Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 127 references

Exploring the habitability and interior composition of exoplanets lying within the extended habitable zone

T0 review · 4 major / 5 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 Six habitable-zone M-dwarf exoplanets are classified as rocky, water-rich, or envelope-bearing via stellar SED fitting, ExoMDN interior retrieval, and photoevolver escape modeling.

desk verdict A competent six-planet consistency analysis whose envelope fractions are real but conditional on fixed composition families and Love numbers; the JWST target ranking is the most actionable output. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.04440 v1 pith:PL23XHPE submitted 2025-07-06 astro-ph.EP

Sushmita Deb , Kaushal Sharma , Samrat Biswas , Biman Jyoti Medhi This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords exoplanetsplanetscompositionhabitabilityamountatmospherichabitableinterior
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 authors started with 881 planets in the NASA Exoplanet Archive, kept 339 with radius under 4 Earth radii and mass under 15 Earth masses and complete basic parameters, then selected 17 that fall inside the extended habitable zone defined by Wandel. After dropping five planets with poor or missing mass and radius errors, they focused on six systems plus the TRAPPIST-1 planets. They used Gaia, Pan-STARRS1, 2MASS, and WISE photometry through the VOSA tool to estimate stellar temperature, gravity, metallicity, and luminosity, then estimated stellar ages with MIST tracks.

For the planets, the authors used the ExoMDN machine-learning interior model, feeding in published mass, radius, equilibrium temperature, and an assumed fluid Love number (Earth-like for two dense planets, Neptune-like for four lower-density planets). The outputs are probability distributions over core, mantle, water, and atmosphere mass fractions. They then ran the public photoevolver code to simulate photoevaporation and core-powered mass loss over 10 Gyr, testing which initial H/He envelope fractions reproduce each planet's observed radius at its estimated age.

The headline results are that LHS 1140 b and TOI-1452 b are consistent with Earth-like rocky cores plus a thin H/He layer (envelope fractions near 0.1-0.25 percent), LP 791-18 c and LTT 3780 c look water-rich under a few tenths of a percent atmosphere, K2-18 b keeps a small envelope only if it is near 10 Gyr old, and TOI-1266 c is water-rich with no significant atmosphere. Transmission spectroscopy metrics rank LP 791-18 c and LTT 3780 c as the best JWST targets in the sample.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim, stated in Section 3.2, is that each of the six modeled exoplanets can be matched to its observed radius at its estimated age by a specific present-day envelope mass fraction: LHS 1140 b at 0.15-0.25%, TOI-1452 b at 0.11%, TOI-1266 c at 0.60-0.68%, LTT 3780 c at 0.80%, LP 791-18 c at 0.40-0.50%, and K2-18 b at 1.50-1.75%. If the paper is correct, these planets form a coherent picture in which two are rocky cores with thin H/He layers, two are water worlds with thin envelopes, one is water-dominated with negligible atmosphere, and one retains a small atmosphere only if very old.

Load-bearing premise

The interior retrieval and envelope evolution both depend on the assumed composition models and on the adopted Love number. Specifically, ExoMDN is trained on a four-layer synthetic interior grid (cores, mantles, water, H/He envelopes) and the paper sets k2 = 0.933 for LHS 1140 b and TOI-1452 b and k2 = 0.392 for the other four planets (Section 2.4), with a 10% uncertainty. If those assumed interior families or Love numbers are wrong, the recovered mass fractions (e.g., the 79% water fraction for TOI-1266 c) are not supported. This assumption is distinct from the claim itself because it enters before the escape simulation and determines the core radius and composition that photoevolver starts from.

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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper selects 339 small exoplanets (R ≤ 4 R⊕, M ≤ 15 M⊕) from the NASA Exoplanet Archive, applies the extended habitable zone criterion of Wandel (2023a,b), and performs a detailed study of six systems after excluding the TRAPPIST-1 planets: LHS 1140 b, TOI-1452 b, TOI-1266 c, LTT 3780 c, LP 791-18 c, and K2-18 b. For each host star, spectral types are derived from Gaia photometry and atmospheric parameters from VOSA SED fits, with extensive comparison to literature values. The paper then uses ExoMDN to infer interior mass fractions and photoevolver to simulate the evolution of a primordial H/He envelope, reporting present-day envelope mass fractions in Table 3. The main qualitative claims are that LHS 1140 b and TOI-1452 b require a small H/He envelope above an Earth-like rather than purely rocky composition; LTT 3780 c and LP 791-18 c are consistent with thermally driven mass loss with thin envelopes; K2-18 b can retain a small envelope only if very old; and TOI-1266 c is likely water-rich with essentially no atmosphere.

