Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 284 references

New SPIRou and TESS observations refine TOI-4438 b and TOI-442 b, cutting mass uncertainties by about half and placing TOI-442 b among the most precisely measured Neptune-sized planets.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 05:28 UTC pith:FLXBDIZL

load-bearing objection A useful, carefully analyzed re-determination of two M-dwarf planetary systems, but TOI-442 b's headline precision numbers rest on a stellar-mass prior that contradicts the paper's own text. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.13333 v1 pith:FLXBDIZL submitted 2026-07-14 astro-ph.EP

Revisiting TOI-4438 and TOI-442 planetary systems with new observations from SPIRou and TESS

J. Serrano Bell , G. H\'ebrard , E. Martioli , R. F. D\'iaz , L. de Almeida , D. Lorenzo-Oliveira , A. Salmi , C. Dorn
show 21 more authors
M. Valatsou A. Carmona M. Ould-Elhkim L. Arnold \'E. Artigau I. Boisse X. Bonfils C. Cadieux Z. Chakir N. J. Cook X. Delfosse J.-F. Donati R. Doyon N. Heidari J. M. Jenkins F. Kiefer S. Lafrance A. L'Heureux C. Moutou J. Morneau X. Vandelac
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords exoplanetsM dwarfsradial velocitiestransit photometryGaussian processeshot Neptune desertmini-Neptunestellar activity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper revisits two transiting M-dwarf planets, TOI-4438 b and TOI-442 b, using new TESS photometry and near-infrared spectropolarimetric radial velocities alongside archival data. Its central claim is that both planets now have substantially more precise masses and radii: for TOI-4438 b, mass precision improves by 53% and radius by 22%, yielding a 4.11 Earth-mass, 2.40 Earth-radius mini-Neptune; for TOI-442 b, mass precision improves by 46% and radius by 67%, yielding a 28.38 Earth-mass, 4.25 Earth-radius planet at the edge of the hot Neptune desert. The gains come from jointly modeling photometry and radial velocities with Gaussian-process activity correction, using rotation periods derived from magnetic Zeeman signatures. A sympathetic reader would care because the refined parameters place TOI-442 b among the roughly ten most precisely characterized exoplanets, making it a key anchor for population studies, atmospheric escape models, and future transmission and emission spectroscopy.

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that both planets' bulk properties are now measured near the limit of current data: TOI-4438 b has M_p = 4.11^{+0.40}_{-0.38} M⊕ and R_p = 2.40^{+0.09}_{-0.10} R⊕, consistent with earlier work but with the mass uncertainty cut from about 20% to about 10%; TOI-442 b has M_p = 28.38^{+0.77}_{-0.73} M⊕ and R_p = 4.25^{+0.10}_{-0.08} R⊕, reducing mass uncertainty to 2.7% and radius uncertainty to 2.3%. This places TOI-442 b among the handful of exoplanets with the most precise masses and radii and makes it the most precise Neptune-size planet known. The paper also reports stellar rotation periods from magnetic-field variability (77.6 days for TOI-4438,

What carries the argument

The central tool is a joint Bayesian fit of TESS transit light curves and radial velocities from optical and near-infrared spectrographs, in which stellar activity is treated with Gaussian processes: a single stochastically driven damped simple harmonic oscillator (SHO) kernel for TOI-4438 and a double-SHO kernel for TOI-442, with independent optical and near-infrared amplitudes sharing a rotation-period prior set by the Zeeman-derived rotation periods. The GP kernels absorb rotationally modulated activity so that the Keplerian planet signals — the 7.446-day and 4.052-day orbits — are isolated cleanly. The paper compares six to twelve noise-model configurations and selects by leave-one-out c

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the Gaussian-process kernels used to model stellar activity capture the true magnetic variability of these M dwarfs; if that activity model is wrong, the quoted planet masses and radii could be biased.

