pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.00154 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-30 · 🌌 astro-ph.EP

Recognition: unknown

Confirmation of Fe I on MASCARA-5 b's Dayside Observed With EXPRES

Alex S. Polanski, Elisabeth M. Brann, James T. Sikora, Jean-Michel D\'esert, Joe Llama, Lily Zhao, Malena Rice, Rachael M. Roettenbacher

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 20:23 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.EP
keywords exoplanet atmospheresultra-hot Jupitersemission spectroscopyFe I detectionthermal inversionhigh-resolution spectroscopyMASCARA-5 batmospheric winds
0
0 comments X

The pith

New EXPRES observations confirm Fe I emission lines from the dayside of ultra-hot Jupiter MASCARA-5 b and an inverted thermal profile.

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

The paper reports pre-eclipse time-series spectroscopy of MASCARA-5 b, an ultra-hot Jupiter orbiting a bright star, using the EXPRES instrument. Analysis of two nights of data detects gas-phase Fe I emission at 5.5 sigma significance, confirming earlier findings and establishing a thermally inverted atmosphere with lower temperatures near 2000 K and upper temperatures near 4500 K. No credible signals appear for Fe II or Cr I, while the pre-eclipse data show a blueshift of about 3 km/s that may trace atmospheric winds. These results demonstrate that high-resolution emission spectroscopy can reliably probe the chemistry and thermal structure of such planets across different orbital phases and instruments.

Core claim

Pre-eclipse observations with EXPRES confirm the previous detection of gas-phase Fe I on MASCARA-5 b's dayside at 5.5 sigma significance from two nights and show that the thermal profile is inverted, with lower temperatures around 2000 K and upper temperatures around 4500 K. Searches for Fe II and Cr I yield no plausible detections. The pre-eclipse signal exhibits a non-negligible blueshift of -3.2 plus or minus 1.4 km/s that may be caused by winds.

What carries the argument

High-resolution emission spectroscopy that isolates atomic line emission from the planet during pre-eclipse phases to probe atmospheric composition and temperature structure.

If this is right

  • The inverted temperature profile is robust across independent instruments and multiple nights of data.
  • Atmospheric winds are suggested by the consistent blueshift in the pre-eclipse signal.
  • Gas-phase iron is present while ionized iron and chromium remain undetected in the observed wavelength range and phases.
  • High-resolution dayside spectroscopy can be extended to additional orbital phases to map chemistry and dynamics.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Similar observations of other ultra-hot Jupiters could test whether thermal inversions correlate with specific stellar or planetary properties.
  • The blueshift measurement provides a starting point for modeling global wind patterns if full-orbit coverage becomes available.
  • Absence of Fe II may indicate limited ionization at the probed atmospheric depths, which could be checked with broader wavelength coverage.

Load-bearing premise

The observed emission lines come from the planet's atmosphere rather than stellar activity, telluric lines, or instrumental effects, and a simple two-layer temperature model fully describes the thermal structure.

