the ESPRESSO telluric correction changes the s-BART RVs by less than ~0.4 m/s (1-sigma compatible) and does not remove the trend. Section 6.3 acknowledges that the missing-lines hypothesis is difficult to support. Since the root-cause claim is part of the abstract ('Our results suggest that a contamination of micro-telluric features... could be the driving factor'), please reconcile this statement with Appendix F, or soften the claim explicitly to a postulate that remains to be tested (e.g., via synthetic injection of micro-telluric lines into the template-building step).
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract, §8, Table C.1] The slope range quoted in the abstract ([-0.3, -52] m/s/h) differs from Table C.1 (-53.69 m/s/h) and from the conclusions ([-0.3, -50] m/s/h); harmonize these values.
  2. [Figure 2 caption] Figure 2 caption states '20 different stars' while Section 2.3 says 19 targets; clarify whether the count includes the two asteroseismology stars added to the WG2 sample.
  3. [Appendix C] Report a goodness-of-fit statistic (e.g., reduced chi-square) for the linear fits, since several reported slopes have very small uncertainties (0.01 m/s/h) and the linear model is described as a simplification.
  4. [§5.2] Some BERV bins show positive residual slopes, which appears to conflict with the statement in Section 4.1 that the bias 'always shows a negative slope'; add a sentence explaining that the sign is not universal when templates are built from BERV-binned data.
  5. [Appendix F] The sentence 'Since we do not find significant differences in the telluric-corrected spectra, it is even more unlikely that we are indeed missing telluric lines from our model' is a non sequitur as written; the absence of a telluric-correction effect could also mean the correction is incomplete or the trend is dominated by another contaminant. Rephrase to state what the test does and does not constrain.
  6. [Abstract and text] The abstract uses 'HD10700' while the text uses 'HD 10700' or 'τ Ceti'; use a single designation throughout.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the template-matching bias is an empirical residual measured against an independent CCF reference and reproduced by external pipelines.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is an empirical detection, not a derivation from an input that already contains the result. The bias slopes are obtained by fitting a first-degree polynomial to the residuals between s-BART and DRS CCF RVs, and the same effect is reproduced with the independent SERVAL and ARVE pipelines. The template-selection controls in Section 5.1 and 6.2 vary only the template construction while holding the data and the CCF reference fixed, which is a controlled experiment rather than a circular reduction. No fitted parameter is used to enforce the sign or amplitude of the trend; the slopes are descriptive summaries. The causal hypothesis involving micro-telluric contamination is explicitly left open in Section 6.3, not assumed as an input. The self-citations to s-BART (Silva et al. 2022) and to Figueira et al. (2025) describe the tools and the tau Ceti dataset, but the main detection also rests on external code and data, so the self-citations are not load-bearing. The weakest point is that CCF RVs are treated as a slope-free reference without a quantitative distribution of CCF-only slopes across all nights; this is a calibration or validity concern, not a circularity of the kind where the output is equivalent to the input by construction. The paper does not invoke a uniqueness theorem, does not smuggle an ansatz via citation, and does not rename a known result.

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

The central claim rests on three domain assumptions: CCF RVs as a bias-free reference, the completeness of the Telfit telluric mask, and the adequacy of a data-driven stellar template; no new physical entities are introduced. The reported slope amplitudes also depend on hand-chosen thresholds (telluric cutoff, BERV bin size, minimum bin occupancy, linear slope model).

free parameters (4)
  • Telluric mask threshold (Tr) = 1% continuum depth (default), varied 0.5-50%
    Chosen by hand in Section 3.1; Section 6.1 shows the measured RV slopes increase as the threshold is relaxed, so the reported slope range depends on this choice.
  • BERV bin size = 600 m/s
    Chosen in Section 5.2 to approximate single-night BERV variation; determines which observations enter each template and hence the recovered slopes.
  • Minimum observations per BERV bin = 20
    Bins with fewer than 20 observations are discarded in Section 5.2, affecting the binned-sample slope distribution.
  • Slope fit function = first-degree polynomial
    Section 4.1 fits a linear model to the residuals as an admitted simplification; the 'quasi-linear' slope values are defined by this choice.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption CCF RVs are a bias-free reference for measuring the template bias.
    The entire analysis defines the bias as residuals between s-BART and CCF RVs (Section 4); if CCF itself exhibits time-correlated systematics, the measured slopes would be misinterpreted. The paper argues CCF uses a fixed, uncontaminated mask (Section 6) but does not directly quantify the CCF slope distribution.
  • domain assumption The Telfit transmittance model is complete enough at the 1% threshold for telluric masking.
    s-BART's telluric mask relies on this model (Section 3.1); the paper acknowledges in Section 6.3 that missing lines could explain the residual effect.
  • domain assumption The data-driven stellar template is an adequate model of every observation of the star.
    This assumption underlies s-BART, SERVAL, and ARVE; the paper's control experiments show the effect is sensitive to which observations form the template (Section 5.1).
  • domain assumption The Laplace/Gaussian posterior approximation in s-BART gives unbiased RV estimates.
    The paper relies on the s-BART implementation (Silva et al. 2022) without independently validating this approximation against the bias being measured.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A systematic bias in template-based RV extraction algorithms." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HDGBWIRT

