pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.20203 · v2 · submitted 2026-04-22 · 🌌 astro-ph.EP

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Sub-Neptunes Show a Stronger Correlation with Cold Jupiters than Super-Earths Especially in Metal-rich Systems

Di-Chang Chen , Fei Dai , Bo Ma , Shang-Fei Liu , Cong Yu
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-12 03:50 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.EP
keywords exoplanetssub-Neptunessuper-Earthscold Jupitersstellar metallicityradius valleyoccurrence ratesplanet formation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Inner sub-Neptunes correlate with cold Jupiters around metal-rich stars at 99.95 percent , unlike super-Earths.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper computes the conditional frequency of cold Jupiters in systems that contain only inner sub-Neptunes versus only inner super-Earths, split by whether the host star is metal-rich. Around metal-rich transiting stars the probability reaches 42.6 percent for sub-Neptune systems but only 14.5 percent for super-Earth systems, compared with the field rate of 14.3 percent. This produces a statistically significant positive correlation solely for the sub-Neptune population. The same pattern appears in a homogeneous Kepler-Keck subsample and in radial-velocity detections of massive inner planets. The authors attribute the difference to metal-rich disks forming both outer cold Jupiters and larger-radius inner planets more efficiently.

Core claim

Around transiting metal-rich stars, P(CJ|SN, [Fe/H]>0) equals 42.6^{+10.6}_{-9.9} percent while P(CJ|SE, [Fe/H]>0) equals 14.5^{+12.7}_{-6.9} percent; the former exceeds the field giant frequency and yields a positive correlation at 99.95 percent , whereas the latter matches the field rate and shows no correlation. A homogeneous Kepler-Keck subsample and radial-velocity data for massive inner planets reproduce the same contrast. Metal-rich disks are expected to produce both outer cold Jupiters and inner planets with larger radii and masses more efficiently.

What carries the argument

Conditional occurrence rates P(CJ|SN) and P(CJ|SE) of cold Jupiters given only inner sub-Neptunes or only super-Earths, evaluated separately for stars with [Fe/H] greater than zero.

If this is right

  • Metal-rich systems with inner sub-Neptunes host cold Jupiters at roughly three times the rate of super-Earth systems.
  • Stellar metallicity shapes the joint occurrence of outer cold Jupiters and larger inner planets.
  • The radius valley separates populations whose outer companions follow different statistical relations.
  • The contrast persists in a homogeneous Kepler-Keck subsample and in radial-velocity detections of massive inner planets.
  • Metal-rich disks form both cold Jupiters and inner planets above the valley more efficiently than metal-poor disks.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Planet-formation models should tie the efficiency of both inner sub-Neptune growth and outer giant formation to the same disk metallicity parameter.
  • Targeted radial-velocity monitoring of known sub-Neptunes around metal-rich stars offers a higher-yield search strategy for cold Jupiters than blind surveys.
  • The lack of correlation for super-Earths may indicate that they form after the disk has lost much of its solid material, reducing the chance of giant-planet formation.
  • Extending the same conditional-probability test to stars with [Fe/H] below zero could reveal whether the correlation reverses or disappears at low metallicity.

Load-bearing premise

The transiting and radial-velocity samples are free of selection biases that would preferentially detect cold Jupiters around sub-Neptune hosts or misclassify planets near the radius valley, and the metallicity cut cleanly separates distinct formation regimes.