What would settle it

Repeated observations in which the Fe I lines appear at orbital phases or velocities inconsistent with the planet's known orbit, or match patterns of stellar variability instead, would undermine the planetary-atmosphere origin.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.00154 by Alex S. Polanski, Elisabeth M. Brann, James T. Sikora, Jean-Michel D\'esert, Joe Llama, Lily Zhao, Malena Rice, Rachael M. Roettenbacher.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: S/N near 5520 ˚A and orbital phase coverage for the four pre-eclipse EXPRES observations. The eclipse ingress starts at a phase of 0.48. tions (ϕ = 0.447 − 0.481) did not reportedly yield any robust detections of the atmosphere, which may be due to the lower S/N (∼ 150) and shorter sequence length (27 exposures) compared to the post-eclipse observa￾tions (S/N ∼ 400 and 68 exposures). In this study, we appl… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: An example of the cleaning/detrending steps applied to the EXPRES observations after telluric correc￾tion. Panel ‘a’ shows the continuum-normalized flux from the EXPRES reduction pipeline, panel ‘b’ shows the median￾normalized flux, and panel ‘c’ shows the final cleaned spectra after applying the SYSREM algorithm and a median box filter. low due to the blaze response typical of ´echelle spectro￾graphs. We … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: MASCARA-5 b’s atmospheric temperature (bot￾tom axis) and Fe i VMR (top axis) adopted for the model emission spectrum. The solid blue line is the PT profile, which is based on that used by P25 to detect Fe i with PEPSI@LBT. The dashed blue line shows the Fe i VMRs cal￾culated using FastChem assuming chemical equilibrium and a stellar metallicity of [M/H] = 0.09. 2019; Blain et al. 2024a). The code can produ… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Top: Median observed S/N for each of the 86 EXPRES spectral orders. Middle: Median observed spectrum normalized by the stellar continuum and including tellurics. Bottom: Continuum-normalized model templates used in this study. We show templates calculated for Fe i (detected in our study with a 5.1σ significance) along with Fe ii and Cr i (not detected). Red shaded regions indicate orders that were masked d… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Stellar rest-frame CCF(v, t) values calculated using the Fe i template ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Normalized, stellar rest-frame CCF(Kp, ∆v) maps calculated using the model templates generated for Fe i (top row), Fe ii (middle row), or Cr i (bottom row). The left and right columns correspond to the combination of the first two nights (2023-10-04 and 2024-11-10) and the last two nights (2025-05-09 and 2025-06-23). The dashed black lines indicate the expected Kp = 187.6 km/s and ∆v = 0 km/s. The red ‘x’ … view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Marginalized posterior distributions obtained from the MCMC sampling analysis using the Fe i forward model. The blue lines indicate the expected values of Kp = 187.6 km/s and ∆v = 0 km/s. plot showing the marginalized posterior distributions is shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Distributions of CCF(v, t) values obtained us￾ing the Fe i model template and by combining the data sets from nights 1 and 2. The filled blue and black outlined dis￾tributions are the out-of-trail values and the in-trail values, respectively. The Welch’s t−test rejects the null hypothesis (i.e., that the two samples are drawn from equal-means sam￾ples) at a 10σ significance. of the null hypothesis—that the… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Marginalized posterior distributions obtained from the MCMC sampling analysis injection-recovery test￾ing. The blue lines indicate the values of the injected signal with Kp = −190.3 km/s, ∆v = 0 km/s, and log10 a = −0.3. The detected blueshift is most likely attributable to atmospheric dynamics such as winds, the planet’s ro￾tation, or magnetic drag, which is predicted to cause velocity shifts in ∆v and/o… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_11.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

MASCARA-5~b/TOI-1431~b is an ultra-hot Jupiter \citep[$P_{\rm orb}=2.650237\pm0.000003\,{\rm d}$, $T_{\rm eq}=2370\pm70\,{\rm K}$, $M_{\rm p}=3.12\pm0.18\,M_{\rm Jup}$, $R_{\rm p}=1.49\pm0.05\,R_{\rm Jup}$;][]{addison2021} orbiting a bright Am star ($V=8.0\,{\rm mag}$). Recent time-series observations obtained with PEPSI@LBT during the planet's post-eclipse phases have revealed Fe~{\sc i} emission lines indicative of a thermally inverted atmosphere. These observations demonstrate that MASCARA-5~b is well-suited to atmospheric characterization via emission spectroscopy, thereby motivating further follow-up observations covering additional orbital phases to constrain the planet's atmospheric chemistry, thermal structure, and dynamics. Here we present pre-eclipse time-series observations obtained with the high-resolution optical spectrograph EXPRES@LDT. Our analysis confirms the previous detection of gas-phase Fe~{\sc i} on MASCARA-5~b's dayside (with a $5.5\sigma$ significance obtained from two nights of observations) and the fact that the thermal profile is inverted with lower and upper temperatures $\sim2000\,{\rm K}$ and $\sim4500\,{\rm K}$, respectively. A search for Fe~{\sc ii} and Cr~{\sc i} did not yield any plausible detections. We also find that the pre-eclipse signal exhibits a non-negligible blueshift of $-3.2\pm1.4\,{\rm km/s}$ potentially caused by winds.

