pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.07511 · v1 · pith:AH5O5URVnew · submitted 2026-06-05 · 🌌 astro-ph.EP

GJ 3929 b as the First Complete Rocky Worlds DDT Data Set

Nicholas J. Connors , Christopher Monaghan , Bjorn Benneke , Lisa Dang , Pierre-Alexis Roy This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 20:47 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.EP
keywords exoplanet atmospheresrocky exoplanetsJWST MIRIsecondary eclipseGJ 3929 bdata reductionatmospheric modelsM-dwarf planets
0
0 comments X

The pith

Combined JWST eclipse data for GJ 3929 b stays consistent with bare rock while still permitting thin atmospheres.

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

The paper presents the complete set of four JWST/MIRI 15 micron secondary eclipse observations of the rocky exoplanet GJ 3929 b. The merged data give an eclipse depth of 118 plus or minus 22 ppm, which translates to a dayside brightness temperature near 641 K. This outcome matches bare-rock models and also accommodates thin-atmosphere cases, but it continues to exclude thick CO2 atmospheres that lack a thermal inversion at more than 3 sigma. The work also shows that the Frame Normalized Principal Component Analysis reduction is less sensitive to aperture choice than polynomial baseline methods. A reader would care because this is the first finished data set from the Rocky Worlds DDT program testing whether low-temperature rocky planets around M dwarfs retain detectable atmospheres.

Core claim

Analysis of the full four-observation data set for GJ 3929 b yields a secondary eclipse depth of 118 plus or minus 22 ppm and a dayside surface brightness temperature of 641 plus 59 minus 64 K. This value is lower than the depth obtained from the first two observations alone. The measurements remain consistent with bare-rock scenarios and leave additional room for thin-atmosphere models, while only thick CO2 atmospheres without thermal inversion are ruled out at greater than 3 sigma. The Frame Normalized Principal Component Analysis method for removing systematics proves more stable against extraction aperture size than standard polynomial detrending.

What carries the argument

The 15 micron secondary eclipse depth obtained with JWST/MIRI and its direct comparison to forward models of bare-rock surfaces versus CO2 atmospheres with and without thermal inversion.

If this is right

  • Only thick CO2 atmospheres without thermal inversion remain excluded at greater than 3 sigma.
  • The measured dayside temperature is consistent with little or no heat redistribution to the nightside.
  • Thin atmospheres on GJ 3929 b remain possible and will require additional observations or wavelengths to confirm or exclude.
  • Data-reduction method choice can shift the inferred eclipse depth enough to alter the atmospheric interpretation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If FN-PCA robustness holds for other targets, the Rocky Worlds survey could systematically favor this approach for the remaining M-dwarf rocky planets.
  • Similar complete data sets on additional survey targets may reveal whether atmosphere retention correlates with instellation or planetary mass.
  • Multi-band eclipse observations at wavelengths outside 15 microns could separate bare-rock thermal emission from possible thin-atmosphere absorption features.

Load-bearing premise

The Frame Normalized Principal Component Analysis reduction removes systematics without introducing biases that change the inferred eclipse depth when compared to atmospheric models.