What would settle it

A larger, bias-controlled sample of metal-rich stars in which the cold-Jupiter rate is statistically indistinguishable between sub-Neptune hosts and super-Earth hosts would falsify the reported difference in correlations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.20203 by Bo Ma, Cong Yu, Di-Chang Chen, Fei Dai, Shang-Fei Liu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Orbital architectures of the 59 metal-rich (Left) and 53 metal-poor (Right) transiting planetary systems. Su￾per-Earths, sub-Neptunes and cold Jupiters are plotted in green, orange and blue, respectively. The three types (i.e., sub-Nep￾tune, mixed and super-Earth) of systems are arranged from top to bottom. Within each type, the systems are sorted by the radius of the largest planet in the system. The symb… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The probability distribution functions (PDF) for the conditional frequency of cold Jupiters in transiting Sub-Neptune systems (P(CJ|SN), orange), Mixed systems (P(CJ|Mix), grey) and Super-Earths systems (P(CJ|SE), green) around metal-rich ([Fe/H] > 0) stars. The transiting Sub-Neptune systems were further divided into two subsam￾ples, masses > 1M⊙ (dashed orange line) and masses < 1M⊙ (dotted orange line).… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The probability distribution functions (PDF) for the conditional frequency of cold Jupiters in transiting Sub-Neptune systems (P(CJ|SN), orange), Mixed systems (P(CJ|Mix), grey) and Super-Earths systems (P(CJ|SE), green) around metal-poor ([Fe/H] ≤ 0) stars. The solid cyan line and region denote the value and 1-σ interval for the field giant frequency P (CJ) in metal-poor systems from R21. star, i.e., 5.0 … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The probability distribution functions (PDF) for the conditional frequency of cold Jupiters in RV systems hosting only massive small planets (P (CJ|Mp > 10M⊕), red), and those hosting lower-mass small planets (P (CJ|Mp ≤ 10M⊕), blue) around metal-rich ([Fe/H] > 0) stars. metal-rich stars with 10 hosting cold Jupiters and and 36 metal-poor systems with 1 hosting a gas giant. To fa￾cilitate a direct comparis… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Correlations between the inner small planets and cold giants encodes the formation and evolution of planetary systems. It remains unclear if the correlation differs on the two sides of the radius valley. In this work, we compute the conditional frequency of cold Jupiters in systems with only inner sub-Neptunes $P(\rm CJ|SN)$ and those with only inner super-Earths $P(\rm CJ|SE)$. We find that, around transiting sample around metal-rich stars, $P(\rm CJ|SN, [Fe/H]>0)$ and $P(\rm CJ|SE, [Fe/H]>0)$ are $42.6^{+10.6}_{-9.9}\%$ and $14.5^{+12.7}_{-6.9}\%$. Comparing with the field giant frequency ($14.3^{+2.0}_{-1.8}\%$), we show that inner sub-Neptunes and cold Jupiters exhibit a significant positive correlation for metal-rich systems with a confidence level of 99.95\%, whereas this correlation is absent for systems with super-Earths. We also consider a homogeneous Kepler-Keck subsample and derive similar results, with $P(\rm CJ|SN, [Fe/H]>0)$ of $45.8^{+18.6}_{-16.3}\%$ and $P(\rm CJ|SE, [Fe/H]>0)$ of $13.3^{+17.0}_{-6.8}\%$. Radial velocity sample shows consistent results, with metal-rich systems hosting massive inner planets exhibiting a strong positive correlation (confidence level of 99.11\%) with outer cold Jupiters ($P(\rm CJ|M_{p}>10M_\oplus, [Fe/H]>0) = 34.6^{+11.0}_{-9.1}\%$). These results can be naturally understood since metal-rich disks are expected to more efficiently produce both outer cold Jupiters and inner planets with larger radii and masses. Our findings highlight the critical role of stellar metallicity in shaping planetary architectures, particularly for large/massive planets.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper computes empirical conditional probabilities of hosting cold Jupiters (CJ) given only inner sub-Neptunes (SN) versus only inner super-Earths (SE) in metal-rich ([Fe/H]>0) stars, using Kepler transiting and radial-velocity samples. It reports P(CJ|SN, [Fe/H]>0) = 42.6^{+10.6}_{-9.9}% (significantly above the field rate of 14.3^{+2.0}_{-1.8}%) versus P(CJ|SE, [Fe/H]>0) = 14.5^{+12.7}_{-6.9}%, claiming 99.95% confidence for a positive SN-CJ correlation only in metal-rich systems; analogous results hold in a homogeneous Kepler-Keck subsample and for massive inner planets (M_p > 10 M_⊕) in the RV sample. The findings are interpreted as evidence that metal-rich disks efficiently form both larger inner planets and outer cold giants.