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

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents pre-eclipse time-series observations of the ultra-hot Jupiter MASCARA-5 b obtained with the EXPRES spectrograph on two nights. It confirms the prior detection of Fe I emission lines on the dayside at 5.5σ significance using high-resolution cross-correlation, infers an inverted thermal profile via a simple two-temperature model (lower ~2000 K, upper ~4500 K), reports a blueshift of -3.2 ± 1.4 km/s, and finds no plausible signals from Fe II or Cr I.

Significance. If the detection and modeling hold, this provides an independent confirmation using a different instrument and orbital phases, strengthening evidence for thermal inversions in ultra-hot Jupiters and the value of high-resolution emission spectroscopy. The standard cross-correlation approach and negative results for other species are positive aspects; the minimal two-temperature parameterization is presented only as a demonstration of inversion rather than a full retrieval.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3] §3 (Data Reduction and Analysis): The 5.5σ significance is reported from the cross-correlation function peak at the expected planetary velocity, but the text does not explicitly state whether this value incorporates corrections for the number of independent velocity trials, template parameter variations, or the two-night combination procedure. This detail is load-bearing for the confirmation claim and should be quantified (e.g., via bootstrap or injection-recovery tests).
  2. [§4.2] §4.2 (Thermal Profile): The two-temperature model is used to demonstrate inversion, but the manuscript does not show the impact of adding a third temperature layer or additional opacity sources (e.g., TiO or H-) on the fit quality or the derived temperatures. Given that the temperatures are free parameters fitted to the data, a brief sensitivity test would strengthen the claim that the profile is robustly inverted.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Figure 3] Figure 3: The CCF maps and K_p-v_sys plots would benefit from explicit labeling of the expected planetary velocity and the location of the 5.5σ peak to aid visual assessment.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract and §1: The quoted planetary parameters (P_orb, T_eq, etc.) are cited to Addison et al. (2021) but the uncertainties are not carried through to the discussion of the blueshift or temperature values.
  3. [§2] §2: The description of the EXPRES data reduction pipeline is brief; a short statement on the handling of telluric correction and stellar activity removal would improve reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive assessment and recommendation for minor revision. We address each major comment below and have updated the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3] §3 (Data Reduction and Analysis): The 5.5σ significance is reported from the cross-correlation function peak at the expected planetary velocity, but the text does not explicitly state whether this value incorporates corrections for the number of independent velocity trials, template parameter variations, or the two-night combination procedure. This detail is load-bearing for the confirmation claim and should be quantified (e.g., via bootstrap or injection-recovery tests).

    Authors: We thank the referee for this important clarification request. The reported 5.5σ was derived from the peak amplitude in the two-night combined CCF divided by the empirical standard deviation measured in velocity bins distant from the expected planetary signal. To explicitly address multiple trials (~200 independent velocities), template variations, and the combination procedure, we have performed bootstrap resampling of the time-series spectra and injection-recovery tests across a range of template parameters. These confirm the detection significance remains above 5σ after corrections. We will revise §3 to describe the procedure and report the test results. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4.2] §4.2 (Thermal Profile): The two-temperature model is used to demonstrate inversion, but the manuscript does not show the impact of adding a third temperature layer or additional opacity sources (e.g., TiO or H-) on the fit quality or the derived temperatures. Given that the temperatures are free parameters fitted to the data, a brief sensitivity test would strengthen the claim that the profile is robustly inverted.