What would settle it

An independent measurement of the 15 micron eclipse depth with substantially smaller uncertainty that falls well above the bare-rock prediction but inside the thin-atmosphere model band would falsify the current consistency with bare rock.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.07511 by Bjorn Benneke, Christopher Monaghan, Lisa Dang, Nicholas J. Connors, Pierre-Alexis Roy.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Raw light curves for the four visits of GJ 3929 b. The light curves shown use aperture photometry with an aperture radius of 5 pixels and a background annulus spanning 12-20 pixels. The extent of the detector settling ramps for each observation are marked with red dashed lines (500 integrations). The grey shaded region shows the expected eclipse time for a circular orbit. Visit 4 consists of two observatio… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Detector settling principal components eigenimages (left) and eigenvalues (right) for both visits of GJ 3929 b. The shaded region shows the range trimmed from the start of each observation. The first component features a lip that is not seen in the other observations, and is not included in the exponential ramp fitting. The first visit component also shows an upwards linear trend throughout the eigenvalue.… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Individual and phase-folded joint-fit light curves of the four visits of GJ 3929 b found using FN-PCA detrending using the Erebus pipeline. The eclipse depth is found to be 190 ± 40 ppm for visit 1, 155 ± 34 ppm for visit 2, 60 ± 34 ppm for visit 3, and 97 ± 78 ppm for visit 4. There is a gap during the eclipse for visit 4 due to a scheduling constraint. For the joint fit of the all visits the eclipse dept… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Individual and joint fit results for the FN-PCA and linear detrending fits, along with the preliminary analy￾sis of the first two released visits from Xue et al. (2025). The shaded region marks the fiducial joint fit result with error. The large error bars for Visit 4 are due to an observing gap occurring within the eclipse. The fitted FN-PCA light curves are shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p00… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Joint fit eclipse depth as a function of aperture radius for different detrending methods. The FN-PCA de￾trending with a 5 pixel aperture is chosen for the fiducial result as it minimizes the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC), and the shaded region marks this result with error. The data used to create this figure is shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Engineering mnemonics for the four visits of GJ 3929 b prior to observation. The sa zattest engineering mnemonics indicate the pointing of the telescope, with the y-axis arranged such that the telescope is on target when the curves converge to zero. The filters are ordered to accurately reflect the rotation of the filter wheel. The pre-flashing detec￾tor settling slope experiment has the filter change to P… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Simulated emission spectra of GJ 3929 b for various surface (left) and atmospheric (right) compositions compared to the measured eclipse depths from our FN-PCA calculation, alongside the previously reported result using only the first two visits by Xue et al. (2025). The F1500W filter transmission is shown in the dotted line at the bottom. The simulated MIRI 1500W eclipse depths for each of the models are … view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Cosmic shoreline plot of exoplanets previously ob￾served at 15 µm using MIRI alongside the remaining DDT targets (Greene et al. 2023, Zieba et al. 2023, August et al. 2024, Vald´es et al. 2025, Fortune et al. 2025, Allen et al. 2025, Holmberg et al. 2026). The cosmic shoreline is shown as the line I ∝ v 4 esc such that it intersects the IXUV and vesc for Mars using equation 27 in Zahnle & Catling (2017). D… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The frame-normalized principal component eigenvalues (left column) and eigenimages (right column) compared to the raw light curve and point-spread function (top row) for visit 1 when not trimming any data (left plot) and when trimming the first 500 integrations (right plot). The components found after trimming the first 500 integrations are used in our lightcurve fitting. We include 40 binned data points … view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The frame-normalized principal component eigenvalues (left column) and eigenimages (right column) compared to the raw light curve and point-spread function (top row) for visit 2 when not trimming any data (left plot) and when trimming the first 500 integrations (right plot). The components found after trimming the first 500 integrations are used in our lightcurve fitting [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The frame-normalized principal component eigenvalues (left column) and eigenimages (right column) compared to the raw light curve and point-spread function (top row) for visit 3 when not trimming any data (left plot) and when trimming the first 500 integrations (right plot). The components found after trimming the first 500 integrations are used in our lightcurve fitting [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The frame-normalized principal component eigenvalues (left column) and eigenimages (right column) compared to the raw light curve and point-spread function (top row) for visit 4. The upper plot is the entire visit split across two observations when not trimming any data. The bottom plots are split across two observations and show the components used when fitting the lightcurve. The bottom left plot has th… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: We compare the size of the detector settling slope (defined by fitting a linear slope to the first 30 minutes of data) to the length of time spent with the P750L filter prior to switching to F1500W, both on target (left) and in total (right), for the four eclipses of GJ 3929 b and the relevant targets of the Hot Rocks Survey described in Fortune et al. (2025). We find that all but one visit of GJ 3929 b h… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Despite their large abundance, it is still unknown whether and under what conditions rocky planets around M dwarf stars can host atmospheres. This open question motivated the on-going Rocky Worlds DDT survey focused on searching for atmospheres on relatively low-temperature rocky exoplanets by systematically probing for the presence of day-night heat redistribution and CO2 absorption through JWST/MIRI 15 $\mu$m eclipse observations. Here we present the analysis of the first full data set from this survey, consisting of four observations of the warm Earth-size exoplanet GJ 3929 b, with a planetary mass of 1.75+0.44-0.45 M$_\oplus$ and instellation flux of 17.3+/-0.7 S$_\oplus$. In our analysis, we include two previously unpublished eclipse observations and find an overall eclipse depth of 118+/-22 ppm and a dayside surface brightness temperature of 641+59-64 K. This is marginally lower than the eclipse depth of 160+26-27 ppm previously reported based on only the first two observations. While the full data set remains consistent with bare rock scenarios, it also leaves more room for thin atmosphere scenarios. Only thick CO2 atmospheres without thermal inversion remain ruled out at greater than 3$\sigma$. We also continue with lessons-learned in robustly analyzing these kind of high-precision JWST/MIRI 15 $\mu$m eclipse observations. Notably, we find that the Frame Normalized Principal Component Analysis (FN-PCA) method appears more robust against the choice of extraction aperture size, which otherwise can have a significant impact on the inferred eclipse depth and scientific conclusions when using a standard polynomial baseline detrending method.