Significance. If the derived envelope fractions were robust, the paper would provide a coherent comparative picture of atmospheric evolution for six habitable-zone exoplanets and an interesting counter-example to the idea that thermally driven mass loss does not operate around water-rich cores. The study has clear strengths: the stellar parameter derivation is carefully cross-checked against the literature, the sample selection is transparent, and the analysis relies on public, reproducible codes (ExoMDN, photoevolver). It also makes testable, if qualitative, predictions for JWST follow-up via TSM values. However, the central quantitative result—the present-day envelope fractions in Table 3—is conditional on a small number of fixed interior composition families and fixed Love numbers, and the paper does not propagate the uncertainties of its own ExoMDN posteriors into these numbers. As a result, the paper is a useful exploratory analysis rather than a secure retrieval of envelope fractions.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.2 / Table 3] The reported present-day envelope mass fractions are conditional on fixed interior composition families: Earth-like (1/3 iron, 2/3 rock) for LHS 1140 b and TOI-1452 b, and 50% water + 50% Earth-like for the other four planets. These families are not derived from the ExoMDN posteriors shown in Figs. 4 and 5. For example, the ExoMDN posterior for LHS 1140 b peaks near a 9% core mass fraction, while the escape modeling assumes 33% iron; TOI-1266 c peaks near a ~79% water fraction, while the escape modeling assumes 50%. Because the core mass-radius relation directly controls the envelope fraction needed to match the observed radius at a given age, the Table 3 values must be presented as conditional, and a sensitivity study over the posterior composition samples (or at least a range of water fractions and core fractions) is needed. As written, the central claim is not robust to the assumed composition families.
  2. [Table 3 / Section 3.2] There is an internal inconsistency for TOI-1266 c. Table 3 lists a present-day envelope mass fraction of 0.60–0.68% with a converged radius of 2.120 R⊕, yet the text states that this planet is 'clearly inconsistent with the TDML model' and that 'only a water-rich core composition can justify the observed mass and radius.' Either the model matches the observed radius at the estimated age and the envelope fraction is a meaningful output, or it does not, in which case Table 3 should not list a converged value. The analogous issue arises for K2-18 b, where Table 3 gives 1.50–1.75% even though the text says the model does not converge for ages below 10 Gyr, while the adopted stellar age is 6.60 Gyr (Table 2). These contradictions need to be resolved and clearly stated in the text.
  3. [Section 3.2 / Fig. 6] The central inference depends critically on the adopted stellar ages, but the ages in Table 2 have very large asymmetric uncertainties (e.g., K2-18: 6.60 +11.1/−2.3 Gyr; LHS 1140: 6.63 +10.9/−2.1 Gyr). The vertical dashed lines in Fig. 6 are drawn at the point estimates, and the quoted envelope fractions do not propagate the age uncertainty. For K2-18 b the conclusion changes qualitatively between 6.6 and 10 Gyr, so an age-uncertainty band should be shown in Fig. 6 and the implications for Table 3 stated explicitly.
  4. [Section 2.4] The fluid Love number k2 is assigned by bulk-density analogy (0.933 for LHS 1140 b and TOI-1452 b; 0.392 for the other four planets), with a 10% uncertainty drawn as a Gaussian input to ExoMDN. The paper does not report how much the interior mass fractions or the Section 3.2 envelope fractions change if k2 is varied within a plausible range, or if the alternative Love number is adopted for a given planet. Since k2 controls the inferred core radius that photoevolver uses as a starting point, omitting this sensitivity analysis leaves the derived envelope fractions unsupported.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 3.1] The sentence about TOI-1266 c stating that 'such high WMF cannot be a possible composition' appears to contradict the quoted interval 79+46/−8%, whose lower bound is 71%; please clarify whether this is a comment on the degeneracy or a rejection of the retrieval solution.
  2. [Table 2 / Fig. 6] Given the very large asymmetric age uncertainties, the ages should be displayed as bands rather than point values in Fig. 6, or at minimum the text should state which envelope fractions survive within the 1σ age range.
  3. [Table 1] The semi-major axis column header 'a (a⊙, 10−3)' is difficult to parse; please express the unit as '10^-3 au' or give the conversion explicitly.
  4. [Section 3.2 / Fig. 6] The initial envelope fractions swept in Fig. 6 are not physically motivated; a brief justification of the chosen range (e.g., expectations from disk accretion timescales) would help the reader interpret the curves.
  5. [Abstract] The phrase 'negligible amount of their initial gas layer' is vague; for LHS 1140 b and TOI-1452 b the derived values are 0.15–0.25% and 0.11%, so the abstract could be made quantitative.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: envelope fractions are forward-model inversions with stated assumptions, not predictions forced by construction.