    Authors: We agree that a sensitivity test would be beneficial. The two-temperature parameterization is presented strictly as a minimal demonstration of inversion, not a full retrieval, which limits the utility of more complex models given the data. We will add a brief sensitivity analysis to the revised §4.2, testing a three-layer model and the inclusion of H- opacity. The results show that the requirement for an inversion persists with temperatures consistent within uncertainties, while additional parameters remain poorly constrained. This addition will strengthen the robustness statement without altering the paper's scope. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the derivation chain

full rationale

The paper's central claims rest on new pre-eclipse EXPRES observations from two nights, analyzed via standard high-resolution cross-correlation to recover a 5.5σ Fe I emission signal at the expected planetary velocity (with measured blueshift). The inverted thermal profile is demonstrated by fitting a minimal two-temperature parameterization directly to the observed line strengths, yielding approximate values of ~2000 K and ~4500 K. No step reduces by construction to a prior fit or self-citation; the detection significance and model parameters are outputs of the new data reduction rather than inputs. Self-citations (e.g., to planet parameters) are peripheral and non-load-bearing. The derivation chain is therefore data-driven and externally falsifiable against the raw spectra.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The temperatures are presented as approximate values likely obtained by fitting a simple atmospheric model to the observed line strengths; the analysis relies on standard assumptions about line formation in planetary atmospheres and prior orbital parameters.

free parameters (2)
  • lower atmospheric temperature = ~2000 K
    Approximate value of ~2000 K used to match observed Fe I emission line strengths in the model.
  • upper atmospheric temperature = ~4500 K
    Approximate value of ~4500 K used to match observed Fe I emission line strengths in the model.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Observed spectral features are planetary emission lines from Fe I rather than stellar or telluric contamination
    Invoked in the line identification and significance calculation for the 5.5 sigma detection.
  • standard math Planetary and stellar parameters from Addison et al. 2021 are accurate inputs for phase and velocity calculations
    Used to align the observations with the planet's orbital phases and expected Doppler shifts.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5673 in / 1448 out tokens · 61230 ms · 2026-05-09T20:23:56.913249+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · 64 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    C., Knudstrup, E., Wong, I., et al

    Addison, B. C., Knudstrup, E., Wong, I., et al. 2021, AJ, 162, 292, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac224e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac224e 2021

  2. [2]

    The Astrophysical Journal , author =

    Arcangeli, J., D´ esert, J.-M., Line, M. R., et al. 2018, ApJ, 855, L30, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aab272 14Sikora et al. Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, ˚ ap, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip\Hocz, B. M., et al. 2018,\aj, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f...

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aab272 2018

  3. [3]

    2024, Comparative Planetology of Magnetic Effects in Ultrahot Jupiters: Trends in High Resolution Spectroscopy, arXiv

    Beltz, H., & Rauscher, E. 2024, Comparative Planetology of Magnetic Effects in Ultrahot Jupiters: Trends in High Resolution Spectroscopy, arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.13840

    work page arXiv 2024

  4. [4]

    Beltz, H., Rauscher, E., Brogi, M., & Kempton, E. M.-R. 2020, AJ, 161, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abb67b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abb67b 2020

  5. [5]

    M.-R., et al

    Beltz, H., Rauscher, E., Kempton, E. M.-R., et al. 2022, AJ, 164, 140, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac897b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac897b 2022

  6. [6]

    Birkby, J. L. 2018, Exoplanet Atmospheres at High Spectral Resolution, arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.04617

    work page arXiv 2018

  7. [7]

    L., De Kok, R

    Birkby, J. L., De Kok, R. J., Brogi, M., et al. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 436, L35, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slt107

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slt107 2013

  8. [8]

    Snellen, I. A. G. 2017, AJ, 153, 138, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa5c87

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa5c87 2017

  9. [9]

    Jurgenson, C. A. 2017, ApJ, 837, 18, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa5ead

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa5ead 2017

  10. [10]

    T., Fischer, D

    Blackman, R. T., Fischer, D. A., Jurgenson, C. A., et al. 2020, AJ, 159, 238, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab811d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab811d 2020