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 / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents the analysis of four JWST/MIRI 15 μm eclipse observations of the rocky exoplanet GJ 3929 b (including two previously unpublished), reporting a combined eclipse depth of 118 ± 22 ppm and dayside brightness temperature of 641 K. The full data set is found to be consistent with bare-rock scenarios while allowing more room for thin atmospheres; only thick CO2 atmospheres without thermal inversion are ruled out at >3σ. The work emphasizes that the Frame Normalized Principal Component Analysis (FN-PCA) reduction method yields more stable eclipse depths across aperture sizes than standard polynomial detrending.

Significance. This constitutes the first complete data set from the Rocky Worlds DDT survey and supplies empirical constraints on atmospheric retention for warm rocky planets around M dwarfs. The direct comparison of reduction methods and the reporting of the full observational data set are strengths that aid reproducibility and community lessons for high-precision MIRI eclipse work.

major comments (2)
  1. [Data Reduction] Data Reduction section: The demonstration that FN-PCA produces more stable depths across aperture sizes addresses only one class of systematic. No signal-injection and recovery tests with the actual MIRI ramp, background, and pointing noise properties are described, leaving open the possibility of a ~20 ppm bias in the reported 118 ppm depth that would alter the >3σ exclusion of thick CO2 models.
  2. [Results] Results section: The manuscript reports the eclipse depth and model-comparison significances but provides insufficient detail on data-exclusion criteria, the exact number and choice of principal components in FN-PCA, and the full systematic error budget from baseline fitting. These omissions prevent independent assessment of whether the quoted ±22 ppm uncertainty fully captures reduction-induced contributions.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The statement that FN-PCA 'appears more robust' would benefit from a one-sentence quantification of the aperture-induced scatter for both methods.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive review of our manuscript on the complete GJ 3929 b JWST/MIRI dataset. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript where appropriate to enhance clarity and reproducibility.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Data Reduction] Data Reduction section: The demonstration that FN-PCA produces more stable depths across aperture sizes addresses only one class of systematic. No signal-injection and recovery tests with the actual MIRI ramp, background, and pointing noise properties are described, leaving open the possibility of a ~20 ppm bias in the reported 118 ppm depth that would alter the >3σ exclusion of thick CO2 models.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this comment. Our primary validation for the FN-PCA method was its superior stability in eclipse depth across a range of aperture sizes compared to polynomial detrending. This addresses a major potential source of systematic error in the data reduction. We did not include signal-injection and recovery tests in this study. We acknowledge that such tests could help quantify any residual bias at the level discussed. We will add a discussion in the revised manuscript of this limitation and its potential implications for the model comparisons. We consider this a partial revision. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Results] Results section: The manuscript reports the eclipse depth and model-comparison significances but provides insufficient detail on data-exclusion criteria, the exact number and choice of principal components in FN-PCA, and the full systematic error budget from baseline fitting. These omissions prevent independent assessment of whether the quoted ±22 ppm uncertainty fully captures reduction-induced contributions.