full rationale

The paper's envelope-mass-fraction results are not circular. The derivation chain is: (1) host-star parameters and ages are obtained from SED fitting and MIST tracks; (2) interior posteriors come from ExoMDN, an externally published machine-learning tool trained on 5.6 million synthetic structures; (3) fixed interior composition families (Earth-like for LHS 1140 b and TOI-1452 b; 50% water + 50% Earth-like for the other four) are adopted as inputs to photoevolver, an independent public code; and (4) initial envelope fractions are varied, and the radius at the adopted stellar age is compared with the observed radius. The reported present-day envelope fraction is therefore inferred from the data through the model, not assumed. The text is transparent about this: 'We therefore, used the Earth-like (1/3 iron, 2/3 rock) composition for both the exoplanets and recovered their observed radius at different envelope mass fraction.' The model is also falsifiable within the paper: K2-18 b 'does not converge to a present-day envelope mass fraction consistent with the observed radius' at its nominal age, and TOI-1266 c is described as 'clearly inconsistent with the TDML model,' so the comparison is not vacuous. The dependence of the inferred envelope fractions on the assumed interior families and Love numbers is a conditioning assumption, not a self-referential reduction, and those assumptions are explicitly stated. There are no load-bearing self-citations and no uniqueness theorem imported from the authors' own prior work. No circular step can be exhibited from the paper's equations or text.

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

No new physical entities are introduced. The main loaded assumptions are the composition grids, the Love-number assignments, and the escape physics, all inherited from prior literature. The free parameters are the per-planet envelope fractions and the chosen interior composition families, which together do much of the work in matching observed radii.

free parameters (3)
  • Envelope mass fraction per planet = LHS 1140 b: 0.15-0.25%; TOI-1452 b: 0.11%; TOI-1266 c: 0.60-0.68%; LTT 3780 c: 0.80%; LP 791-18 c: 0.40-0.50%; K2-18…
    These are chosen in Figure 6 to make the modeled radius cross the observed radius at the assumed stellar age, so they are fitted values, not independent predictions.
  • Fluid Love number k2 per planet = 0.933 for LHS 1140 b and TOI-1452 b; 0.392 for TOI-1266 c, LP 791-18 c, LTT 3780 c, K2-18 b
    Adopted from Earth and Neptune rather than measured per planet, with a 10% uncertainty. This choice directly shapes the ExoMDN posterior.
  • Assumed interior composition families for escape modeling = Earth-like (1/3 iron, 2/3 rock) for LHS 1140 b and TOI-1452 b; 50% water + 50% Earth-like for the other four
    Chosen after noting pure-rocky or pure-water models fail; the envelope fractions are then fitted under these assumptions, so part of the output is inherited from the input composition family.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The ExoMDN training grid (core, mantle, water, H/He envelope) spans the true interiors of the sample planets.
    The interior posteriors are meaningful only if the synthetic training set covers the actual physical states of these planets.
  • domain assumption The extended habitable zone boundaries of Wandel 2023a,b are the correct definition of habitability for tidally locked M-dwarf planets.
    The sample selection (17 planets) depends entirely on these boundaries, which remain debated.
  • domain assumption Photoevaporation plus core-powered mass loss (Owen & Wu 2017; Gupta & Schlichting 2019) is the relevant envelope-loss physics for 10 Gyr.
    The photoevolver simulations assume these models and would give different envelope fractions under, e.g., gas-poor accretion or different XUV histories.
  • domain assumption The BT-NextGen SED models used in VOSA adequately represent the M-dwarf photospheres.
    The authors themselves note log g discrepancies with spectroscopy for TOI-1266, LTT 3780, and K2-18, so the stellar parameters carry unquantified model error.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Exploring the habitability and interior composition of exoplanets lying within the extended habitable zone." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PL23XHPE

@misc{pith2026250704440,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Exploring the habitability and interior composition of exoplanets lying within the extended habitable zone},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PL23XHPE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.04440}
}
abstract