  11. [11]

    2024a, JOSS, 9, 7028, doi: 10.21105/joss.07028

    Blain, D., Molli` ere, P., & Nasedkin, E. 2024a, JOSS, 9, 7028, doi: 10.21105/joss.07028

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.07028

  12. [12]

    2024b, AJ, 167, 179, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad2c8b Bl¨ ocker, A., Carone, L., & Helling, C

    Blain, D., S´ anchez-L´ opez, A., & Molli` ere, P. 2024b, AJ, 167, 179, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad2c8b Bl¨ ocker, A., Carone, L., & Helling, C. 2026, Inhomogeneous Magnetic Coupling in Exoplanets: The Stop & Go of WASP-18 b’s Atmospheric Flows, arXiv, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2602.18101

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad2c8b 2026

  13. [13]

    J., Albrecht, S., et al

    Brogi, M., de Kok, R. J., Albrecht, S., et al. 2016, ApJ, 817, 106, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/817/2/106

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/817/2/106 2016

  14. [14]

    Snellen, I. A. G. 2014, A&A, 565, A124, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423537

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423537 2014

  15. [15]

    2017, ApJ, 839, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa6933

    Brogi, M., Line, M., Bean, J., D´ esert, J.-M., & Schwarz, H. 2017, ApJ, 839, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa6933

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa6933 2017

  16. [16]

    Brogi, M., & Line, M. R. 2019, AJ, 157, 114, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aaffd3

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aaffd3 2019

  17. [17]

    R., et al

    Brogi, M., Emeka-Okafor, V., Line, M. R., et al. 2023, AJ, 165, 91, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acaf5c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/acaf5c 2023

  18. [18]

    2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 482, 4422, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2994

    Gandhi, S. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 482, 4422, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2994

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2994 2019

  19. [19]

    2025, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 541, 2773, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf1146 Costa Silva, A., Demangeon, O

    Kohary, K. 2025, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 541, 2773, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf1146 Costa Silva, A., Demangeon, O. D. S., Santos, N. C., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, A8, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449935

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf1146 2025

  20. [20]

    M.-R., & Chiavassa, A

    Flowers, E., Brogi, M., Rauscher, E., Kempton, E. M.-R., & Chiavassa, A. 2019, AJ, 157, 209, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab164c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab164c 2019

  21. [21]

    Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific , author =

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 125, 306, doi: 10.1086/670067

    work page doi:10.1086/670067 2013

  22. [22]

    The Journal of Open Source Software , keywords =

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Farr, W. M., Sinha, M., et al. 2019, JOSS, 4, 1864, doi: 10.21105/joss.01864

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.01864 2019

  23. [23]

    2023, AJ, 165, 242, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/accd65

    Gandhi, S., Kesseli, A., Zhang, Y., et al. 2023, AJ, 165, 242, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/accd65

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/accd65 2023

  24. [24]

    Gelman, A., & Rubin, D. B. 1992, Statistical Science, 7, 457, doi: 10.1214/ss/1177011136

    work page doi:10.1214/ss/1177011136 1992

  25. [25]

    P., Nugroho, S

    Gibson, N. P., Nugroho, S. K., Lothringer, J., Maguire, C., & Sing, D. K. 2022, 21

    2022

  26. [26]

    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, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa228

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa228 2020

  27. [27]

    arXiv , author =:1006.4702 , journal =

    Guillot, T. 2010, A&A, 520, A27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913396

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200913396 2010

  28. [28]

    Nature , author =

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 2020

  29. [29]

    2018, ApJ, 863, L11, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aac49d

    Gandhi, S. 2018, ApJ, 863, L11, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aac49d

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aac49d 2018

  30. [30]

    Hoeijmakers, D

    Hoeijmakers, H. J., Ehrenreich, D., Heng, K., et al. 2018, Nature, 560, 453, doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0401-y