What would settle it

A decisive test is whether the ~16-day radial-velocity excess in TOI-442 remains phase-coherent as a Keplerian signal in future RVs and produces the predicted ~3–40-minute transit-timing variations in longer TESS baselines; if it decorrelates and follows the dTEMP activity indicator, activity is confirmed and the one-planet interpretation stands.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • TOI-442 b becomes a benchmark for the hot Neptune desert, with mass and radius precise to a few percent, so photoevaporation and migration scenarios can be tested against its nearly circular orbit and edge-of-desert location.
  • TOI-4438 b's density of 1.65 g/cm³ confirms a volatile-rich mini-Neptune, now precise enough to anchor interior models and atmospheric mass fraction estimates.
  • Both planets pass the transmission spectroscopy metric threshold for JWST, and TOI-442 b is also favorable for emission spectroscopy, making them immediate atmospheric follow-up targets.
  • No second planet is supported around TOI-442; if correct, the system offers a clean single-planet case where the ~16-day signal is stellar activity, validated by its association with the rotation period and activity indicators.
  • The single-transit candidate around TOI-4438, with radius ~1.8 R⊕ and a long-tailed period near 74 days, provides a concrete target for future TESS sectors and higher-precision radial velocities.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the activity interpretation is correct, the 16-day radial-velocity signal in TOI-442 is not a planet, but the paper's own prior-sensitivity analysis leaves room for the opposite; a longer baseline of RVs should show whether the signal stays coherent at P_c ≈ 16.0 days.
  • The single-transit candidate around TOI-4438, if confirmed, would add a ~1.8 R⊕ planet on a long orbit, but its expected RV amplitude of only 1–2.6 m/s means confirmation will likely require a second transit in TESS sector 118 or higher-precision spectrographs.
  • A testable extension of the interior modeling: if TOI-442 b is indeed near the photoevaporative regime, transmission spectroscopy measuring its atmospheric metallicity should reveal a high-metallicity envelope, breaking the current composition degeneracy.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reanalyzes the TOI-4438 and TOI-442 systems using new TESS sectors and SPIRou radial velocities, spectropolarimetry, and activity indicators, combined with archival CARMENES, ESPRESSO, HIRES, iSHELL, and PFS data. It performs joint transit+RV fits with GP stellar-activity models, compares 6–12 models via LOO-CV, and reports refined parameters: for TOI-4438 b, Mp = 4.11 +0.40/−0.38 M⊕, Rp = 2.40 +0.09/−0.10 R⊕; for TOI-442 b, Mp = 28.38 +0.77/−0.73 M⊕, Rp = 4.25 +0.10/−0.08 R⊕. The paper claims large precision improvements, places TOI-442 b among the most precisely measured Neptune-size planets, discusses a single-transit candidate around TOI-4438, tests a second-planet hypothesis for TOI-442, and presents interior-structure inferences for both planets.

