Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 81 references

Probing the Atmospheres of Young Long-Period Sub-Neptune Progenitors with ELT/ANDES

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This simulation study forecasts that ELT/ANDES high-resolution spectroscopy can detect H2O, H2S, and CO in the young sub-Neptune V1298 Tau b in under ten hours, and can separate sub-solar from super-solar C/O in TOI-451 c in about seventeen

desk verdict Solid injection-recovery forecast for ELT/ANDES on two young sub-Neptunes, but the abstract overstates the C/O claim and the static host-star assumption should worry anyone planning time. read the letter →

arxiv 2602.22830 v2 pith:IH3HLD4W submitted 2026-02-26 astro-ph.EP

Spandan Dash , Dwaipayan Dubey , Liton Majumdar This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords exoplanetatmosphereshigh-resolutioncross-correlationspectroscopyELT/ANDESsub-NeptuneprogenitorsV1298TaubTOI-451ctransmissiondetrendingalgorithms
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 tries to establish that high-resolution cross-correlation spectroscopy with the future ELT/ANDES instrument can reach young, long-period sub-Neptunes, not just hot Jupiters. Using fully simulated nights of YJH-band observations and injection-recovery tests, it claims that for V1298 Tau b, water, hydrogen sulfide, and carbon monoxide would be detected at more than 4-sigma in less than about ten hours (two nights), and that for TOI-451 c, roughly four nights would separate sub-solar and super-solar carbon-to-oxygen ratios from each other. The methodological claim is that including out-of-transit exposures and propagating the detrending operation onto the template spectrum before cross-correlation is necessary: without that step, orbital parameters shift or the signal disappears. A sympathetic reader would care because these are formative-stage planets whose atmospheres still record their formation and mass-loss history, and because the result defines the observing strategy needed to characterize them from the ground.

What carries the argument

The mechanism that carries the argument is the SVD+MLR detrending step inside the paper's pipeline, together with a reprocessing step: the saved detrending matrix is applied to the Doppler-shifted model template before cross-correlation, so the template suffers the same line attenuation and distortion as the injected signal. In long-period planets the planetary Doppler drift is slow, so the signal is easily absorbed into the first few singular vectors; out-of-transit exposures produce artifacts that, once reproduced in the template, actually increase the likelihood contrast at the correct orbital velocity. The observation simulator supplies the synthetic ANDES data, using PHOENIX stellar spe

What would settle it

Take one real night of high-resolution spectra of an active young star like V1298 Tau, inject a synthetic planetary transmission signal with a known rest velocity and Kp, and run the same SVD detrending-and-reprocessing pipeline with and without out-of-transit exposures: if the injected signal is not recovered at more than 4-sigma with correct orbital parameters whenever out-of-transit exposures are present, the central forecast fails. A cheaper pre-ANDES version would use archival CARMENES or ESPRESSO observations of a young active star with an injected Doppler-shifting template.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central claim is a sensitivity forecast: if the injected atmospheric models are right, the combination of ELT/ANDES and an SVD-based detrending pipeline will recover molecular signals in young long-period sub-Neptunes. For V1298 Tau b, whose model is anchored to HST, Spitzer, and JWST spectra, the forecast is more than 4-sigma detections of H2O, H2S, and CO within at most ten hours (two nights) in the cloud-free case, dropping to H2O alone when a 0.01-bar cloud deck is added. For TOI-451 c, a single 4.5-hour night makes sub-solar and super-solar C/O models detectable but not distinguishable; roughly 17-18 hours (four nights) are needed to tell them apart, while

Load-bearing premise

The forecast rests on treating the host star's spectrum as static and smooth and the telluric absorption as time-independent; V1298 Tau is actually a magnetically active pre-main-sequence star, so unmodeled starspots and rotation could shift stellar lines in ways that either mask the planetary signal or mimic it, and the paper itself notes the PHOENIX spectrum 'might not be the best fit.'

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Ground-based high-resolution spectroscopy can plausibly be extended from hot Jupiters to young sub-Neptunes on 10-20 day orbits once ELT/ANDES is online.
  • Observing proposals for long-period transiting planets should budget for out-of-transit exposures; a transit-only night can erase the signal completely.
  • Any future HRCCS analysis that uses SVD/SYSREM-style detrending should reprocess model templates through the detrending matrix, or reported orbital parameters and detection significances will be misleading.
  • Cloud decks change the detectable molecule set: with a 0.01-bar cloud deck, H2O remains detectable in V1298 Tau b but H2S and CO weaken below detection in the same time budget.
  • For TOI-451 c, sub-solar and super-solar C/O become distinguishable after about four nights, but a solar C/O atmosphere is not cleanly differentiated by this method alone.