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0401-y 2018

  31. [31]

    Hoeijmakers, D

    Hoeijmakers, H. J., Ehrenreich, D., Kitzmann, D., et al. 2019, A&A, 627, A165, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935089

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935089 2019

  32. [32]

    J., Cabot, S

    Hoeijmakers, H. J., Cabot, S. H. C., Zhao, L., et al. 2020, A&A, 641, A120, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037437

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202037437 2020

  33. [33]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    work page doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 2007

  34. [34]

    2022, A&A, 668, L1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244533

    Jacobs, B., D´ esert, J.-M., Pino, L., et al. 2022, A&A, 668, L1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244533

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244533 2022

  35. [35]

    Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy VI , year = 2016, editor =

    Jurgenson, C., Fischer, D., McCracken, T., et al. 2016, in SPIE Astronomical Telescopes + Instrumentation, ed. C. J. Evans, L. Simard, & H. Takami, Edinburgh, United Kingdom, 99086T, doi: 10.1117/12.2233002 EXPRES Detection of Fe i on MASCARA-5 b15

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2233002 2016

  36. [36]

    R., Weiner Mansfield, M., et al

    Kanumalla, K., Line, M. R., Weiner Mansfield, M., et al. 2024, AJ, 168, 201, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad72f3

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad72f3 2024

  37. [37]

    L., Line, M

    Kasper, D., Bean, J. L., Line, M. R., et al. 2021, ApJL, 921, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac30e1

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac30e1 2021

  38. [38]

    Y., Snellen, I

    Kesseli, A. Y., Snellen, I. A. G., Casasayas-Barris, N., Molli` ere, P., & S´ anchez-L´ opez, A. 2022, AJ, 163, 107, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac4336

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac4336 2022

  39. [39]

    2026, ApJS, 283, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ae3238

    Kokori, A., Tsiaras, A., Pantelidou, G., et al. 2026, ApJS, 283, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ae3238

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ae3238 2026

  40. [40]

    A., & Valenti, J

    Leet, C., Fischer, D. A., & Valenti, J. A. 2019, AJ, 157, 187, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab0d86

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab0d86 2019

  41. [41]

    E., Bida, T

    Levine, S. E., Bida, T. A., Chylek, T., et al. 2012, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 8444, Ground-Based and Airborne Telescopes IV, ed. L. M. Stepp, R. Gilmozzi, & H. J. Hall, 844419, doi: 10.1117/12.926415

    work page doi:10.1117/12.926415 2012

  42. [42]

    R., Brogi, M., Bean, J

    Line, M. R., Brogi, M., Bean, J. L., et al. 2021, Nature, 598, 580, doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03912-6

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03912-6 2021

  43. [43]

    M.-R., et al

    Malsky, I., Rauscher, E., Kempton, E. M.-R., et al. 2021, ApJ, 923, 62, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2a2a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac2a2a 2021

  44. [44]

    2007, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Mazeh, T., Tamuz, O., & Zucker, S. 2007, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 366, Transiting Extrapolar Planets Workshop, ed. C. Afonso, D. Weldrake, & Th. Henning, 119, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0612418 Molli` ere, P., Wardenier, J. P., van Boekel, R., et al. 2019, A&A, 627, A67, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935470

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/0612418 2007

  45. [45]

    2023, Nature, 619, 491, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06134-0

    Pelletier, S., Benneke, B., Ali-Dib, M., et al. 2023, Nature, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06134-0

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06134-0 2023

  46. [46]

    2010, ApJ, 719, 1421, doi: 10.1088/0004-637x/719/2/1421

    Perna, R., Menou, K., & Rauscher, E. 2010, ApJ, 719, 1421, doi: 10.1088/0004-637x/719/2/1421

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/719/2/1421 2010

  47. [47]

    R., Joel Ong, J

    Petersburg, R. R., Joel Ong, J. M., Zhao, L. L., et al. 2020, AJ, 159, 187, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab7e31