Significance. If the quoted parameters are correct, the paper is valuable: it adds a substantial SPIRou baseline, uses a careful Bayesian framework with convergence checks and LOO-CV model selection, and provides two planets of interest for atmospheric follow-up. The multi-model comparison, the explicit treatment of stellar activity with GP kernels, the TTV test for the proposed second planet, and the detailed interior modeling are strengths. However, the headline precision for TOI-442 b rests on an internally inconsistent stellar-mass prior, and the TOI-4438 b K prior is informative enough that part of the claimed mass-precision gain could be prior-driven. These issues are load-bearing for the paper's main claims and must be addressed before the results can be accepted as stated.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3.2, Table 1, Table 3] Internal inconsistency in the TOI-442 stellar parameters. Section 3.2 reports M* = 0.542 ± 0.017 M⊙ and R* = 0.536 ± 0.012 R⊙, but Table 1 tabulates M* = 0.542 ± 0.001 and Table 3 adopts BN(0.542, 0.001) as the joint-fit prior, yielding posterior R* = 0.536 ± 0.001. Since R* is tied to M* through the mean stellar density from the transit light curve, R* cannot be constrained to 0.1% when M* is uncertain to 3.1%; the quoted Rp and Mp uncertainties for TOI-442 b are therefore prior-driven, not data-driven. This directly affects the claimed 67% radius-precision improvement, the 46% mass-precision improvement, the 'most precise Neptune-size planet' statement, and the derived density and Teq. Please rerun the fits with BN(0.542, 0.017) and report how the parameters, uncertainties, and ranking claims change.
  2. [Table 3, K priors; Sections 3.5 and 5] The priors on the RV semi-amplitude K are log-normal with sigma = 0.1 in log, i.e., a ~10% fractional prior. For TOI-4438 b, the posterior K = 2.75 ± 0.24 m/s has an 8.7% uncertainty, essentially the same as the prior width; the data do not tighten K much beyond the prior. The claimed 53% improvement in mass precision (Abstract and Section 5) may therefore be partly an artifact of the informative prior rather than of the new SPIRou data. Please repeat the fits with a broad prior (e.g., log-uniform over a wide range or N(0, 10) m/s) and report whether the K and Mp posteriors change materially; if they do, the precision claims must be revised.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Table 3] The stellar-mass row is labeled 'M⋆ (R⊙)'; this should be M⊙. Also, the notation 'TBJD-ref time' for T0 should be defined explicitly.
  2. [Section 3.3 / Abstract] For TOI-4438, the GLS detection of the 7.4-day signal is only at FAP < 10% in the combined RVs and is not significant in SPIRou alone. The paper should state this explicitly in the results/abstract so that the RV detection is not overstated; the known transit ephemeris is what makes the Keplerian interpretation viable.
  3. [Section 3.4 / 3.5] The TESS GP detrending is performed in a two-step way: the GP is fit to out-of-transit data and then subtracted before the joint MCMC. This does not propagate GP hyperparameter uncertainty into the transit parameters. A robustness check with a simultaneous GP+transit fit, or at least a statement quantifying the effect, would strengthen the radius-precision claims.
  4. [Section 3.7.1] The single-transit candidate constraints are model-dependent (circular orbit, P > 32.7 d, empirical mass-radius relation). The text is appropriately cautious, but the quoted K range of ~1–2.6 m/s should be labeled as a model prediction, not an observed constraint.
  5. [Section 3.6] LOO-CV scores for GP and non-GP models use different estimators (analytical LOO vs PSIS-LOO). A brief sentence explaining why this does not bias the model ranking would be useful.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; the central mass/radius claims are independent joint fits; a stellar-mass prior inconsistency is a correctness concern, not a circular derivation.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is: new TESS photometry + SPIRou/CARMENES/archival RVs -> joint transit+RV model -> derived planetary mass and radius. No fitted planetary parameter is reinserted into the definition of the target, and the quoted M_p and R_p posteriors are not equal by construction to any prior on those quantities. The GP activity components use priors informed by the B_l variability, but the planetary parameters are not defined by those GP priors; model comparison (LOO-CV) is performed on the same data but does not itself fix the planet parameters. The single-transit candidate for TOI-4438 adopts stellar priors from the planet-b joint fit, but this is a standard prior choice, not a reduction of the candidate's parameters to the same fitted values. The only notable issue is an internal inconsistency: Section 3.2 reports M* = 0.542 +/- 0.017 M_sun for TOI-442, whereas Table 1 and Table 3 adopt M* = 0.542 +/- 0.001 M_sun as the prior, and the posterior M* equals this prior. This means the quoted TOI-442 b mass precision (2.7%) is partly prior-driven rather than fully data-driven, and it affects the 'most precise Neptune-size planet' ranking. However, this is a prior-calibration/correctness problem, not circularity: the planet mass is not an input to the stellar-mass prior, and independent RV and photometric data still enter the joint fit. The paper is otherwise self-contained against external benchmarks and does not rely on a load-bearing self-citation chain. Accordingly, no circular step meets the evidence threshold; score 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

8 free parameters · 5 axioms · 1 invented entities

The measurement claims rest mostly on standard joint fitting; the loaded assumptions are the activity-GP kernels, the activity interpretation of the 16-day signal, and the interior-model priors. There are no invented forces or particles beyond the explicitly labeled single-transit candidate.