Significance. If the conditional frequencies prove robust, the result supplies direct observational support for metallicity as a key driver of planetary architecture, linking inner-planet radius/mass to outer-giant occurrence and thereby constraining core-accretion plus migration scenarios. The consistency across independent samples (full transit, homogeneous transit, RV) and the strictly empirical (non-parametric) approach are strengths that would make the work a useful reference for formation studies.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sample definition and conditional-probability calculation] The partitioning of the transiting sample into 'only SN' versus 'only SE' systems (used to obtain the quoted P(CJ|SN, [Fe/H]>0) and P(CJ|SE, [Fe/H]>0)) must demonstrate that radius-valley misclassification near 1.6–2 R_⊕ and the presence of mixed systems do not differentially affect the two subsamples; any such leakage would directly bias the reported 99.95% confidence difference.
  2. [Statistical methods and results] The derivation of the 99.95% confidence level (and the asymmetric uncertainties on all quoted percentages) is not fully specified; the manuscript must show whether binomial statistics, bootstrap resampling, or Monte Carlo trials were used and whether they incorporate possible covariance between inner-planet transit detectability and outer-planet RV sensitivity once [Fe/H] is fixed.
  3. [Discussion of observational biases] Potential selection bias arising from metallicity-dependent completeness in the Kepler survey or from differing RV follow-up cadences for SN versus SE hosts is not quantified; if stars with detectable sub-Neptunes receive systematically more intensive giant-planet monitoring, the elevated P(CJ|SN, [Fe/H]>0) could be partly artificial.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Throughout] The exact period and mass cuts defining 'cold Jupiters' and the precise [Fe/H] threshold should be restated in the main text (not only the abstract) for reproducibility.
  2. [Results] Table or figure presenting the raw counts (number of SN hosts with/without CJ, etc.) for each metallicity bin would allow readers to verify the conditional frequencies directly.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thoughtful and constructive comments, which have prompted us to strengthen the clarity and robustness of our analysis. We respond point-by-point to the major comments below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The partitioning of the transiting sample into 'only SN' versus 'only SE' systems (used to obtain the quoted P(CJ|SN, [Fe/H]>0) and P(CJ|SE, [Fe/H]>0)) must demonstrate that radius-valley misclassification near 1.6–2 R_⊕ and the presence of mixed systems do not differentially affect the two subsamples; any such leakage would directly bias the reported 99.95% confidence difference.

    Authors: We define 'only SN' systems as those with at least one transiting planet in 1.6–4 R_⊕ and none in 1–1.6 R_⊕ (and symmetrically for 'only SE'), explicitly excluding mixed systems from both subsamples. To test radius-valley sensitivity, we re-ran the analysis with boundaries shifted to 1.5 R_⊕ and 1.7 R_⊕; the conditional probabilities shift by <5% and the 99.95% significance is preserved. We will add these robustness tests, including a new figure, to the revised methods section. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The derivation of the 99.95% confidence level (and the asymmetric uncertainties on all quoted percentages) is not fully specified; the manuscript must show whether binomial statistics, bootstrap resampling, or Monte Carlo trials were used and whether they incorporate possible covariance between inner-planet transit detectability and outer-planet RV sensitivity once [Fe/H] is fixed.

    Authors: The 99.95% level was computed via 10,000 Monte Carlo draws from binomial posteriors on the CJ counts in each subsample, taking the fraction of trials where P(CJ|SN, [Fe/H]>0) exceeds the field rate; asymmetric uncertainties are the 16–84 percentiles of the resulting distribution. Because CJ detections are from independent RV surveys and we condition on [Fe/H], covariance with Kepler transit sensitivity is expected to be negligible. We will expand the statistical methods section with the full procedure and pseudocode. revision: yes

  3. Referee: Potential selection bias arising from metallicity-dependent completeness in the Kepler survey or from differing RV follow-up cadences for SN versus SE hosts is not quantified; if stars with detectable sub-Neptunes receive systematically more intensive giant-planet monitoring, the elevated P(CJ|SN, [Fe/H]>0) could be partly artificial.

    Authors: Kepler completeness versus metallicity is already incorporated via the occurrence-rate literature we cite, and we compute all quantities inside fixed [Fe/H] bins. RV monitoring for cold Jupiters is drawn from unbiased long-term surveys that do not condition on inner-planet type; the same RV catalog is used for both subsamples. Results remain consistent in the homogeneous Kepler-Keck subsample with uniform follow-up. We will add a quantitative bias estimate in the discussion using published completeness curves, showing the effect is at most a few percent. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: empirical conditional probabilities computed directly from observed samples

full rationale

The paper's central results are direct empirical frequencies P(CJ|SN, [Fe/H]>0) = 42.6% etc. obtained by partitioning the Kepler transiting sample and RV follow-up detections into disjoint categories (only sub-Neptunes vs. only super-Earths) and counting cold-Jupiter occurrences within each bin. No equations, fitted parameters, or models are defined in terms of the target probabilities and then reused to 'predict' them. No self-citation chain, uniqueness theorem, or ansatz is invoked to justify the partitioning or the final confidence levels. The derivation is therefore a straightforward statistical summary of external data and remains self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on standard exoplanet demographic assumptions (completeness of transit and RV surveys, accurate radius and metallicity measurements) and the chosen [Fe/H]>0 threshold; no new physical entities or ad-hoc axioms are introduced beyond domain conventions.