@misc{pith2026250623261,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A systematic bias in template-based RV extraction algorithms},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HDGBWIRT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.23261}
}
read the original abstract

In this paper we identify and explore a previously unidentified, multi meter-per-second, systematic correlation between time and RVs inferred through TM and LBL methods. We evaluate the influence of the data-driven stellar template in the RV bias and hypothesize on the possible sources of this effect. We first use the s-BART pipeline to extract RVs from three different datasets gathered over four nights of ESPRESSO and HARPS observations. Then, we demonstrate that the effect can be recovered on a larger sample of 19 targets, totaling 4124 ESPRESSO observations spread throughout 38 nights. We also showcase the presence of the bias in RVs extracted with the SERVAL and ARVE pipelines. Lastly, we explore the construction of the stellar template through the 5 years of ESPRESSO observations of HD10700, totalling more than 2000 observations. We find that a systematic quasi-linear bias affects the RV extraction with slopes that vary from -0.3 m/s-1/h-1 to -52 m/s-1/h-1 in our sample. This trend is not observed in CCF RVs and appears when all observations of a given star are collected within a short time-period (timescales of hours). We show that this systematic contamination exists in the RV time-series of two different template-matching pipelines, one line-by-line pipeline, and that it is agnostic to the spectrograph. We also find that this effect is connected with the construction of the stellar template, as we are able to mitigate it through a careful selection of the observations used to construct it. Our results suggest that a contamination of micro-telluric features, coupled other sources of correlated noise, could be the driving factor of this effect. We also show that this effect does not impact the usual usage of template-matching for the detection and characterization of exoplanets. Other short-timescale science cases can however be severely affected.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.23261 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Mean-subtracted RV time-series for one night (December [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Residuals between the s-BART and CCF RVs for two nights of HARPS observations of HD160691 (top row) and two ESPRESSO nights of ϵ Indi (bottom row). The red and blue points represents the RV time-series extracted when using the corresponding detectors. that the bias is present at different wavelengths, showing a small wavelength dependence in amplitude. 5. A closer look into the BERV-dependency In Section 4 we have s… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. shows that the systematic bias is closely linked to the observations that are selected to construct the stellar tem￾plate. If the template is constructed from observations that are spread over the year we do not find any structure in the residuals (top right panel) nor any meaningful slope within the error bars (median value of ∼ 0 m s−1 h −1 ). In the case where the nights are assumed to be independent (left column… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: RV extraction on the ESPRESSO dataset of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Impact on the RV trend from template matching after cre [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Top panel: Comparison of different RV time-series of τ Ceti, extracted with stellar templates that sequentially utilise one more night of observations than the previous; Bottom panel: Slope of a first degree polynomial adjusted to the residuals as a function of the num…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * 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.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all := #1 ...

  2. [2]

    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 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in " " * FUNCTION format....