free parameters (8)
  • RV semi-amplitude K (TOI-4438 b) = 2.75^{+0.24}_{-0.23} m/s
    Sets planetary mass via joint fit; value from Table 3.
  • RV semi-amplitude K (TOI-442 b) = 17.13^{+0.46}_{-0.44} m/s
    Sets planetary mass via joint fit; value from Table 3.
  • Orbital eccentricity e = 0.07^{+0.07}_{-0.05} (TOI-4438 b), 0.022^{+0.022}_{-0.015} (TOI-442 b)
    Fitted with uniform prior; affects RV shape and derived mass.
  • Per-instrument RV jitter = SPIRou 2.8/3.2 m/s; CARMENES-VIS 1.0/2.3 m/s; ESPRESSO 1.0 m/s; etc.
    Nuisance parameters absorbing white noise; from Table 3.
  • GP stellar-activity hyperparameters = sigma_GP nIR 4.4 (TOI-4438) and 5 (TOI-442); P_rot 77.7 and 28.8 d; tau, Q0, dQ, f as in Table 3
    Model correlated stellar noise; chosen by LOO-CV; affects planet parameter uncertainties.
  • Quadratic drift coefficients (TOI-4438) = C1 = -0.011 +/- 0.004, C2 = -0.00004 +/- 0.00001
    Fit to capture long-term RV curvature; 95% HDI excludes zero.
  • Transit parameters (b, Rp/R*, q1, q2, T0) = See Table 3 posterior values
    Fitted transit shape parameters in the joint model.
  • Single-transit candidate period and radius = P = 74^{+152}_{-34} d, Rp = 1.8 +/- 0.1 R_Earth
    Inferred from one transit with P>32.7 d prior; speculative and explicitly unconfirmed.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Quasi-periodic and double-SHO Gaussian process kernels can represent stellar-activity-induced RV variability around these M dwarfs.
    Adopted in Section 3.5; if wrong, planet parameters/jitters could be biased.
  • domain assumption Optical and near-IR activity signals should be modeled as independent GP components sharing a common rotation period.
    Section 3.5 states this is a conservative choice, not directly justified by the data; chromaticity of spots/plages/Zeeman is uncertain.
  • ad hoc to paper The ~16 d RV excess in TOI-442 is stellar activity rather than a second planet.
    Section 3.7.2; authors note posterior of P_c is sensitive to the 14-18 d prior and no transits/TTVs support a planet.
  • ad hoc to paper The single-transit event in TOI-4438 is a planet on a circular orbit with no additional transits in the TESS baseline (P>32.7 d).
    Section 3.7.1/Table A.2; used to derive the period posterior.
  • ad hoc to paper Interior model: H2-He-H2O envelope, Earth-like core/mantle ratio 0.325:0.675, and for TOI-442 b a 90% core+mantle mass prior.
    Appendix B and Table A.4; the 90% prior is imposed to handle model-grid limits and directly shapes the inferred atmospheric mass fraction.
invented entities (1)
  • TOI-4438 single-transit planet candidate independent evidence
    purpose: Explain a ~2 ppt, 2.2 h single transit in TESS sector 79.
    Inferred Rp = 1.8 +/- 0.1 R_Earth and P = 74^{+152}_{-34} d; future TESS sector 118 observations and RV follow-up can confirm or refute it.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 31067 in / 11585 out tokens · 130782 ms · 2026-08-02T05:28:31.567661+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We present a comprehensive re-analysis of two star-planet systems: TOI-4438, an M3.5V star hosting a mini-Neptune in a 7.4-day orbit, and TOI-442, an M1V star with a 4-day period planet located within the hot Neptune desert. Both systems were originally identified as transiting planet candidates by TESS and subsequently validated through the radial velocity (RV) method. Our work incorporates new TESS transit data and high-resolution spectroscopy from the SPIRou near-infrared spectropolarimeter. We detect a persistent and relatively strong Zeeman signature in TOI-442, while TOI-4438 exhibits weaker and intermittent magnetic activity, and we infer the stellar rotation periods of both stars from the variability of the longitudinal magnetic field. We jointly fit photometry and RV models for each system. For TOI-4438\,b we combine archival CARMENES data with 81 SPIRou observations and five TESS sectors. This yields a refined planetary mass of $M_{\rm p} = 4.11^{+0.40}_{-0.38}\,M_{\oplus}$ and a radius of $R_{\rm p} = 2.40^{+0.09}_{-0.10}\,R_{\oplus}$, consistent with the previous estimate within 1.1$\sigma$ while improving by 53\% the precision on the mass and 22\% on the radius. For TOI-442\,b, we add 29 SPIRou RV measurements to an extensive archival dataset, significantly extending the temporal baseline. With a new TESS sector, we tighten the mass to $M_{\rm p} = 28.38^{+0.77}_{-0.73}\,M_{\oplus}$ and radius to $R_{\rm p} = 4.25^{+0.10}_{-0.08}\,R_{\oplus}$, which agrees to the previous values within 1.5$\sigma$ and improves the precisions by 46\% and 67\% respectively. We find no clear signs of additional planets in the available RV data, although we detect a single-transit event in the TOI-4438 light curve. We compare various RV models and find that those accounting for stellar variability-induced signals yield improved constraints on the planetary parameters.