Reading between the lines

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

  • My inference: if stellar activity on V1298 Tau produces Doppler-shifting line distortions, the predicted two-night budget may be optimistic; a testable extension is to repeat the injection-recovery with a time-variable stellar spectrum instead of a static PHOENIX model.
  • My inference: the same out-of-transit and reprocessing logic should apply to emission-phase observations during occultation, so the result could generalize to non-transiting long-period planets observed in thermal emission.
  • My inference: the difficulty with the solar C/O case hints that cross-correlation detection significance alone is not a reliable proxy for chemical abundance constraints; a full Bayesian retrieval on the same simulated nights might separate the scenarios earlier or reveal degeneracies.
  • My inference: because the paper uses a CARMENES CCD layout with coarser wavelength coverage, the true ANDES detections could be stronger than forecast; a direct test is to rerun the pipeline once the ANDES detector design and order format are finalized.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents simulated ELT/ANDES high-resolution cross-correlation spectroscopy (HRCCS) observations of two young, long-period sub-Neptunes, V1298 Tau b and TOI-451 c, using the Ratri observation simulator and the Upamana SVD+MLR detrending and CCF-to-likelihood analysis framework. Atmospheric structures and disequilibrium chemistry are computed with petitCODE/VULCAN, and high-resolution transmission spectra are generated with petitRADTRANS and injected into synthetic YJH-band nights. The central methodological claim is that including out-of-transit exposures improves detectability only if the detrending operation is also applied to the template models before cross-correlation; without this reprocessing, recovered orbital parameters can be biased or the signal can be lost. For V1298 Tau b, the authors report possible >4–5σ detections of H2O, H2S, and CO in ~10 hours (two nights) in a cloud-free scenario, with H2O alone surviving in the cloudy case. For TOI-451 c, they find that one 4.5-hour night can detect sub-solar and super-solar C/O scenarios, but that differentiating these cases requires roughly 18 hours (four nights), while the solar C/O case remains non-differentiable. The paper frames these as feasibility forecasts, not empirical detections.

Significance. If the forecast holds, the paper gives concrete guidance for ELT/ANDES observing programs: out-of-transit exposures and template reprocessing are necessary for long-period sub-Neptunes, and a few nights of YJH spectroscopy could measure molecular abundances in objects that are otherwise accessible only to JWST. The pipeline is internally consistent, the comparison between reprocessed and non-reprocessed templates is clean, and the use of HST/Spitzer/JWST-informed models for V1298 Tau b is a strength. The result is nevertheless a self-recovery injection test: the injected signals are generated with the same forward models used as templates, so the quoted significances are sensitivity forecasts conditional on the atmospheric and stellar assumptions. The most serious limitations are the static PHOENIX host star for an active T-Tauri target, the ad hoc SVD truncation, and the un-simulated extrapolation from one night to four/five nights for the C/O differentiation claim. These issues make the headline numbers less robust than the text suggests.