    Authors: We agree with the referee that more transparency is needed. In the revised version, we will include additional details in the Methods and Results sections on the data-exclusion criteria, the exact number and choice of principal components in FN-PCA, and the full systematic error budget from baseline fitting. This will allow independent assessment of the uncertainty. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; purely observational eclipse depth measurement

full rationale

The paper's central result is a direct measurement of eclipse depth (118±22 ppm) from four JWST/MIRI 15 μm observations of GJ 3929 b, obtained via FN-PCA data reduction and compared to separate atmospheric models. No load-bearing step derives a 'prediction' from fitted inputs by construction, renames a known result, or relies on self-citation chains for uniqueness or ansatz. The FN-PCA robustness test (stability across apertures) is an internal empirical check on the reduction pipeline, not a self-referential derivation of the depth itself. The model comparisons (ruling out thick CO2 at >3σ while allowing bare rock or thin atmospheres) use external forward models. The analysis is self-contained against external benchmarks with no circular reduction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Review based solely on abstract; limited visibility into fitting details or model assumptions. Standard exoplanet eclipse analysis relies on noise models and atmospheric forward models whose parameters are fitted to the data.

free parameters (1)
  • baseline detrending coefficients
    Polynomial baseline parameters fitted during data reduction; choice of method affects reported depth.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard assumptions in JWST/MIRI eclipse photometry hold, including accurate removal of instrumental systematics.
    Invoked when comparing measured depth to bare-rock and atmospheric models.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5855 in / 1215 out tokens · 25775 ms · 2026-06-27T20:47:11.960285+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

78 extracted references · 63 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    L., et al

    Agol, E., Dorn, C., Grimm, S. L., et al. 2021, The Planetary Science Journal, 2, 1, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/abd022

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/abd022 2021

  2. [2]

    P., Tollerud, E

    Allen, N. H., Espinoza, N., Diamond-Lowe, H., et al. 2025, Hot Rocks Survey IV: Emission from LTT 3780 b is consistent with a bare rock. https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.14210 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al....

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 2025

  3. [3]

    C., Buchhave, L

    August, P. C., Buchhave, L. A., Diamond-Lowe, H., et al. 2024, Hot Rocks Survey I : A shallow eclipse for LHS 1478 b, arXiv. http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.11048

    arXiv 2024

  4. [4]

    C., Buchhave, L

    August, P. C., Buchhave, L. A., Rathcke, A., et al. 2025, Confirming a Tentative Terrestrial Atmosphere Detection on LHS 1478 b with JWST/MIRI, JWST Proposal. Cycle 4, ID. #7675

    2025

  5. [5]

    Bazinet, L., Pelletier, S., Benneke, B., Salinas, R., & Mace, G. N. 2024, The Astronomical Journal, 167, 206, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad3071

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad3071 2024

  6. [7]

    2022, ApJ, 936, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8480

    Beard, C., Robertson, P., Kanodia, S., et al. 2022, ApJ, 936, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8480

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac8480 2022

  7. [8]

    The Journal of Open Source Software , keywords =

    Bell, T. J., Ahrer, E.-M., Brande, J., et al. 2022, Journal of Open Source Software, 7, 4503, doi: 10.21105/joss.04503