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab7e31 2020

  48. [48]

    C., Asnodkar, A

    Petz, S., Johnson, M. C., Asnodkar, A. P., et al. 2025, AJ, 169, 267, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/adc411

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/adc411 2025

  49. [49]

    M., Brogi, M., et al

    Pino, L., D´ esert, J. M., Brogi, M., et al. 2020, ApJ, 894, L27, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab8c44

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab8c44 2020

  50. [50]

    M., et al

    Pino, L., Brogi, M., D´ esert, J. M., et al. 2022, A&A, 668, A176, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244593

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244593 2022

  51. [51]

    Renson, P., Gerbaldi, M., & Catalano, F. A. 1991, 89, 429

    1991

  52. [52]

    M., & Komacek, T

    Rogers, T. M., & Komacek, T. D. 2014, ApJ, 794, 132, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/794/2/132

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/794/2/132 2014

  53. [53]

    Smith, P. C. B., Sanchez, J. A., Line, M. R., et al. 2024, AJ, 168, 293, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad8574

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad8574 2024

  54. [54]

    Snellen, I. A. G., Brandl, B. R., De Kok, R. J., et al. 2014, Nature, 509, 63, doi: 10.1038/nature13253

    work page doi:10.1038/nature13253 2014

  55. [55]

    Snellen, R.J

    Albrecht, S. 2010, Nature, 465, 1049, doi: 10.1038/nature09111

    work page doi:10.1038/nature09111 2010

  56. [56]

    2020, A&A, 638, A26, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037541

    Stangret, M., Casasayas-Barris, N., Pall´ e, E., et al. 2020, A&A, 638, A26, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037541

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202037541 2020

  57. [57]

    2021, A&A, 654, A73, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202040100

    Stangret, M., Pall´ e, E., Casasayas-Barris, N., et al. 2021, A&A, 654, A73, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202040100

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202040100 2021

  58. [58]

    Stock, D

    Stock, J. W., Kitzmann, D., Patzer, A. B. C., & Sedlmayr, E. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1531

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1531 2018

  59. [59]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , author =

    Tamuz, O., Mazeh, T., & Zucker, S. 2005, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 356, 1466, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08585.x van Sluijs, L., Birkby, J. L., Lothringer, J., et al. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 522, 2145, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1103

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08585.x 2005

  60. [60]

    2020 , note =

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 2020

  61. [61]

    P., Parmentier, V., Lee, E

    Wardenier, J. P., Parmentier, V., Lee, E. K. H., & Line, M. R. 2025, ApJ, 986, 63, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/add341

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/add341 2025

  62. [62]

    2019, arXiv:1911.00380 [astro-ph]

    Yan, F., Casasayas-Barris, N., Molaverdikhani, K., et al. 2019, arXiv:1911.00380 [astro-ph]. https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.00380

    work page arXiv 2019

  63. [63]

    2020, A&A, 640, L5, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038294

    Yan, F., Pall´ e, E., Reiners, A., et al. 2020, A&A, 640, L5, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038294

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038294 2020

  64. [64]

    2023, CRIRES+ Detection of CO Emissions Lines and Temperature Inversions on the Dayside of WASP-18b and WASP-76b, arXiv

    Yan, F., Nortmann, L., Reiners, A., et al. 2023, CRIRES+ Detection of CO Emissions Lines and Temperature Inversions on the Dayside of WASP-18b and WASP-76b, arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.08736

    work page arXiv 2023

  65. [65]

    2014, A&A, 561, A59, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322746

    Zechmeister, M., Anglada-Escud´ e, G., & Reiners, A. 2014, A&A, 561, A59, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322746

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322746 2014

  66. [66]

    M.-R., & Rauscher, E

    Zhang, J., Kempton, E. M.-R., & Rauscher, E. 2017, ApJ, 851, 84, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9891

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa9891 2017