major comments (4)
  1. [§3.1.1, Fig. 4, Table 1] The V1298 Tau b detection budgets assume a spectroscopically inert host star. Ratri uses a single PHOENIX spectrum, and §3.1.1 concedes that “this host star is a pre-main sequence star, so the PHOENIX spectrum might not be the best fit.” V1298 Tau is a <30 Myr active T-Tauri star with rotation period 2.91 d (Table 1). Spots, faculae, and rotational modulation produce time-dependent stellar line-profile variability that is absent from the simulated flux cuboids, while the planetary transmission features in Fig. 4 are only ~100–200 ppm. The time-domain SVD detrending (§2.4.2) can either absorb such variability into the removed modes (eroding the planetary signal) or leave Doppler-shifting residuals that the v_rest–K_P search could misattribute. The >4–5σ budgets and recovered K_P values are therefore conditional on a spectroscopically inert host; a spot/faculae simulation or activity-scali
  2. [§3.2.3, Fig. 11, abstract, Conclusions] The abstract states that “distinguishing sub-solar and solar from super-solar C/O requires ~17 hours,” but the paper’s own model-selection test does not support inclusion of the solar case. Fig. 11 (right) shows that the solar C/O model remains non-differentiable even after scaling to four/five nights, and §3.2.3 explicitly says “the solar case cannot be differentiated at all.” The Conclusions correctly restrict the 18-hour statement to sub-solar versus super-solar. The abstract therefore overstates the result. In addition, the four/five-night projection is obtained by scaling one night’s log(L) matrix (§3.2.3: “scaled up the log(L) matrix by the number of nights”), not by simulating independent nights; this assumes identical noise, airmass, telluric, and barycentric realizations for each night. Simulated multi-night co-adds are needed before the 17/18-hour claim can be considered robust
  3. [§2.4.2, §3.1.2, §3.2.3] The SVD truncation rank k is a free parameter, and the choice is explicitly ad hoc: k = 4 for V1298 Tau b is said to be “not based on any injection-retrieval studies,” and k = 8 is used for TOI-451 c with no stated justification. The paper reports partial robustness for V1298 Tau b (“detections can be found ... until at least k = 10”) but does not scan k for TOI-451 c. Since the entire study is about how SVD detrending affects signal recovery, the significance levels in Figs. 7–11 are conditional on this choice. A k-sensitivity analysis or an objective selection criterion should be provided, otherwise the reported detection significances and the comparison across nights/scenarios are not fully trustworthy.
  4. [§2.3] The ANDES simulations are performed using the CARMENES CCD layout as a proxy: 28 spectral orders, 4096 pixels per order, a CARMENES read-out time of 34 s, and H-band coverage only to 1.7 µm instead of the ANDES 1.8 µm. The paper states that this makes the results conservative, but that claim is asserted rather than demonstrated. ANDES is expected to have roughly twice the number of orders, and denser order coverage could change the CCF line statistics and the SVD detrending behavior. Given that the title and abstract make quantitative claims about ELT/ANDES, the instrument approximation is load-bearing for the quoted significances. At least a targeted discussion, or a mock-order sensitivity test, is required to justify the “conservative” terminology.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract in the full text states “>5σ” detections for V1298 Tau b, while the arXiv abstract supplied with the manuscript states “>4σ.” The number should be standardized, and the final significance for CO (described in §3.1.2 as ~4–5σ) should be reported consistently.
  2. [Fig. 11, §3.2.3, Conclusions] There is a numerical inconsistency: the text says “co-adding 5 similar nights,” the Fig. 11 caption says “4 nights,” and the Conclusions say “at least 18 hours i.e. 4 nights.” If Night 1 is 4.5 hours, five nights would be 22.5 hours, not 18 hours. Please align the text, caption, and conclusions.
  3. [§2.1 and §2.2] The treatment of aerosols for V1298 Tau b is presented inconsistently. §2.1 states that a cloud-free atmosphere is supported by HST/WFC3 showing “no detectable aerosol opacity,” while §2.2 introduces a gray cloud deck at 0.01 bar “indicated from JWST observations in Barat et al. (2025).” It should be clarified whether the cloudy case is observationally motivated or is an idealized test scenario.
  4. [§2.1, §2.2, §2.3] Minor typographical issues: “metallciity” should be “metallicity”; “SCO” in Fig. 3 and §2.2 should be “OCS” (carbonyl sulfide); “read-out noise (ROD)” should be “read-out noise (RON).” Also, the reference to the ANDES ETC in the caption of Fig. A.1 uses Palle et al. 2025b while the text cites Palle et al. 2025a; please check which publication contains the ETC description.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: injection-recovery sensitivity forecasts with independently anchored models.

full rationale

The paper is a simulation/forecast study, not an empirical detection claim. Its derivation chain is: (1) construct forward-model transmission spectra with petitCODE/VULCAN/petitRADTRANS, (2) inject them into synthetic YJH-band ANDES observations generated with Ratri, and (3) recover them with the Upamana SVD+MLR/CCF pipeline. Using the same forward-model code to make both the injected signal and the cross-correlation template is the standard and appropriate way to measure pipeline sensitivity; it is not a hidden reduction of a prediction to a fit, because no parameters are fitted to the simulated data and the paper explicitly frames the outcome as a detectability forecast ('we simulate... and analyze them'), not as a detection of real molecules. For V1298 Tau b, the atmospheric model is independently anchored to HST/Spitzer/JWST constraints (Barat et al. 2024, 2025), and Ratri is benchmarked against the ANDES-ETC in Appendix A. The methodological claims about the need for out-of-transit exposures and template reprocessing are demonstrated by controlled comparisons within the same simulated nights, so references to the authors' prior pipeline papers (Dash et al. 2024, 2025) are not load-bearing self-citations. The paper also flags its own key limitations—the static PHOENIX host-star approximation for the active T-Tauri star V1298 Tau and the still-unfinalized ANDES CCD configuration—which are correctness risks, not evidence of circularity. One internal inconsistency exists: the abstract states TOI-451 c solar C/O can be distinguished from super-solar, whereas Fig. 11 and the text conclude the solar case remains non-differentiable; this is a reporting inconsistency affecting interpretability of the headline, but it does not make the derivation circular. Overall, the work is self-contained as a sensitivity study and no step reduces by construction to its own inputs.