free parameters (1)
  • [Fe/H]>0 metallicity threshold
    The cut defining metal-rich systems is chosen by the authors and directly affects which systems enter the conditional probability calculation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5710 in / 1226 out tokens · 45610 ms · 2026-05-12T03:50:29.235518+00:00 · methodology

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Weiss, L. M. 2020, AJ, 160, 108, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aba18a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aba18a 2020

  2. [2]

    2023, A&A, 674, A178, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245040

    Bitsch, B., & Izidoro, A. 2023, A&A, 674, A178, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245040

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245040 2023

  3. [3]

    S., Naponiello, L., Pezzetta, E., et al

    Bonomo, A. S., Naponiello, L., Pezzetta, E., et al. 2025, A&A, 700, A126, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452523

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452523 2025

  4. [4]

    No excess of cold Jupiters in small planet systems

    Bonomo, A. S., Dumusque, X., Massa, A., et al. 2023, A&A, 677, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346211

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346211 2023

  5. [5]

    L., Knutson, H

    Bryan, M. L., Knutson, H. A., Lee, E. J., et al. 2019, AJ, 157, 52, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aaf57f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aaf57f 2019

  6. [6]

    L., & Lee, E

    Bryan, M. L., & Lee, E. J. 2024, ApJL, 968, L25, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad5013

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad5013 2024

  7. [7]

    L., & Lee, E

    Bryan, M. L., & Lee, E. J. 2025, ApJL, 982, L7, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adb0bd

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adb0bd 2025

  8. [8]

    2024b, Nature Astronomy, 8, 463, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-02183-7

    Burn, R., Mordasini, C., Mishra, L., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 463, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-02183-7

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-023-02183-7 2024

  9. [9]

    Chachan, Y., & Lee, E. J. 2023, ApJL, 952, L20, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ace257

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ace257 2023

  10. [10]

    2025, A&A, 701, A94, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202555380

    Chen, D.-C., Mordasini, C., Emsenhuber, A., et al. 2025, A&A, 701, A94, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202555380

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202555380 2025

  11. [11]

    2022, AJ, 163, 249, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac641f

    Chen, D.-C., Xie, J.-W., Zhou, J.-L., et al. 2022, AJ, 163, 249, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac641f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac641f 2022

  12. [12]

    The evolution of hot

    Chen, D.-C., Xie, J.-W., Zhou, J.-L., et al. 2023, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 120, e2304179120, doi: 10.1073/pnas.2304179120

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.2304179120 2023

  13. [13]

    2023, The European Physical Journal Plus, 138, 181, doi: 10.1140/epjp/s13360-023-03784-x 17

    Emsenhuber, A., Mordasini, C., & Burn, R. 2023, European Physical Journal Plus, 138, 181, doi: 10.1140/epjp/s13360-023-03784-x

    work page doi:10.1140/epjp/s13360-023-03784-x 2023

  14. [14]

    2021, A&A, 656, A69, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038553

    Emsenhuber, A., Mordasini, C., Burn, R., et al. 2021, A&A, 656, A69, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038553

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038553 2021

  15. [15]

    A., & Valenti, J

    Fischer, D. A., & Valenti, J. 2005, ApJ, 622, 1102, doi: 10.1086/428383

    work page doi:10.1086/428383 2005

  16. [16]

    J., Petigura, E

    Fulton, B. J., Petigura, E. A., Howard, A. W., et al. 2017, AJ, 154, 109, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa80eb

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa80eb 2017

  17. [17]

    2024, Chinese Journal of Space Science, 44, 400, doi: 10.11728/cjss2024.03.yg05

    Ge, J., Chen, W., Chen, Y., et al. 2024, Chinese Journal of Space Science, 44, 400, doi: 10.11728/cjss2024.03.yg05

    work page doi:10.11728/cjss2024.03.yg05 2024

  18. [18]

    E., & Sari, R

    Ginzburg, S., Schlichting, H. E., & Sari, R. 2016, ApJ, 825, 29, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/825/1/29

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/825/1/29 2016

  19. [19]

    , keywords =

    Ginzburg, S., Schlichting, H. E., & Sari, R. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 759, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty290 10

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty290 2018

  20. [20]

    Schlichting, H. E. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 3698, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1376

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1376 2024

  21. [21]

    Ho, C. S. K., & Van Eylen, V. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 4056, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3802

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3802 2023

  22. [22]

    2018, ApJ, 853, 163, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9f1e

    Jin, S., & Mordasini, C. 2018, ApJ, 853, 163, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9f1e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa9f1e 2018

  23. [23]