  3. [3]

    R., Jackson, B., Johnson, S., et al

    Adams, E. R., Jackson, B., Johnson, S., et al. 2021, The Planetary Science Journal, 2, 152, publisher: IOP ADS Bibcode: 2021PSJ.....2..152A

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    2025, A&A, submitted

    Al Moulla, K. 2025, A&A, submitted

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    H., Dawson, R

    Albrecht, S. H., Dawson, R. I., & Winn, J. N. 2022, PASP, 134, 082001

    2022

  6. [6]

    2022, A&A, 666, A196

    Allart, R., Lovis, C., Faria, J., et al. 2022, A&A, 666, A196

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    & Butler, R

    Anglada-Escudé, G. & Butler, R. P. 2012, ApJS, 200, 15

    2012

  8. [8]

    J., et al

    Artigau, E., Cadieux, C., Cook, N. J., et al. 2022, AJ, 164, 84

    work page 2022

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    2015, PhD , Université Grenoble, Alpes

    Astudillo-Defru, N. 2015, PhD , Université Grenoble, Alpes

    2015

  2. [10]

    2009, A&A, 506, 411

    Auvergne, M., Bodin, P., Boisnard, L., et al. 2009, A&A, 506, 411

    2009

  3. [11]

    Azevedo Silva, T., Demangeon, O. D. S., Santos, N. C., et al. 2022, A&A, 666, L10

    2022

  4. [12]

    M., et al

    Balsalobre-Ruza, O., Lillo-Box, J., Silva, A. M., et al. 2025, A&A, 694, A15

    2025

  5. [13]

    1996, Astron

    Baranne, A., Queloz, D., Mayor, M., et al. 1996, Astron. Astrophys. Suppl. Ser., 119, 373

    1996

  6. [14]

    C., Vauclair, S., & Sosnowska, D

    Bouchy, F., Bazot, M., Santos, N. C., Vauclair, S., & Sosnowska, D. 2005, A&A, 440, 609

    2005

  7. [15]

    2001, A&A, 374, 733

    Bouchy, F., Pepe, F., & Queloz, D. 2001, A&A, 374, 733

    2001

  8. [16]

    Boué, G., Montalto, M., Boisse, I., Oshagh, M., & Santos, N. C. 2013, A&A, 550, A53

    2013

  9. [17]

    L., Kjeldsen, H., Li, Y., et al

    Campante, T. L., Kjeldsen, H., Li, Y., et al. 2024, A&A, 683, L16

    2024

  10. [18]

    L., Schofield, M., Kuszlewicz, J

    Campante, T. L., Schofield, M., Kuszlewicz, J. S., et al. 2016, ApJ, 830, 138

    2016

  11. [19]

    2019, A&A, 628, A9

    Casasayas-Barris, N., Pallé, E., Yan, F., et al. 2019, A&A, 628, A9

    2019

  12. [20]

    Castro-González, A., Bouchy, F., Correia, A. C. M., et al. 2025, Two neighbours to the ultra-short-period Earth -sized planet K2 -157 b in the warm Neptunian savanna, version Number: 1

    2025

  13. [21]

    Castro-González, A., Demangeon, O. D. S., Lillo-Box, J., et al. 2023, A&A, 675, A52

    2023

  14. [22]

    Costa Silva, A., Demangeon, O. D. S., Santos, N. C., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, A8

    2024

  15. [23]

    C., et al

    Cristo, E., Esparza Borges, E., Santos, N. C., et al. 2024, A&A, 682, A28

    2024

  16. [24]

    C., Figueira, P., et al

    Cunha, D., Santos, N. C., Figueira, P., et al. 2014, A&A, 568, A35

    2014

  17. [25]

    2018, A&A, 620, A47

    Dumusque, X. 2018, A&A, 620, A47

    2018

  18. [26]

    2020, Nature, 580, 597

    Ehrenreich, D., Lovis, C., Allart, R., et al. 2020, Nature, 580, 597

    2020

  19. [27]

    2023, ESPRESSO Pipeline User Manual

    ESO . 2023, ESPRESSO Pipeline User Manual

    2023

  20. [28]

    P., Mascareño, A

    Faria, J. P., Mascareño, A. S., Figueira, P., et al. 2022, A&A, 658, A115, arXiv: 2202.05188

    2022 arXiv

  21. [29]

    P., Silva, A

    Figueira, P., Faria, J. P., Silva, A. M., et al. 2025, A&A

    2025

  22. [30]

    R., Howard, A

    Gibson, S. R., Howard, A. W., Rider, K., et al. 2020, in Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy VIII , ed. C. J. Evans, J. J. Bryant, & K. Motohara (Online Only, United States: SPIE), 278

    2020

  23. [31]

    I., Suárez Mascareño, A., Silva, A

    González Hernández, J. I., Suárez Mascareño, A., Silva, A. M., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A79

    2024

  24. [32]

    2014, AJ, 148, 53, arXiv: 1406.6059

    Gullikson, K., Dodson-Robinson, S., & Kraus, A. 2014, AJ, 148, 53, arXiv: 1406.6059