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

The central claims rest on the authors' own forward-modeling and detrending pipeline chain (petitCODE/VULCAN/petitRADTRANS -> Ratri -> Upamana). No new physical entities are introduced. The free parameters listed are all choices that directly affect the predicted significances. The most load-bearing is the assumed atmospheric chemistry and cloud state: for V1298 Tau b it is externally anchored to HST/JWST, but for TOI-451 c it is purely assumed, so the C/O differentiation claim is a sensitivity forecast, not a measurement.

free parameters (6)
  • SVD rank k = 4 (V1298 Tau b), 8 (TOI-451 c)
    Chosen ad hoc; the authors state 'This is an ad-hoc choice and not based on any injection-retrieval studies' (Section 3.1.2). Detection significances and recovered orbital constraints depend on this detrending depth.
  • Precipitable water vapour (PWV) = 2.5 mm (V1298 Nights 1-2), 3.5 mm (Night 3)
    Drawn from CARMENES 'good night' parameters in Ratri; authors note ELT site is drier, so values are upper limits (Section 3.1.1). Higher telluric absorption increases detrending burden.
  • Cloud/haze prescription (cloudy case) = Gray deck at 0.01 bar; Rayleigh scattering x10 for haze
    For V1298 Tau b cloudy case; 0.01 bar deck is motivated by JWST (Barat et al. 2025) but the haze enhancement factor of 10 is hand-set in Section 2.2. Cloud altitude/haze strength strongly controls H2S/CO detectability.
  • Internal temperature T_int = 500 K for both planets
    Assumed in Section 2.1 to compute PT structures; affects scale heights and line depths. For V1298 it follows the Barat et al. (2025) retrieval framework, but for TOI-451 c it is unconstrained.
  • Eddy diffusion coefficient Kzz = 10^7 cm2 s^-1 (both planets)
    Set following Barat et al. (2025) in Section 2.1; vertical mixing directly changes disequilibrium abundances of H2O, CO, CH4, H2S.
  • C/O ratio scenarios for TOI-451 c = 0.22, 0.55, 0.80 at solar metallicity
    No atmospheric observations for TOI-451 c; these three values are assumed (Section 2.1). All hour-budget and differentiability claims for this planet are conditional on this grid.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The injected atmospheric forward model (petitCODE+VULCAN+petitRADTRANS) is a faithful representation of the true planetary transmission spectrum.
    Everything follows from injecting this model; for V1298 it is anchored to HST/JWST/Spitzer retrievals (Barat et al. 2024, 2025), but for TOI-451 c it is unconstrained (Section 2.1). Incorrect chemistry or clouds would change all significance and hour estimates.
  • domain assumption Time-domain SVD+MLR detrending removes telluric/stellar/systematic contributions while preserving the Doppler-shifted planet signal, and template reprocessing fully accounts for detrending's imprint on the signal.
    Central pipeline assumption in Section 2.4.2 and Section 3.1.2. The paper itself shows this fails for Night 1 (no detection) and is imperfect for the solar C/O case, so it is only partially satisfied.
  • standard math The likelihood-ratio statistic follows Wilks' theorem with 2 or 3 degrees of freedom on the v_rest-KP grid.
    Used to convert log(L) maps into sigma detections (Section 2.4.3). Residuals are correlated after detrending and the grid is oversampled; Wilks' conditions may not hold, although the authors do use a likelihood framework to avoid S/N oversampling bias.
  • domain assumption Telluric transmission and the stellar spectrum are static during each night.
    Ratri uses a static PHOENIX stellar model and time-independent telluric spectra (Sections 2.3 and 3.1.1). V1298 Tau is an active pre-main-sequence star; unmodeled spots and variability could mimic or erode the injected planetary signal.
  • domain assumption The ANDES instrument can be approximated by the CARMENES CCD order/pixel layout with ANDES throughputs.
    Section 2.3: efficiencies interpolated onto CARMENES YJH CCD config. The paper argues this is conservative, but the number and width of spectral orders affect the CCF and SNR.
  • domain assumption Scale factor S=1 for the cross-correlated template.
    Assumed throughout after a single test retrieval finds log(S) near 0 (Section 2.4.3, Fig. B.1).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Probing the Atmospheres of Young Long-Period Sub-Neptune Progenitors with ELT/ANDES." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IH3HLD4W