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.04503 2022

  8. [9]

    2015, Strict Upper Limits on the Carbon-to-Oxygen Ratios of Eight Hot Jupiters from Self-Consistent Atmospheric Retrieval

    Benneke, B. 2015, Strict Upper Limits on the Carbon-to-Oxygen Ratios of Eight Hot Jupiters from Self-Consistent Atmospheric Retrieval. https://arxiv.org/abs/1504.07655

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  9. [10]

    2012, ApJ, 753, 100, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/753/2/100 —

    Benneke, B., & Seager, S. 2012, ApJ, 753, 100, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/753/2/100 —. 2013, ApJ, 778, 153, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/778/2/153

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/753/2/100 2012

  10. [11]

    , keywords =

    Benneke, B., Wong, I., Piaulet, C., et al. 2019a, ApJL, 887, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab59dc

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab59dc 2041

  11. [12]

    A., Lothringer, J., et al

    Benneke, B., Knutson, H. A., Lothringer, J., et al. 2019b, Nature Astronomy, 3, 813, doi: 10.1038/s41550-019-0800-5

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-019-0800-5

  12. [13]

    2024, JWST Reveals CH 4, CO2, and H 2O in a Metal-rich Miscible Atmosphere on a Two-Earth-Radius Exoplanet

    Benneke, B., Roy, P.-A., Coulombe, L.-P., et al. 2024, JWST Reveals CH 4, CO2, and H 2O in a Metal-rich Miscible Atmosphere on a Two-Earth-Radius Exoplanet. https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.03325

    arXiv 2024

  13. [14]

    K., Wachiraphan, P., & Murray, C

    Berta-Thompson, Z. K., Wachiraphan, P., & Murray, C. 2025, The 3D Cosmic Shoreline for Nurturing Planetary Atmospheres. https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.02136

    arXiv 2025

  14. [15]

    J., Hawley, S

    Bochanski, J. J., Hawley, S. L., Covey, K. R., et al. 2010, AJ, 139, 2679, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/139/6/2679

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/139/6/2679 2010

  15. [16]

    , keywords =

    Bonfanti, A., Brady, M., Wilson, T. G., et al. 2024, A&A, 682, A66, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348180

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348180 2024

  16. [17]

    2024, astropy/photutils: 2.0.2, 2.0.2, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.13989456

    Bradley, L., Sip˝ ocz, B., Robitaille, T., et al. 2024, astropy/photutils: 2.0.2, 2.0.2, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.13989456

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.13989456 2024

  17. [18]

    2022, JWST Calibration Pipeline, 1.8.2, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7229890

    Bushouse, H., Eisenhamer, J., Dencheva, N., et al. 2022, JWST Calibration Pipeline, 1.8.2, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7229890

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.7229890 2022

  18. [19]

    2024, ApJL, 960, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad1691 Castro-Gonz´ alez, A., Demangeon, O

    Cadieux, C., Plotnykov, M., Doyon, R., et al. 2024, ApJL, 960, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad1691 Castro-Gonz´ alez, A., Demangeon, O. D. S., Lillo-Box, J., et al. 2023, A&A, 675, A52, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346550

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad1691 2024

  19. [20]

    2013, Python and HDF5 (O’Reilly)

    Collette, A. 2013, Python and HDF5 (O’Reilly)

    2013

  20. [21]

    J., Monaghan, C., Benneke, B., & Dang, L

    Connors, N. J., Monaghan, C., Benneke, B., & Dang, L. 2025, ApJL, 989, L11, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adee0d

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adee0d 2025

  21. [22]

    P., Ih, J., Kite, E

    Coy, B. P., Ih, J., Kite, E. S., et al. 2025, Population-level Hypothesis Testing with Rocky Planet Emission Data: A Tentative Trend in the Brightness Temperatures of M-Earths. https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.06573

    arXiv 2025

  22. [23]