    2014 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Holt, J. R. 1893, Astronomy and Astro-Physics (formerly The Sidereal Messenger), 12, 646

  26. [34]

    S., et al

    Hon, M., Huber, D., Kuszlewicz, J. S., et al. 2021, ApJ, 919, 131

    2021

  27. [35]

    2024, ApJ, 975, 147

    Hon, M., Huber, D., Li, Y., et al. 2024, ApJ, 975, 147

    2024

  28. [36]

    B., Sobeck, C., Haas, M., et al

    Howell, S. B., Sobeck, C., Haas, M., et al. 2014, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 126, 398

    2014

  29. [37]

    R., Arentoft, T., et al

    Kjeldsen, H., Bedding, T. R., Arentoft, T., et al. 2008, ApJ, 682, 1370

    2008

  30. [38]

    G., Borucki, W

    Koch, D. G., Borucki, W. J., Basri, G., et al. 2010, ApJ, 713, L79

    2010

  31. [39]

    Li, Y., Huber, D., Ong, J. M. J., et al. 2025, K-dwarf Radius Inflation and a 10- Gyr Spin -down Clock Unveiled through Asteroseismology of HD 219134 from the Keck Planet Finder , version Number: 1

    2025

  32. [40]

    S., González-Álvarez, E., Osorio, M

    Mascareño, A. S., González-Álvarez, E., Osorio, M. R. Z., et al. 2023, A&A, 670, A5, arXiv:2212.07332 [astro-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  33. [41]

    2003, The Messenger, 114, 20, tex.adsnote: Provided by the SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System tex.adsurl: https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003Msngr.114...20M

    Mayor, M., Pepe, F., Queloz, D., et al. 2003, The Messenger, 114, 20, tex.adsnote: Provided by the SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System tex.adsurl: https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003Msngr.114...20M

    2003

  34. [42]

    McLaughlin, D. B. 1924, ApJ, 60, 22

    1924

  35. [43]

    A., Mortier, A., et al

    Palethorpe, L., John, A. A., Mortier, A., et al. 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, stae707

    2024

  36. [44]

    M., Suárez Mascareño, A., Allart, R., et al

    Passegger, V. M., Suárez Mascareño, A., Allart, R., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A22

    2024

  37. [45]

    2021, A&A, 645, A96, arXiv: 2010.00316

    Pepe, F., Cristiani, S., Rebolo, R., et al. 2021, A&A, 645, A96, arXiv: 2010.00316

    2021 arXiv

  38. [46]

    2002 a , A&A, 388, 632

    Pepe, F., Mayor, M., Galland, F., et al. 2002 a , A&A, 388, 632

    2002

  39. [47]

    2002 b , The Messenger, 110, 9, aDS Bibcode: 2002Msngr.110....9P

    Pepe, F., Mayor, M., Rupprecht, G., et al. 2002 b , The Messenger, 110, 9, aDS Bibcode: 2002Msngr.110....9P

    2002

  40. [48]

    R., Winn, J

    Ricker, G. R., Winn, J. N., Vanderspek, R., et al. 2014, J. Astron. Telesc. Instrum. Syst, 1, 014003

    2014

  41. [49]

    Rossiter, R. A. 1924, ApJ, 60, 15

    1924

  42. [50]

    C., Mortier, A., Faria, J

    Santos, N. C., Mortier, A., Faria, J. P., et al. 2014, A&A, 566, A35

    2014

  43. [51]

    M., Faria, J

    Silva, A. M., Faria, J. P., Santos, N. C., et al. 2022, A&A

    2022

  44. [52]

    G., Adibekyan, V., Delgado-Mena, E., et al

    Sousa, S. G., Adibekyan, V., Delgado-Mena, E., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A53

    2024

  45. [53]

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

    Winn, J. N., Fabrycky, D., Albrecht, S., & Johnson, J. A. 2010, ApJ, 718, L145

    2010

  46. [54]

    2015, A&A, 577, A62

    Wyttenbach, A., Ehrenreich, D., Lovis, C., Udry, S., & Pepe, F. 2015, A&A, 577, A62

    2015

  47. [55]

    J., et al

    Zechmeister, M., Reiners, A., Amado, P. J., et al. 2018, A&A, 609, A12

    2018

Pith tools

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