@misc{pith2026260222830,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Probing the Atmospheres of Young Long-Period Sub-Neptune Progenitors with ELT/ANDES},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IH3HLD4W}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2602.22830}
}
abstract

High-resolution cross-correlation spectroscopy (HRCCS) has become a powerful ground-based technique for detecting and characterizing exoplanet atmospheres. While highly successful for ultra-hot and hot Jupiters, next-generation facilities such as ELT/ANDES will observe smaller and longer-period planets, including young sub-Neptunes and their progenitors. We investigate whether HRCCS with ELT/ANDES can robustly recover orbital parameters and atmospheric signals for the long-period sub-Neptunes V1298 Tau b and TOI-451 c. In long-period systems, the slow Doppler drift during a single night limits separation between planetary and telluric signals, increasing the risk of signal loss during detrending. We therefore quantify the impact of including out-of-transit exposures on signal recovery and parameter estimation. We simulate YJH-band transmission observations using the \texttt{Ratri} pipeline and analyze them with the HRCCS detrending and cross-correlation framework \texttt{Upamana}. For V1298 Tau b, injected atmospheric models are consistent with HST, Spitzer, and JWST constraints. For TOI-451 c, we explore sub-solar to super-solar C/O ratios to test compositional sensitivity. Incorporating out-of-transit exposures significantly improves detectability, provided detrending effects are consistently propagated to the template spectra prior to cross-correlation. Without this step, orbital parameters can deviate from injected values and detection significance decreases. For V1298 Tau b, $>4\sigma$ detections of H$_2$O, H$_2$S, and CO are achievable at $\lesssim$10 hours (minimum 2 nights, cloud-free scenario). For TOI-451 c, distinguishing sub-solar and solar from super-solar C/O requires $\sim$17 hours (minimum 4 nights). HRCCS with ELT/ANDES will therefore be a key tool for atmospheric characterization of young, long-period sub-Neptunes in the ELT era.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.22830 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overview of the modeling and analysis workflow used in this study. The Chemistry module (top) combines elemental [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Comparison of the ultraviolet stellar flux spec [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Vertical chemical abundance profiles for the dominant molecular species in the atmospheres of V1298 Tau b (top panel) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: High-resolution transmission spectra simulated for V1298 Tau b and TOI-451 c at the resolving power of ELT/ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The variation of airmass versus exoplanet orbital phase in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Exoplanet orbital trace plots for the cloud-free case of V1298 Tau b for (top row) the optimistic detrending scenario and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Recovery of an injected signal for the cloud-free case of V1298 Tau b on a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Recovery of an injected signal for the cloud-free case of V1298 Tau b on a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Recovery of an injected signal of V1298 Tau b by combining the data from Nights 2 and 3 on a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Recovery of an injected signal of TOI-451 c corresponding to di [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Grid-based model selection plots for the case of TOI-451 c. 1 night of synthetic data (left panel) is not enough to di [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

81 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    M., et al

    Barat, S., Désert, J.-M., Goyal, J. M., et al. 2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 692, A198

    2024

  2. [2]

    2025, The Astronomical Journal, 170, 165

    Barat, S., Désert, J.-M., Mukherjee, S., et al. 2025, The Astronomical Journal, 170, 165

    2025

  3. [3]

    2024, Astronomy & Astro- physics, 686, A127

    Basilicata, M., Giacobbe, P., Bonomo, A., et al. 2024, Astronomy & Astro- physics, 686, A127

    2024

  4. [4]

    2014, As- tronomy & Astrophysics, 564, A46

    Bertaux, J.-L., Lallement, R., Ferron, S., Boonne, C., & Bodichon, R. 2014, As- tronomy & Astrophysics, 564, A46

    2014

  5. [5]

    2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 436, L35

    Birkby, J., De Kok, R., Brogi, M., et al. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 436, L35

    2013

  6. [6]

    2002, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 390, 779

    Borysow, A. 2002, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 390, 779

    2002

  7. [7]

    & Frommhold, L

    Borysow, A. & Frommhold, L. 1989, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004- 637X), vol. 341, June 1, 1989, p. 549-555., 341, 549

    1989

  8. [8]

    1989, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol

    Borysow, A., Frommhold, L., & Moraldi, M. 1989, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol. 336, Jan. 1, 1989, p. 495-503., 336, 495