Studying the habitability, internal structure and composition of exoplanets is crucial for understanding their potential to sustain life beyond our solar system. Characterizing planetary structures and atmospheric evolution provides valuable insights into surface conditions and the long-term habitability of these planets. In this study, we present a comprehensive analysis of exoplanets spanning from super-Earths to mini-Neptunes ($R_{\textrm{p}}$ $\leq$ 4 $R_{\oplus}$ and $M_{\textrm{p}}$ $\leq$ 15 $M_{\oplus}$) located within the extended habitable zone, along with parameterization of their host stars. We find that the planets in our sample orbit M dwarf stars and are tidally locked to them. Using archival photometric data from Gaia, Pan-STARRS1, 2MASS, and WISE, we estimate the atmospheric and physical parameters of the host stars. We also model the interior structure of these planets to infer their possible compositions. Additionally, under the assumption that these exoplanets can accrete a gaseous layer, we model the envelope fraction of the habitable exoplanets. With an Earth-like rocky composition, LHS 1140 b and TOI-1452 b can hold onto negligible amount of their initial gas layer. However, sustaining a sufficient amount of atmosphere over time, the planets LP 791-18 c, LTT 3780 c and K2-18 b are likely to be water worlds. The models suggest a water rich composition for TOI-1266 c without any significant amount of atmosphere. Modeling interior compositions and atmospheric escape scenarios allow us to assess the potential habitability of these planets by evaluating the likelihood of surface liquid water and the retention of stable atmospheres.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.04440 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Distribution of 339 planets in the stellar effective flux (𝑆eff) versus stellar temperature (𝑇eff) space. Red solid circles indicate the 17 planets orbiting within the EHZ, while gray points depict the remaining planets. Solar system planets are marked with purple circles. The green solid lines correspond to the inner and outer edges of the classical 1D habitable zone, as defined by Kopparapu et al. (2013). The blue… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Mass-radius relationship for the 12 exoplanets, color-coded by their equilibrium temperature, as indicated by the colorbar. The compositional curves are taken from Zeng et al. (2016), while the H-He-rich region from Rogers et al. (2023) is highlighted in orange. The blue-shaded area represents the radius valley, also known as the Fulton gap. degeneracy where the exoplanet composition, either H-He or water￾rich, of s… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Radius-period relationship of exoplanets. The exoplanets in the sam￾ple are color-coded according to their bulk densities. The black solid lines depict the radius-period trends for the TDML and GDF formation mecha￾nisms, as defined by M19 and CM20, respectively. The gray-shaded region highlights the overlap between the two trends. planets are scattered below it. The two super-Earths, LHS 1140 b and TOI-1452 b, with … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Ternary plots showing various composition of CMF, MMF and WMF for the sample exoplanets, obtained using ExoMDN. The scatter points shows the weightage of the different mass fractions. The high density points describes the most probable composition of the exoplanet mass…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Histograms for CMF, MMF, WMF, and AMF for individual exoplanets. The histograms are generated using the ExoMDN. LHS 1140 b and TOI-1452 b exhibits pridominantly rocky compositions, with MMF peaking around 80% for both the planets. While LHS 1140 b shows a negligible WM…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (2/2) Continued from previous page. K2-18 b: This exoplanet shows a high AMF of 1 +2 −1% with WMF of 66+23 −43%, CMF of 9 +19 −9 % and MMF of 18+45 −17%. The large histogram tails suggests for higher CMF and lower WMF, in agreement with the predictions of Madhusudhan e…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Photoevaporation simulation of the primordial H/He atmosphere for six exoplanets. The different curves represent various initial envelope mass fractions, as indicated in the legend. The vertical dashed line marks the estimated present age of the exoplanet system. The h…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

127 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Abdurro'uf et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ac4414 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJS..259...35A 259, 35

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac4414 2022

  2. [2]

    Agol E., et al., 2021, @doi [The Planetary Science Journal] 10.3847/PSJ/abd022 , 2, 1

    doi:10.3847/psj/abd022 2021

  3. [3]

    Akinsanmi B., et al., 2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 685, A63

    2024

  4. [4]

    J., Scott P., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ARA&A..47..481A 47, 481

    Asplund M., Grevesse N., Sauval A. J., Scott P., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ARA&A..47..481A 47, 481

    arXiv 2009

  5. [5]

    Barnes R., 2017, Celestial mechanics and dynamical astronomy, 129, 509

    2017

  6. [6]