    2024, Journal of Open Source Software, 9, 6202, doi: 10.21105/joss.06202

    Deal, D., & Espinoza, N. 2024, Journal of Open Source Software, 9, 6202, doi: 10.21105/joss.06202

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.06202 2024

  23. [24]

    2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 358–369, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02428-z

    Ducrot, E., Lagage, P.-O., Min, M., et al. 2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 358–369, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02428-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-024-02428-z 2025

  24. [25]

    J., Ducrot, E., Rackham, B

    Fauchez, T. J., Ducrot, E., Rackham, B. V., et al. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 989, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adf068

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adf068 2025

  25. [26]

    2016 , month =

    Foreman-Mackey, D. 2016, Journal of Open Source Software, 1, 24, doi: 10.21105/joss.00024

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.00024 2016

  26. [27]

    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, 306–312, doi: 10.1086/670067

    work page doi:10.1086/670067 2013

  27. [28]

    P., Diamond-Lowe, H., et al

    Fortune, M., Gibson, N. P., Diamond-Lowe, H., et al. 2025, Hot Rocks Survey III: A deep eclipse for LHS 1140c and a new Gaussian process method to account for correlated noise in individual pixels. https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.22186

    arXiv 2025

  28. [29]

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

    work page doi:10.1214/ss/1177011136 1992

  29. [30]

    J., et al

    Gillon, M., Ducrot, E., Bell, T. J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.02128, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2509.02128

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.02128 2025

  30. [31]

    M., Brasseur, C

    Ginsburg, A., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., Brasseur, C. E., et al. 2019, AJ, 157, 98, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aafc33

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aafc33 2019

  31. [32]

    D., Sloan, G

    Gordon, K. D., Sloan, G. C., Garcia Marin, M., et al. 2024, The Astronomical Journal, 169, 6, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad8cd4 GJ 3929 b - First Complete Rocky Worlds DDT Data Set19

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad8cd4 2024

  32. [33]

    P., Bell, T

    Greene, T. P., Bell, T. J., Ducrot, E., et al. 2023, Nature, 618, 39, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-05951-7

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-05951-7 2023

  33. [34]

    Hansen, B. M. S. 2008, ApJS, 179, 484, doi: 10.1086/591964

    work page doi:10.1086/591964 2008

  34. [35]

    R., Millman, K

    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

  35. [36]

    2023, ApJL, 956, L20, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acfe05

    Heng, K. 2023, ApJL, 956, L20, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acfe05

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acfe05 2023

  36. [37]

    M., et al

    Holmberg, M., Diamond-Lowe, H., Mendon¸ ca, J. M., et al. 2026, AJ, 171, 251, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ae4c45

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ae4c45 2026

  37. [38]

    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

  38. [39]

    G., Krick, J

    Ingalls, J. G., Krick, J. E., Carey, S. J., et al. 2016, AJ, 152, 44, doi: 10.3847/0004-6256/152/2/44

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-6256/152/2/44 2016

  39. [40]

    2024, in AAS/Division for Extreme Solar Systems Abstracts, Vol

    Gharib-Nezhad, E. 2024, in AAS/Division for Extreme Solar Systems Abstracts, Vol. 56, AAS/Division for Extreme Solar Systems Abstracts, 631.03

    2024

  40. [41]

    2024, in AASTCS10, Extreme Solar Systems V, Vol

    Gharib-Nezhad, E. 2024, in AASTCS10, Extreme Solar Systems V, Vol. 56, 631.03. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ESS.....563103I

    2024

  41. [42]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 944, 41, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acabc2

    Gharib-Nezhad, E. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 944, 41, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acabc2

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acabc2 2023

  42. [43]

    D., Coy, B

    Ji, X., Chatterjee, R. D., Coy, B. P., & Kite, E. S. 2025, The Cosmic Shoreline Revisited: A Metric for Atmospheric Retention Informed by Hydrodynamic Escape. https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.19872

    arXiv 2025

  43. [44]