    1989

Show all 81 references
  1. [9]

    1988, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol

    Borysow, J., Frommhold, L., & Birnbaum, G. 1988, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol. 326, March 1, 1988, p. 509-515. NASA-supported research., 326, 509

    1988

  2. [10]

    2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 522, 5062

    Boucher, A., Lafreniére, D., Pelletier, S., et al. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 522, 5062

    2023

  3. [11]

    A., Qu, Q., McKemmish, L

    Bowesman, C. A., Qu, Q., McKemmish, L. K., Yurchenko, S. N., & Tennyson, J. 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 529, 1321

    2024

  4. [12]

    2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 817, 106

    Brogi, M., De Kok, R., Albrecht, S., et al. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 817, 106

    2016

  5. [13]

    2014, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 565, A124

    Brogi, M., De Kok, R., Birkby, J., Schwarz, H., & Snellen, I. 2014, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 565, A124

    2014

  6. [14]

    & Line, M

    Brogi, M. & Line, M. R. 2019, The Astronomical Journal, 157, 114

    2019

  7. [15]

    A., De Kok, R

    Brogi, M., Snellen, I. A., De Kok, R. J., et al. 2012, Nature, 486, 502

    2012

  8. [16]

    H., Madhusudhan, N., Hawker, G

    Cabot, S. H., Madhusudhan, N., Hawker, G. A., & Gandhi, S. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 482, 4422

    2019

  9. [17]

    Cheverall, C. J. & Madhusudhan, N. 2024, The Astronomical Journal, 167, 272

    2024

  10. [18]

    2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal As- tronomical Society, 530, 3100

    Dash, S., Brogi, M., Gandhi, S., et al. 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal As- tronomical Society, 530, 3100

    2024

  11. [19]

    L., et al

    Dash, S., Brogi, M., Seidler, F. L., et al. 2025, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 538, 3042

    2025

  12. [20]

    J., Petigura, E

    David, T. J., Petigura, E. A., Luger, R., et al. 2019b, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 885, L12 De Kok, R. J., Brogi, M., Snellen, I. A., et al. 2013, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 554, A82

    2013

  13. [21]

    K., De Mooij, E

    Deibert, E. K., De Mooij, E. J., Jayawardhana, R., et al. 2021, The Astronomical Journal, 161, 209

    2021

  14. [22]

    2023, Astronomy & Astro- physics, 678, A53

    Dubey, D., Grübel, F., Arenales-Lope, R., et al. 2023, Astronomy & Astro- physics, 678, A53

    2023

  15. [23]

    & Majumdar, L

    Dubey, D. & Majumdar, L. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 972, 165

    2024

  16. [24]

    2025, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 278, 19

    Dubey, D., Majumdar, L., Beichman, C., et al. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 278, 19

    2025

  17. [25]

    M., Cauley, P

    Duvvuri, G. M., Cauley, P. W., Aguirre, F. C., et al. 2023, The Astronomical Journal, 166, 196

    2023

  18. [26]

    2012, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 547, A18

    Ehrenreich, D., Bourrier, V ., Bonfils, X., et al. 2012, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 547, A18

    2012

  19. [27]

    J., De Mooij, E

    Esteves, L. J., De Mooij, E. J., Jayawardhana, R., Watson, C., & De Kok, R. J. 2017, The Astronomical Journal, 153, 268

    2017

  20. [28]

    2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 526, 4627

    Finociety, B., Donati, J.-F., Cristofari, P., et al. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 526, 4627

    2023

  21. [29]

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

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 125, 306

    2013

  22. [30]

    2019, The Astronomical Journal, 158, 228

    Gandhi, S., Madhusudhan, N., Hawker, G., & Piette, A. 2019, The Astronomical Journal, 158, 228

    2019

  23. [31]

    P., Merritt, S., Nugroho, S

    Gibson, N. P., Merritt, S., Nugroho, S. K., et al. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 493, 2215 Article number, page 17 of 21 A&A proofs:manuscript no. aanda

    2020

  24. [32]

    P., Nugroho, S

    Gibson, N. P., Nugroho, S. K., Lothringer, J., Maguire, C., & Sing, D. K. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 512, 4618

    2022

  25. [33]

    E., Rothman, L

    Gordon, I. E., Rothman, L. S., Hargreaves, e. R., et al. 2022, Journal of quanti- tative spectroscopy and radiative transfer, 277, 107949

    2022

  26. [34]

    A., Landman, R., Picos, D

    Grasser, N., Snellen, I. A., Landman, R., Picos, D. G., & Gandhi, S. 2024, As- tronomy & Astrophysics, 688, A191