    C., et al., 2022, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 657, A52

    Barros S. C., et al., 2022, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 657, A52

    2022

  7. [7]

    Baumeister P., Tosi N., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202346216 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...676A.106B 676, A106

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346216 2023

  8. [8]

    Baumeister P., Padovan S., Tosi N., Montavon G., Nettelmann N., MacKenzie J., Godolt M., 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 889, 42

    2020

Show all 127 references
  1. [9]

    Bayo A., Rodrigo C., Barrado Y Navascu \'e s D., Solano E., Guti \'e rrez R., Morales-Calder \'o n M., Allard F., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:200810395 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A

    2008 doi

  2. [10]

    C., Batygin K., 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 778, 100

    Becker J. C., Batygin K., 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 778, 100

    2013

  3. [11]

    Benneke B., et al., 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 887, L14

    2019

  4. [12]

    A., Huber D., Gaidos E., van Saders J

    Berger T. A., Huber D., Gaidos E., van Saders J. L., Weiss L. M., 2020, The Astronomical Journal, 160, 108

    2020

  5. [13]

    Bonfanti A., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202348180 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...682A..66B 682, A66

    2024 doi

  6. [14]

    Buder S., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab1242 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.506..150B 506, 150

    2021 doi

  7. [15]

    A., Matthews M

    Burns J. A., Matthews M. S., et al., 1986, Satellites. No. 77, University of Arizona Press

    1986

  8. [16]

    Cadieux C., et al., 2022, The Astronomical Journal, 164, 96

    2022

  9. [17]

    Cadieux C., et al., 2024, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 960, L3

    2024

  10. [18]

    C., et al., 2016, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.1612.05560 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016arXiv161205560C p

    Chambers K. C., et al., 2016, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.1612.05560 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016arXiv161205560C p. arXiv:1612.05560

    2016 doi arXiv

  11. [19]

    D., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...823..102C 823, 102

    Choi J., Dotter A., Conroy C., Cantiello M., Paxton B., Johnson B. D., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...823..102C 823, 102

    2016 doi

  12. [20]

    Cloutier R., Menou K., 2020, The Astronomical Journal, 159, 211

    2020

  13. [21]

    Cloutier R., et al., 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 527, 5464

    2024

  14. [22]

    S., 2020, Astrobiology: understanding life in the universe

    Cockell C. S., 2020, Astrobiology: understanding life in the universe. John Wiley & Sons

    2020

  15. [23]

    S., et al., 2016, Astrobiology, 16, 89

    Cockell C. S., et al., 2016, Astrobiology, 16, 89

    2016

  16. [24]

    Constantinou S., Madhusudhan N., 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 514, 2073

    2022

  17. [25]

    J., et al., 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 883, L16

    Crossfield I. J., et al., 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 883, L16

    2019

  18. [26]

    Csizmadia S., Hellard H., Smith A., 2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 623, A45

    2019

  19. [27]

    Damasceno Y., et al., 2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 689, A54

    2024

  20. [28]

    K., Perdelwitz V., Teklu J

    Daspute M., Wandel A., Kopparapu R. K., Perdelwitz V., Teklu J. T., Tal-Or L., 2025, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9ba9 , 979, 158

    2025 doi

  21. [29]

    J., et al., 2021, The Astronomical Journal, 161, 265

    David T. J., et al., 2021, The Astronomical Journal, 161, 265

    2021

  22. [30]

    Delrez L., et al., 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 475, 3577

    2018

  23. [31]

    O., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202038616 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...642A..49D 642, A49

    Demory B. O., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202038616 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...642A..49D 642, A49

    2020 doi

  24. [32]

    A., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature22055 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017Natur.544..333D 544, 333

    Dittmann J. A., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature22055 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017Natur.544..333D 544, 333

    2017 doi

  25. [33]

    J., Rozel A., 2018, Assessing the Interior Structure of Terrestrial Exoplanets with Implications for Habitability

    Dorn C., Bower D. J., Rozel A., 2018, Assessing the Interior Structure of Terrestrial Exoplanets with Implications for Habitability. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 3111--3135, @doi 10.1007/978-3-319-55333-7_66 , https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55333-7_66

    2018 doi

  26. [34]

    Dotter A., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0067-0049/222/1/8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJS..222....8D 222, 8

    2016 doi

  27. [35]

    D., et al., 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 800, 135

    Dressing C. D., et al., 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 800, 135

    2015

  28. [36]