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.13333 by A. Carmona, A. L'Heureux, A. Salmi, C. Cadieux, C. Dorn, C. Moutou, D. Lorenzo-Oliveira, \'E. Artigau, E. Martioli, F. Kiefer, G. H\'ebrard, I. Boisse, J.-F. Donati, J. M. Jenkins, J. Morneau, J. Serrano Bell, L. Arnold, L. de Almeida, M. Ould-Elhkim, M. Valatsou, N. Heidari, N. J. Cook, R. Doyon, R. F. D\'iaz, S. Lafrance, X. Bonfils, X. Delfosse, X. Vandelac, Z. Chakir.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: TESS light curves. Upper panel: PDCSAP flux for TOI-4438 with 2-min cadence. Lower panel: PDCSAP flux for TOI-442 with 2-min cadence. The triangular markers indicate transits (see Sect. 3.4), in red for TOI-4438 b and TOI-442 b, and in green for the single transit (see Sect. 3.4) observed in TOI-4438 (also shown in the zoomed-in view including both the raw and binned light-curve data). The GP model (Sect. … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: GP analysis of the time series of the longitudinal magnetic field (Bℓ). The black points represent the Bℓ measurements derived from the LSD profiles of the SPIRou spectropolarimetric data, together with the best-fit GP model (orange lines). thetic spectra were generated with MARCS (Gustafsson et al. 2008b) atmospheres and MOOG6 (Sneden et al. 2012) radiative transfer; the line list is our internal list aug… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: GLS periodograms for TOI-4438 for (from top to bottom): com￾bined RVs dataset, SPIRou RVs, SPIRou dLW, SPIRou dTEMP, resid￾uals from the Keplerian model of planet b, residuals from the GP model for stellar activity and residuals from the full final model. Horizontal dashed lines show the 1%, 5% and 10% false alarm probabilities. The orange solid and dashed line mark the period of the TOI-4438 b and its 1-d… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Leave-one-out cross-validation (LOO-CV) scores with their es￾timated uncertainties for all evaluated models. For non-GP models, the scores are computed using the PSIS-LOO-CV implementation in Arviz; otherwise, the analytical LOO-CV expression is used (Section 5.4.2 from Rasmussen & Williams (2006)). 4. Discussion In our analysis of the TOI-4438 system, we find that the mini￾Neptune TOI-4438 b has a mass of… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Best-fit model for TOI-4438 b, the solid black line and its gray overlay correspond to the median and 16th-84th percentile regions of the posterior. Top panel: Keplerian model and drift. Middle panel: SHO-GP model. Bottom panel: Full model residuals. -20 0 20 RV-GP (ms 1 ) TOI-442 Keplerian model SPIRou CARMENES-VIS ESPRESSO HIRES iSHELL PFS -20 0 20 -20 0 20 RV-Planet b (ms 1 ) GP model (nIR) GP model (vi… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Best-fit RV model for TOI-442 b, the solid black line and its gray overlay correspond to the median and 16th-84th percentile regions of the posterior. Top panel: Keplerian model and drift. Middle panel: dSHO-GP model. Bottom panel: Full model residuals. nIR (5±3 m s−1 ) amplitudes are consistent within their uncertain￾ties, in line with theoretical expectations for an early M dwarf (Reiners et al. 2010) an… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Radius vs orbital period of known exoplanets obtained from the NASA Exoplanet Archive (planets with radius precision greater than 20%). Dashed black lines mark the estimated boundaries for the hot￾Neptune "desert", "ridge" and "savanna" (Castro-González et al. 2024). The position of TOI-4438 b and TOI-442 b is marked with red and blue markers respectively. Planets with mass and radius measured with equal … view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Phase folded RVs and residuals. The best-fit model is shown with a solid black line and a gray overlay corresponding to the median and the 16th-84th percentile regions of the posterior. For TOI-4438 b in the top panel and TOI-442 b in the bottom panel [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Phase folded TESS light curves and residuals. The best-fit model is shown with a solid black line and a gray overlay corresponding to the median and the 16th-84th percentile regions of the posterior. Murray-Clay et al. 2009; Lopez & Fortney 2013; Owen & Wu 2017). In addition, dynamical processes such as high eccentric￾ity migration (HEM) and disk-driven migration may deliver gi￾ant planets to close-in orbi… view at source ↗