    2024

  27. [35]

    Gray, D. F. 2008, The Observation and Analysis of Stellar Photospheres

    2008

  28. [36]

    A., Madhusudhan, N., Cabot, S

    Hawker, G. A., Madhusudhan, N., Cabot, S. H., & Gandhi, S. 2018, The Astro- physical Journal Letters, 863, L11

    2018

  29. [37]

    2013, Astronomy & As- trophysics, 553, A6

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

    2013

  30. [38]

    J., Jayawardhana, R., et al

    Jindal, A., de Mooij, E. J., Jayawardhana, R., et al. 2020, The Astronomical Journal, 160, 101

    2020

  31. [39]

    2013, Astron- omy & Astrophysics, 560, A91

    Jones, A., Noll, S., Kausch, W., Szyszka, C., & Kimeswenger, S. 2013, Astron- omy & Astrophysics, 560, A91

    2013

  32. [40]

    L., Line, M

    Kasper, D., Bean, J. L., Line, M. R., et al. 2022, The Astronomical Journal, 165, 7

    2022

  33. [41]

    2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

    Keles, E., Mallonn, M., Kitzmann, D., et al. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

    2022

  34. [42]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal Sup- plement Series, 265, 4

    Kokori, A., Tsiaras, A., Edwards, B., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Sup- plement Series, 265, 4

    2023

  35. [43]

    A., Fossati, L., & Farrell, E

    Kubyshkina, D., Vidotto, A. A., Fossati, L., & Farrell, E. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 499, 77

    2020

  36. [44]

    2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 521, 1233

    Lafarga, M., Brogi, M., Gandhi, S., et al. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 521, 1233

    2023

  37. [45]

    C., Johnson, J

    Lockwood, A. C., Johnson, J. A., Bender, C. F., et al. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 783, L29

    2014

  38. [46]

    2018, The Astronomical Journal, 156, 271

    Luhman, K. 2018, The Astronomical Journal, 156, 271

    2018

  39. [47]

    2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 758, 36

    Madhusudhan, N. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 758, 36

    2012

  40. [48]

    K., Masseron, T., Hoeijmakers, H

    McKemmish, L. K., Masseron, T., Hoeijmakers, H. J., et al. 2019, Monthly No- tices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 488, 2836

    2019

  41. [49]

    Meech, A., Aigrain, S., Brogi, M., & Birkby, J. L. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 512, 2604

    2022

  42. [50]

    2019, The Astrophysical Jour- nal, 883, 194 Mollière, P., Stolker, T., Lacour, S., et al

    Molaverdikhani, K., Henning, T., & Mollière, P. 2019, The Astrophysical Jour- nal, 883, 194 Mollière, P., Stolker, T., Lacour, S., et al. 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 640, A131 Mollière, P., van Boekel, R., Dullemond, C., Henning, T., & Mordasini, C. 2015, The Astrophysical...

    2019

  43. [51]

    M., Tollerud, E., Sip ˝ocz, B., et al

    Morris, B. M., Tollerud, E., Sip ˝ocz, B., et al. 2018, The Astronomical Journal, 155, 128

    2018

  44. [52]

    2024, The Journal of Open Source Soft- ware, 9, 5875

    Nasedkin, E., Mollière, P., & Blain, D. 2024, The Journal of Open Source Soft- ware, 9, 5875

    2024

  45. [53]

    R., Mann, A

    Newton, E. R., Mann, A. W., Kraus, A. L., et al. 2021, The Astronomical Journal, 161, 65

    2021

  46. [54]

    Ng, K.-C. 1974, J. Chem. Phys., 61, 2680

    1974

  47. [55]

    2012, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 543, A92

    Noll, S., Kausch, W., Barden, M., et al. 2012, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 543, A92

    2012

  48. [56]

    2017, VizieR Online Data Catalog, 515, J

    Oh, S., Price-Whelan, A., Hogg, D., Morton, T., & Spergel, D. 2017, VizieR Online Data Catalog, 515, J

    2017

  49. [57]

    L., Auer, L., & Buchler, J

    Olson, G. L., Auer, L., & Buchler, J. R. 1986, Journal of Quantitative Spec- troscopy and Radiative Transfer, 35, 431

    1986

  50. [58]

    Owen, J. E. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 498, 5030

    2020

  51. [59]

    T., Mendonça, J

    Parker, L. T., Mendonça, J. M., Diamond-Lowe, H., et al. 2025, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 538, 3263 Peláez-Torres, A., Sánchez-López, A., Nortmann, L., et al. 2025, Tighter con- straints on the atmosphere of GJ 436 b from combined high-resolution CARMEN...