    D., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ab2895 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019AJ....158...87D 158, 87

    Dressing C. D., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ab2895 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019AJ....158...87D 158, 87

    2019 doi

  29. [37]

    E., Barnes R., 2015, Astrobiology, 15, 739

    Driscoll P. E., Barnes R., 2015, Astrobiology, 15, 739

    2015

  30. [38]

    Edwards B., et al., 2020, The Astronomical Journal, 161, 44

    2020

  31. [39]

    J., King G

    Fern \'a ndez Fern \'a ndez J., Wheatley P. J., King G. W., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad1257 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.522.4251F 522, 4251

    2023 doi

  32. [40]

    Forget F., 2013, International Journal of Astrobiology, 12, 177

    2013

  33. [41]

    J., Nettelmann N., 2010, Space Science Reviews, 152, 423

    Fortney J. J., Nettelmann N., 2010, Space Science Reviews, 152, 423

    2010

  34. [42]

    J., Petigura E

    Fulton B. J., Petigura E. A., 2018, The Astronomical Journal, 156, 264

    2018

  35. [43]

    J., et al., 2017, The Astronomical Journal, 154, 109

    Fulton B. J., et al., 2017, The Astronomical Journal, 154, 109

    2017

  36. [44]

    Furesz G., 2008, PhD thesis, University of Szeged, Hungary

    2008

  37. [45]

    Gaia Collaboration et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201629272 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A&A...595A...1G 595, A1

    2016 doi

  38. [46]

    Gaia Collaboration et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...674A...1G 674, A1

    2023 doi

  39. [47]

    E., Sari R., 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 476, 759

    Ginzburg S., Schlichting H. E., Sari R., 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 476, 759

    2018

  40. [48]

    D., Nicholson P., Rand R., 1996, Icarus, 122, 166

    Gladman B., Quinn D. D., Nicholson P., Rand R., 1996, Icarus, 122, 166

    1996

  41. [49]

    J., 1993, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993A&A...271..587G 271, 587

    Grevesse N., Noels A., Sauval A. J., 1993, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993A&A...271..587G 271, 587

    1993

  42. [50]

    L., et al., 2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 613, A68

    Grimm S. L., et al., 2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 613, A68

    2018

  43. [51]

    E., 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 487, 24

    Gupta A., Schlichting H. E., 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 487, 24

    2019

  44. [52]

    E., 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 493, 792

    Gupta A., Schlichting H. E., 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 493, 792

    2020

  45. [53]

    K., Zink J

    Hardegree-Ullman K. K., Zink J. K., Christiansen J. L., Dressing C. D., Ciardi D. R., Schlieder J. E., 2020, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 247, 28

    2020

  46. [54]

    H., 1978, Icarus, 33, 23

    Hart M. H., 1978, Icarus, 33, 23

    1978

  47. [55]

    Hellard H., Csizmadia S., Padovan S., Rauer H., Cabrera J., Sohl F., Spohn T., Breuer D., 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 878, 119

    2019

  48. [56]

    R., Burrows A., Verne W., 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 787, 173

    Howe A. R., Burrows A., Verne W., 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 787, 173

    2014

  49. [57]

    Huang S.-S., 1959, American scientist, 47, 397

    1959

  50. [58]

    Huang S.-S., 1960, Scientific American, 202, 55

    1960

  51. [59]

    F., 1988, Icarus, 74, 472

    Kasting J. F., 1988, Icarus, 74, 472

    1988

  52. [60]

    F., Toon O

    Kasting J. F., Toon O. B., Pollack J. B., 1988, Scientific American, 258, 90

    1988

  53. [61]

    F., Whitmire D

    Kasting J. F., Whitmire D. P., Reynolds R. T., 1993, Icarus, 101, 108

    1993

  54. [62]

    Kellermann C., Becker A., Redmer R., 2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 615, A39

    2018

  55. [63]

    M.-R., et al., 2018, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 130, 114401

    Kempton E. M.-R., et al., 2018, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 130, 114401

    2018

  56. [64]

    J., Angus R., Cruz K

    Kiman R., Schmidt S. J., Angus R., Cruz K. L., Faherty J. K., Rice E., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ab1753 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019AJ....157..231K 157, 231

    2019 doi

  57. [65]

    K., et al., 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 765, 131

    Kopparapu R. K., et al., 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 765, 131

    2013

  58. [66]

    Lambeck K., 1980, Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 85, 6397

    1980

  59. [67]