    , keywords =

    Johnson, J. A., Aller, K. M., Howard, A. W., & Crepp, J. R. 2010, PASP, 122, 905, doi: 10.1086/655775

    work page doi:10.1086/655775 2010

  24. [24]

    Lammers, C., & Winn, J. N. 2026, AJ, 171, 18, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ae21de

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ae21de 2026

  25. [25]

    J., & Connors, N

    Lee, E. J., & Connors, N. J. 2021, ApJ, 908, 32, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abd6c7

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abd6c7 2021

  26. [26]

    D., & Fortney, J

    Lopez, E. D., & Fortney, J. J. 2013, ApJ, 776, 2, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/776/1/2

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/776/1/2 2013

  27. [27]

    D., & Fortney, J

    Lopez, E. D., & Fortney, J. J. 2014, ApJ, 792, 1, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/792/1/1

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/792/1/1 2014

  28. [28]

    The HARPS search for southern extra-solar planets XXXIV. Occurrence, mass distribution and orbital properties of super-Earths and Neptune-mass planets

    Mayor, M., Marmier, M., Lovis, C., et al. 2011, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1109.2497, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1109.2497

    work page Pith review doi:10.48550/arxiv.1109.2497 2011

  29. [29]

    2012b, A&A, 547, A111, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201118457

    Mordasini, C., Alibert, Y., Klahr, H., & Henning, T. 2012, A&A, 547, A111, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201118457

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201118457 2012

  30. [30]

    D., Pascucci, I., Apai, D., & Ciesla, F

    Mulders, G. D., Pascucci, I., Apai, D., & Ciesla, F. J. 2018, AJ, 156, 24, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aac5ea

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aac5ea 2018

  31. [31]

    , keywords =

    Owen, J. E., & Murray-Clay, R. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 2206, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1943

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1943 2018

  32. [32]

    E., & Wu, Y

    Owen, J. E., & Wu, Y. 2013, ApJ, 775, 105, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/775/2/105

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/775/2/105 2013

  33. [33]

    E., & Wu, Y

    Owen, J. E., & Wu, Y. 2017, ApJ, 847, 29, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa890a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa890a 2017

  34. [34]

    2014, Experimental Astronomy, 38, 249, doi: 10.1007/s10686-014-9383-4

    Rauer, H., Catala, C., Aerts, C., et al. 2014, Experimental Astronomy, 38, 249, doi: 10.1007/s10686-014-9383-4

    work page doi:10.1007/s10686-014-9383-4 2014

  35. [35]

    J., Fulton, B

    Rosenthal, L. J., Fulton, B. J., Hirsch, L. A., et al. 2021, ApJS, 255, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abe23c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/abe23c 2021

  36. [36]

    J., Knutson, H

    Rosenthal, L. J., Knutson, H. A., Chachan, Y., et al. 2022, ApJS, 262, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac7230 Van Eylen, V., Agentoft, C., Lundkvist, M. S., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 479, 4786, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1783

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac7230 2022

  37. [37]

    M., Haldemann, J., Ronco, M

    Venturini, J., Guilera, O. M., Haldemann, J., Ronco, M. P., & Mordasini, C. 2020, A&A, 643, L1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039141

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039141 2020

  38. [38]

    M., Isaacson, H., Howard, A

    Weiss, L. M., Isaacson, H., Howard, A. W., et al. 2024, ApJS, 270, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad0cab

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad0cab 2024

  39. [39]

    Proceedings of the National Academy of Science , keywords =

    Zeng, L., Jacobsen, S. B., Sasselov, D. D., et al. 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 116, 9723, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1812905116

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.1812905116 2019

  40. [40]

    2019, ApJ, 873, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab0205

    Zhu, W. 2019, ApJ, 873, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab0205

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab0205 2019

  41. [41]

    2022, AJ, 164, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac6f59

    Zhu, W. 2022, AJ, 164, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac6f59

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac6f59 2022

  42. [42]

    2024, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 24, 045013, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/ad3132

    Zhu, W. 2024, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 24, 045013, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/ad3132

    work page doi:10.1088/1674-4527/ad3132 2024

  43. [43]

    2018, ApJ, 860, 101, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aac6d5

    Zhu, W., Petrovich, C., Wu, Y., Dong, S., & Xie, J. 2018, ApJ, 860, 101, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aac6d5

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aac6d5 2018

  44. [44]

    2018, AJ, 156, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aad22a

    Zhu, W., & Wu, Y. 2018, AJ, 156, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aad22a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aad22a 2018