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

284 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    2021, , 647, A53

    Acu \ n a , L., Deleuil , M., Mousis , O., et al. 2021, , 647, A53

    2021

  2. [2]

    & Fabrycky , D

    Agol , E. & Fabrycky , D. C. 2018, in Handbook of Exoplanets, ed. H. J. Deeg & J. A. Belmonte , 7

    2018

  3. [3]

    2021, , 914, 84

    Aguichine , A., Mousis , O., Deleuil , M., & Marcq , E. 2021, , 914, 84

    2021

  4. [4]

    F., & Barcel \'o Forteza , S

    Aller , A., Lillo-Box , J., Jones , D., Miranda , L. F., & Barcel \'o Forteza , S. 2020, , 635, A128

    2020

  5. [5]

    M., Bonfils , X., Bryant , E

    Almenara , J. M., Bonfils , X., Bryant , E. M., et al. 2024, , 683, A166

    2024

  6. [6]

    W., & O'Neil , M

    Ambikasaran , S., Foreman-Mackey , D., Greengard , L., Hogg , D. W., & O'Neil , M. 2014

    2014

  7. [7]

    2018, , 474, 2094

    Angus , R., Morton , T., Aigrain , S., Foreman-Mackey , D., & Rajpaul , V. 2018, , 474, 2094

    2018

  8. [8]

    J., Lopez , T

    Armstrong , D. J., Lopez , T. A., Adibekyan , V., et al. 2020, , 583, 39

    2020

  9. [9]

    J., et al

    Artigau , \'E ., Cadieux , C., Cook , N. J., et al. 2024, , 168, 252

    2024

  10. [10]

    J., et al

    Artigau , \'E ., Cadieux , C., Cook , N. J., et al. 2022, , 164, 84

    2022

  11. [11]

    M., Lim , P

    Astropy Collaboration , Price-Whelan , A. M., Lim , P. L., et al. 2022, , 935, 167

    2022

  12. [12]

    Barros , S. C. C., Demangeon , O., D \' az , R. F., et al. 2020, , 634, A75

    2020

  13. [13]

    L., et al

    Basant , R., Luque , R., Bean , J. L., et al. 2025, , 982, L1

    2025

  14. [14]

    , Cameron, R

    Beeck, B. , Cameron, R. H. , Reiners, A. , & Schüssler, M. 2013, , 558, A49

    2013

  15. [15]

    2019, , 486, 2075

    Blanco-Cuaresma , S. 2019, , 486, 2075

    2019

  16. [16]

    2013, , 549, A109

    Bonfils , X., Delfosse , X., Udry , S., et al. 2013, , 549, A109

    2013

  17. [17]

    2001, , 374, 733

    Bouchy , F., Pepe , F., & Queloz , D. 2001, , 374, 733

    2001

  18. [18]

    2023, , 669, A63

    Bourrier , V., Attia , M., Mallonn , M., et al. 2023, , 669, A63

    2023

  19. [19]