    , keywords =

    Kemmer, J., Stock, S., Kossakowski, D., et al. 2020, A&A, 642, A236, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038967

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038967 2020

  44. [45]

    2022, A&A, 659, A17, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142653

    Kemmer, J., Dreizler, S., Kossakowski, D., et al. 2022, A&A, 659, A17, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142653

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142653 2022

  45. [46]

    Koll, D. D. B. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 924, 134, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3b48

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac3b48 2022

  46. [47]

    2015, PASP, 127, 1161, doi: 10.1086/683602

    Kreidberg, L. 2015, PASP, 127, 1161, doi: 10.1086/683602

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/683602 2015

  47. [48]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.11083, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.11083

    Lacedelli, G., Pall` e, E., Luque, R., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.11083, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.11083

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.11083 2024

  48. [49]

    2015, Astrobiology, 15, 119, doi: 10.1089/ast.2014.1231

    Luger, R., & Barnes, R. 2015, Astrobiology, 15, 119, doi: 10.1089/ast.2014.1231

    work page doi:10.1089/ast.2014.1231 2015

  49. [50]

    J., Kunimoto, M., et al

    Luque, R., Fulton, B. J., Kunimoto, M., et al. 2022, A&A, 664, A199, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243834 Meier Vald´ es, E. A., Demory, B.-O., Diamond-Lowe, H., et al. 2025, A&A, 698, A68, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453449

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243834 2022

  50. [51]

    J., Coulombe, L.-P., & Roy, P.-A

    Monaghan, C., Benneke, B., Connors, N. J., Coulombe, L.-P., & Roy, P.-A. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2604.15421. https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.15421

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  51. [52]

    2025, The Astronomical Journal, 169, 239, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/adbe75

    Monaghan, C., Roy, P.-A., Benneke, B., et al. 2025, The Astronomical Journal, 169, 239, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/adbe75

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/adbe75 2025

  52. [53]

    2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 830, 159, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/159

    Nakajima, T., & Sorahana, S. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 830, 159, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/159

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/830/2/159 2016

  53. [54]

    2008, PASP, 120, 317, doi: 10.1086/533420

    Nutzman, P., & Charbonneau, D. 2008, PASP, 120, 317, doi: 10.1086/533420

    work page doi:10.1086/533420 2008

  54. [55]

    2023, AJ, 165, 134, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acb4e3

    Oddo, D., Dragomir, D., Brandeker, A., et al. 2023, AJ, 165, 134, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acb4e3

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/acb4e3 2023

  55. [56]

    A., Hu, R., et al

    Paragas, K., Knutson, H. A., Hu, R., et al. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 981, 130, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ada9eb

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ada9eb 2025

  56. [57]

    K., Charbonneau, D., & Vanderburg, A

    Pass, E. K., Charbonneau, D., & Vanderburg, A. 2025, The Receding Cosmic Shoreline of Mid-to-Late M Dwarfs: Measurements of Active Lifetimes Worsen Challenges for Atmosphere Retention by Rocky Exoplanets. https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.01182

    arXiv 2025

  57. [58]

    K., Winters, J

    Pass, E. K., Winters, J. G., Charbonneau, D., et al. 2023, AJ, 166, 171, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acf561

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/acf561 2023

  58. [59]

    A., Brandeker, A., Kitzmann, D., et al

    Patel, J. A., Brandeker, A., Kitzmann, D., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A159, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450748

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450748 2024

  59. [60]

    2011, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825

    Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., et al. 2011, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825

    2011

  60. [61]

    , keywords =

    Pelletier, S., Benneke, B., Darveau-Bernier, A., et al. 2021, AJ, 162, 73, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac0428

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac0428 2021

  61. [62]

    2025, AJ, 169, 10, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad8b28

    Pelletier, S., Benneke, B., Chachan, Y., et al. 2024, The Astronomical Journal, 169, 10, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad8b28