    2025

  52. [60]

    1998, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 110, 863

    Pickles, A. 1998, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 110, 863

    1998

  53. [61]

    2022, A&A, 668, A176

    Pino, L., Brogi, M., Désert, J., et al. 2022, A&A, 668, A176

    2022

  54. [62]

    1995, Astron- omy and Astrophysics Supplement, v

    Piskunov, N., Kupka, F., Ryabchikova, T., Weiss, W., & Jeffery, C. 1995, Astron- omy and Astrophysics Supplement, v. 112, p. 525, 112, 525

    1995

  55. [63]

    C., Currie, M

    Rasmussen, K. C., Currie, M. H., Hagee, C., et al. 2023, The Astronomical Jour- nal, 166, 155

    2023

  56. [64]

    E., Rothman, L

    Richard, C., Gordon, I. E., Rothman, L. S., et al. 2012, Journal of Quantitative Spectroscopy and Radiative Transfer, 113, 1276

    2012

  57. [65]

    K., Flagg, L., et al

    Ridden-Harper, A., Nugroho, S. K., Flagg, L., et al. 2023, The Astronomical Journal, 165, 170

    2023

  58. [66]

    2016, Astronomy & Astro- physics, 593, A129

    Ridden-Harper, A., Snellen, I., Keller, C., et al. 2016, Astronomy & Astro- physics, 593, A129

    2016

  59. [67]

    2012, The Astrophysical Journal Let- ters, 753, L25 Sánchez, S

    Rodler, F., Lopez-Morales, M., & Ribas, I. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal Let- ters, 753, L25 Sánchez, S. F., Aceituno, J., Thiele, U., Pérez-Ramírez, D., & Alves, J. 2007, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 119, 1186 Sánchez-López, A. & Millán, A. P. 20...

    2012 arXiv

  60. [68]

    C., Martins, A

    Sanna, N., Martins, B. C., Martins, A. d. M., et al. 2024, in Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy X, V ol. 13096, SPIE, 1299–1305

    2024

  61. [69]

    C., Line, M

    Smith, P. C., Line, M. R., Bean, J. L., et al. 2024, The Astronomical Journal, 167, 110

    2024

  62. [70]

    A., De Kok, R

    Snellen, I. A., De Kok, R. J., De Mooij, E. J., & Albrecht, S. 2010, Nature, 465, 1049

    2010

  63. [71]

    F., Tennyson, J., & Yurchenko, S

    Sousa-Silva, C., Al-Refaie, A. F., Tennyson, J., & Yurchenko, S. N. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 446, 2337

    2015

  64. [72]

    G., Oelkers, R

    Stassun, K. G., Oelkers, R. J., Paegert, M., et al. 2019, The Astronomical Journal, 158, 138

    2019

  65. [73]

    W., Kitzmann, D., Patzer, A

    Stock, J. W., Kitzmann, D., Patzer, A. B. C., & Sedlmayr, E. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 479, 865

    2018

  66. [74]

    R., et al

    Tabernero, H., Allende Prieto, C., Zapatero Osorio, M. R., et al. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 498, 4222

    2020

  67. [75]

    P., Fortney, J

    Thorngren, D. P., Fortney, J. J., Murray-Clay, R. A., & Lopez, E. D. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 831, 64

    2016

  68. [76]

    R., Grosheintz, L., et al

    Tsai, S.-M., Lyons, J. R., Grosheintz, L., et al. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 228, 20

    2017

  69. [77]

    2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 923, 264

    Tsai, S.-M., Malik, M., Kitzmann, D., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 923, 264

    2021

  70. [78]

    X., et al

    Vach, S., Zhou, G., Huang, C. X., et al. 2024, The Astronomical Journal, 167, 210

    2024

  71. [79]

    Wilks, S. S. 1938, The annals of mathematical statistics, 9, 60

    1938

  72. [80]

    2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 614, A1

    Woitke, P., Helling, C., Hunter, G., et al. 2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 614, A1

    2018

  73. [81]

    A., Wang, L., et al

    Zhang, M., Knutson, H. A., Wang, L., et al. 2021, The Astronomical Journal, 161, 181 Article number, page 18 of 21 Spandan Dash et al.: Prospects for ground-based HRCCS using ANDES for long-period sub-Neptunes Fig. A.1: The SNR/resolution element across all possible bands for ...

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.