    Bryant , E. M. & Bayliss , D. 2022, , 163, 197

    2022

  20. [20]

    2022, , 164, 96

    Cadieux , C., Doyon , R., Plotnykov , M., et al. 2022, , 164, 96

    2022

  21. [21]

    2025, , 700, A222

    Carmona , A., Delfosse , X., Ould-Elhkim , M., et al. 2025, , 700, A222

    2025

  22. [22]

    2024, , 689, A250

    Castro-Gonz \'a lez , A., Bourrier , V., Lillo-Box , J., et al. 2024, , 689, A250

    2024

  23. [23]

    P., & Tinetti , G

    Changeat , Q., Keyte , L., Waldmann , I. P., & Tinetti , G. 2020, , 896, 107

    2020

  24. [24]

    L., McElroy, D

    Christiansen, J. L., McElroy, D. L., Harbut, M., et al. 2025, The Planetary Science Journal, 6, 186

    2025

  25. [25]

    J., Artigau , \'E ., Doyon , R., et al

    Cook , N. J., Artigau , \'E ., Doyon , R., et al. 2022, , 134, 114509

    2022

  26. [26]

    Correia , A. C. M., Bourrier , V., & Delisle , J.-B. 2020, , 635, A37

    2020

  27. [27]

    2023, , 673, A14

    Cort \'e s-Zuleta , P., Boisse , I., Klein , B., et al. 2023, , 673, A14

    2023

  28. [28]

    D., Shectman , S

    Crane , J. D., Shectman , S. A., & Butler , R. P. 2006, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 6269, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy, ed. I. S. McLean & M. Iye , 626931

    2006

  29. [29]

    D., Shectman , S

    Crane , J. D., Shectman , S. A., Butler , R. P., et al. 2010, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 7735, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy III, ed. I. S. McLean , S. K. Ramsay , & H. Takami , 773553

    2010

  30. [30]

    D., Shectman , S

    Crane , J. D., Shectman , S. A., Butler , R. P., Thompson , I. B., & Burley , G. S. 2008, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 7014, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy II, ed. I. S. McLean & M. M. Casali , 701479

    2008

  31. [31]

    2025, , 169, 97

    Damiano , M., Burr , Z., Hu , R., Burt , J., & Kataria , T. 2025, , 169, 97

    2025

  32. [32]

    O., & Marelli , S

    de Wringer , T., Dorn , C., Garvin , E. O., & Marelli , S. 2026, , 997, 321

    2026

  33. [33]

    F., Kouach , D., Moutou , C., et al

    Donati , J. F., Kouach , D., Moutou , C., et al. 2020, , 498, 5684

    2020

  34. [34]

    F., Semel , M., Carter , B

    Donati , J. F., Semel , M., Carter , B. D., Rees , D. E., & Collier Cameron , A. 1997, , 291, 658

    1997

  35. [35]

    2015, , 577, A83

    Dorn , C., Khan , A., Heng , K., et al. 2015, , 577, A83

    2015

  36. [36]

    2017, , 597, A37

    Dorn , C., Venturini , J., Khan , A., et al. 2017, , 597, A37

    2017

  37. [37]

    Dreizler , S., Crossfield , I. J. M., Kossakowski , D., et al. 2020, , 644, A127

    2020

  38. [38]

    Engle , S. G. & Guinan , E. F. 2023, , 954, L50

    2023

  39. [39]

    2018, Computer Physics Communications, 227, 117

    Faik , S., Tauschwitz , A., & Iosilevskiy , I. 2018, Computer Physics Communications, 227, 117

    2018

  40. [40]

    2017, , 154, 220

    Foreman-Mackey , D., Agol , E., Ambikasaran , S., & Angus , R. 2017, , 154, 220

    2017

  41. [41]

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

    Foreman-Mackey , D., Hogg , D. W., Lang , D., & Goodman , J. 2013 a , , 125, 306

    2013

  42. [42]

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

    Foreman-Mackey , D., Hogg , D. W., Lang , D., & Goodman , J. 2013 b , , 125, 306

    2013

  43. [43]