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad8b28 2024

  62. [63]

    2024, ApJL, 974, L10, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad6f00

    Piaulet-Ghorayeb, C., Benneke, B., Radica, M., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 974, L10, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad6f00

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad6f00 2024

  63. [64]

    V., Apai, D., & Giampapa, M

    Rackham, B. V., Apai, D., & Giampapa, M. S. 2018, ApJ, 853, 122, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa08c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaa08c 2018

  64. [65]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.02932, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.02932

    Redfield, S., Batalha, N., Benneke, B., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.02932, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.02932

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.02932 2024

  65. [66]

    H., Wright, G

    Rieke, G. H., Wright, G. S., B¨ oker, T., et al. 2015, PASP, 127, 584, doi: 10.1086/682252

    work page doi:10.1086/682252 2015

  66. [67]

    2026, ApJL, 998, L39, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae3da3

    Rochon, A., Artigau, ´E., Weisserman, D., et al. 2026, ApJL, 998, L39, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae3da3

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae3da3 2026

  67. [68]

    2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 941, 89, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac9f18 —

    Roy, P.-A., Benneke, B., Piaulet, C., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 941, 89, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac9f18 —. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 954, L52, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acebf0

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac9f18 2022

  68. [69]

    Efron, Bootstrap methods: Another look at the jackknife

    Schwarz, G. 1978, The Annals of Statistics, 6, 461, doi: 10.1214/aos/1176344136

    work page doi:10.1214/aos/1176344136 1978

  69. [70]

    2010, ARA&A, 48, 631, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081309-130837 20

    Seager, S., & Deming, D. 2010, ARA&A, 48, 631, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081309-130837 20

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081309-130837 2010

  70. [71]

    , keywords =

    Soto, M. G., Anglada-Escud´ e, G., Dreizler, S., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A144, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140618

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140618 2021

  71. [72]

    , keywords =

    Stassun, K. G., Oelkers, R. J., Paegert, M., et al. 2019, AJ, 158, 138, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab3467

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab3467 2019

  72. [73]

    2014, PASJ, 66, 98, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psu078 —

    Tsuji, T., & Nakajima, T. 2014, PASJ, 66, 98, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psu078 —. 2016, PASJ, 68, 13, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psv119

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/psu078 2014

  73. [74]

    2015, PASJ, 67, 26, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psu160 Vald´ es, E

    Tsuji, T., Nakajima, T., & Takeda, Y. 2015, PASJ, 67, 26, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psu160 Vald´ es, E. A. M., Demory, B. O., Diamond-Lowe, H., et al. 2025, Hot Rocks Survey II: The thermal emission of TOI-1468 b reveals a hot bare rock. https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.19772

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/psu160 2015

  74. [75]

    E., et al

    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

  75. [76]

    G., Cloutier, R., Medina, A

    Winters, J. G., Cloutier, R., Medina, A. A., et al. 2022, AJ, 163, 168, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac50a9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac50a9 2022

  76. [77]

    P., et al

    Xue, Q., Zhang, M., Coy, B. P., et al. 2025, The JWST Rocky Worlds DDT Program reveals GJ 3929b to likely be a bare rock. https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.12516

    arXiv 2025

  77. [78]

    J., & Catling, D

    Zahnle, K. J., & Catling, D. C. 2017, ApJ, 843, 122, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7846 Zapatero Osorio, M. R., Tabernero, H., Su´ arez Mascare˜ no, A., et al. 2026, A&A, 706, A166, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449545

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7846 2017

  78. [79]

    2023, No Thick Carbon Dioxide Atmosphere on the Rocky Exoplanet TRAPPIST-1 c, Nature, 620, 746, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06232-z

    Zieba, S., Kreidberg, L., Ducrot, E., et al. 2023, Nature, 620, 746, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06232-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06232-z 2023