    J., Connors N

    Lee E. J., Connors N. J., 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 908, 32

    2021

  60. [68]

    J., Chiang E., Ormel C

    Lee E. J., Chiang E., Ormel C. W., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/797/2/95 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...797...95L 797, 95

    2014 doi

  61. [69]

    D., Fortney J

    Lopez E. D., Fortney J. J., 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 792, 1

    2014

  62. [70]

    D., Rice K., 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 479, 5303

    Lopez E. D., Rice K., 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 479, 5303

    2018

  63. [71]

    Love A. E. H., 1909, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Containing Papers of a Mathematical and Physical Character, 82, 73

    1909

  64. [72]

    Lozovsky M., Helled R., Dorn C., Venturini J., 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 866, 49

    2018

  65. [73]

    Luque R., et al., 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 642, A50

    2020

  66. [74]

    G., 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 487, 5062

    MacDonald M. G., 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 487, 5062

    2019

  67. [75]

    J., Madhusudhan N., 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 469, 1979

    MacDonald R. J., Madhusudhan N., 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 469, 1979

    2017

  68. [76]

    C., Welbanks L., Piette A

    Madhusudhan N., Nixon M. C., Welbanks L., Piette A. A., Booth R. A., 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 891, L7

    2020

  69. [77]

    Marfil E., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202141980 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...656A.162M 656, A162

    2021 doi

  70. [78]

    F., Cunha K., Ghezzi L., Smith V

    Martinez C. F., Cunha K., Ghezzi L., Smith V. V., 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 875, 29

    2019

  71. [79]

    E., 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 503, 5658

    Misener W., Schlichting H. E., 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 503, 5658

    2021

  72. [80]

    Mordasini C., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201935541 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...638A..52M 638, A52

    2020 doi

  73. [81]

    M \"u ller S., Baron J., Helled R., Bouchy F., Parc L., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202348690 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...686A.296M 686, A296

    2024 doi

  74. [82]

    A., Chiang E

    Murray-Clay R. A., Chiang E. I., Murray N., 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 693, 23

    2009

  75. [83]

    Noack L., Breuer D., 2013, Habitability of Other Planets and Satellites, pp 203--233

    2013

  76. [84]

    Noack L., Godolt M., von Paris P., Plesa A.-C., Stracke B., Breuer D., Rauer H., 2014, Planetary and Space Science, 98, 14

    2014

  77. [85]

    Noack L., Rivoldini A., Van Hoolst T., 2017, Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors, 269, 40

    2017

  78. [86]

    Nowak G., et al., 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 642, A173

    2020

  79. [87]

    Ojha L., Troncone B., Buffo J., Journaux B., McDonald G., 2022, Nature communications, 13, 7521

    2022

  80. [88]

    Oosterloo M., H \"o ning D., Kamp I., Van Der Tak F., 2021, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 649, A15

    2021

  81. [89]

    Orosei R., et al., 2018, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.aar7268 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018Sci...361..490O 361, 490

    2018 doi

  82. [90]

    E., Murray-Clay R., 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 480, 2206

    Owen J. E., Murray-Clay R., 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 480, 2206

    2018

  83. [91]

    E., Wu Y., 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 775, 105

    Owen J. E., Wu Y., 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 775, 105

    2013

  84. [92]

    E., Wu Y., 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 847, 29

    Owen J. E., Wu Y., 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 847, 29

    2017

  85. [93]

    Padovan S., Spohn T., Baumeister P., Tosi N., Breuer D., Csizmadia S., Hellard H., Sohl F., 2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 620, A178

    2018

  86. [94]

    M., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201935679 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...627A.161P 627, A161

    Passegger V. M., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201935679 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...627A.161P 627, A161

    2019 doi

  87. [95]

    S., et al., 2023, Nature, 617, 701

    Peterson M. S., et al., 2023, Nature, 617, 701

    2023

  88. [96]

    D., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab1167 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.504.5788R 504, 5788

    Rains A. D., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab1167 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.504.5788R 504, 5788

    2021 doi

  89. [97]

    S., Allard F., Rajpurohit S., Sharma R., Teixeira G

    Rajpurohit A. S., Allard F., Rajpurohit S., Sharma R., Teixeira G. D. C., Mousis O., Rajpurohit K., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201833500 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...620A.180R 620, A180

    2018 doi

  90. [98]

    N., Hawley S

    Reid I. N., Hawley S. L., Gizis J. E., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1086/117655 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995AJ....110.1838R 110, 1838

    1995 doi

  91. [99]

    N., et al., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/379173 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003AJ....126.3007R 126, 3007

    Reid I. N., et al., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/379173 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003AJ....126.3007R 126, 3007

    2003 doi

  92. [100]

    Ridden-Harper A., et al., 2023, The Astronomical Journal, 165, 170

    2023

  93. [101]

    A., 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 801, 41

    Rogers L. A., 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 801, 41

    2015

  94. [102]

    G., Schlichting H

    Rogers J. G., Schlichting H. E., Owen J. E., 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 947, L19

    2023

  95. [103]

    Sarkis P., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aac108 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018AJ....155..257S 155, 257

    2018 doi

  96. [104]

    D., Meusinger H., Jahrei H., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20053004 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005A&A...442..211S 442, 211

    Scholz R. D., Meusinger H., Jahrei H., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20053004 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005A&A...442..211S 442, 211

    2005 doi

  97. [105]

    Schweitzer A., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834965 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...625A..68S 625, A68

    2019 doi

  98. [106]

    Seidel J., Prinoth B., Knudstrup E., Hoeijmakers H., Zanazzi J., Albrecht S., 2023, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 678, A150

    2023

  99. [107]

    F., et al., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/498708 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006AJ....131.1163S 131, 1163

    Skrutskie M. F., et al., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/498708 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006AJ....131.1163S 131, 1163

    2006 doi

  100. [108]

    Sotin C., Grasset O., Mocquet A., 2007, Icarus, 191, 337

    2007

  101. [109]

    Stef \'a nsson G., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/abbe19 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020AJ....160..259S 160, 259

    2020 doi

  102. [110]

    J., Sasselov D., 2006, Icarus, 181, 545

    Valencia D., O'Connell R. J., Sasselov D., 2006, Icarus, 181, 545

    2006

  103. [111]

    D., O'Connell R

    Valencia D., Sasselov D. D., O'Connell R. J., 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 656, 545

    2007

  104. [112]

    S., Kjeldsen H., Owen J

    Van Eylen V., Agentoft C., Lundkvist M. S., Kjeldsen H., Owen J. E., Fulton B. J., Petigura E., Snellen I., 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 479, 4786

    2018

  105. [113]

    Van Hoolst T., Noack L., Rivoldini A., 2019, Advances in Physics: X, 4, 1630316

    2019

  106. [114]

    S., et al., 1994, HIRES: the high-resolution echelle spectrometer on the Keck 10-m Telescope

    Vogt S. S., et al., 1994, HIRES: the high-resolution echelle spectrometer on the Keck 10-m Telescope . p. 362, @doi 10.1117/12.176725

    1994 doi

  107. [115]

    Wandel A., 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 856, 165

    2018

  108. [116]

    Wandel A., 2023a, nature communications, 14, 2125

  109. [117]

    Wandel A., 2023b, The Astronomical Journal, 166, 222

  110. [118]

    S., Liu F., Ireland T

    Wang H. S., Liu F., Ireland T. R., Brasser R., Yong D., Lineweaver C. H., 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 482, 2222

    2019

  111. [119]

    pp 173--178

    Whitmire D., Reynolds R., Kasting J., 1991, in Bioastronomy: The Search for Extraterrestrial Life—The Exploration Broadens. pp 173--178

    1991

  112. [120]

    A., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aaa3e4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018AJ....155...84W 155, 84

    Wittenmyer R. A., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aaa3e4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018AJ....155...84W 155, 84

    2018 doi

  113. [121]

    L., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W 140, 1868

    Wright E. L., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W 140, 1868

    2010 doi

  114. [122]

    Yang J., et al., 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 826, 222

    2016

  115. [123]

    V., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.icarus.2004.02.008 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004Icar..170..167Y 170, 167

    Yelle R. V., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.icarus.2004.02.008 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004Icar..170..167Y 170, 167

    2004 doi

  116. [124]

    B., 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 837, 164

    Zeng L., Jacobsen S. B., 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 837, 164

    2017

  117. [125]

    D., Jacobsen S

    Zeng L., Sasselov D. D., Jacobsen S. B., 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 819, 127

    2016

  118. [126]

    Zeng L., et al., 2019, @doi [Proceedings of the National Academy of Science] 10.1073/pnas.1812905116 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019PNAS..116.9723Z 116, 9723

    2019 doi

  119. [127]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...

Pith tools

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