    2021, The Journal of Open Source Software, 6, 3285

    Foreman-Mackey , D., Luger , R., Agol , E., et al. 2021, The Journal of Open Source Software, 6, 3285

    2021

  44. [44]

    2023, , 672, A52

    Fouqu \'e , P., Martioli , E., Donati , J.-F., et al. 2023, , 672, A52

    2023

  45. [45]

    2013, , 766, 81

    Fressin , F., Torres , G., Charbonneau , D., et al. 2013, , 766, 81

    2013

  46. [46]

    J., Petigura , E

    Fulton , B. J., Petigura , E. A., Howard , A. W., et al. 2017, , 154, 109

    2017

  47. [47]

    Gaia Collaboration , Vallenari , A., Brown , A. G. A., et al. 2023, , 674, A1

    2023

  48. [48]

    B., Stern, H

    Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., et al. 2013, Bayesian Data Analysis, 3rd edn. (Chapman and Hall/CRC)

    2013

  49. [49]

    2024, , 685, A147

    Goffo , E., Chaturvedi , P., Murgas , F., et al. 2024, , 685, A147

    2024

  50. [50]

    D., et al

    Gore , R., Giacalone , S., Dressing , C. D., et al. 2024, , 271, 48

    2024

  51. [51]

    2010, , 520, A27

    Guillot , T. 2010, , 520, A27

    2010

  52. [52]

    & Schlichting , H

    Gupta , A. & Schlichting , H. E. 2019, , 487, 24

    2019

  53. [53]

    2008 a , , 486, 951

    Gustafsson , B., Edvardsson , B., Eriksson , K., et al. 2008 a , , 486, 951

    2008

  54. [54]

    2008 b , , 486, 951

    Gustafsson , B., Edvardsson , B., Eriksson , K., et al. 2008 b , , 486, 951

    2008

  55. [55]

    F., Armstrong , D

    Hacker , A., D \' az , R. F., Armstrong , D. J., et al. 2024, , 532, 1612

    2024

  56. [56]

    2018, , 313, 61

    Hakim , K., Rivoldini , A., Van Hoolst , T., et al. 2018, , 313, 61

    2018

  57. [57]

    Haswell , C. A. 2010, Transiting Exoplanets

    2010

  58. [58]

    M., Donati , J.-F., Delfosse , X., et al

    H \'e brard , \'E . M., Donati , J.-F., Delfosse , X., et al. 2014, , 443, 2599

    2014

  59. [59]

    & Heller , R

    Hippke , M. & Heller , R. 2019, , 623, A39

    2019

  60. [60]

    Hoffman , M. D. & Gelman , A. 2011, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1111.4246

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  61. [61]

    W., Marcy , G

    Howard , A. W., Marcy , G. W., Bryson , S. T., et al. 2012, , 201, 15

    2012

  62. [62]

    & Tsuchiya , T

    Ichikawa , H. & Tsuchiya , T. 2020, Minerals, 10, 59

    2020

  63. [63]

    Jenkins , J. M. 2002, , 575, 493

    2002

  64. [64]

    M., Chandrasekaran , H., McCauliff , S

    Jenkins , J. M., Chandrasekaran , H., McCauliff , S. D., et al. 2010, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 7740, Software and Cyberinfrastructure for Astronomy, ed. N. M. Radziwill & A. Bridger , 77400D

    2010

  65. [65]

    M., Tenenbaum , P., Seader , S., et al

    Jenkins , J. M., Tenenbaum , P., Seader , S., et al. 2020, Kepler Data Processing Handbook: Transiting Planet Search , Kepler Science Document KSCI-19081-003

    2020

  66. [66]

    M., Twicken , J

    Jenkins , J. M., Twicken , J. D., McCauliff , S., et al. 2016, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9913, Software and Cyberinfrastructure for Astronomy IV, ed. G. Chiozzi & J. C. Guzman , 99133E

    2016

  67. [67]

    2014, , 795, 65

    Jin , S., Mordasini , C., Parmentier , V., et al. 2014, , 795, 65

    2014

  68. [68]

    M.-R., Bean , J

    Kempton , E. M.-R., Bean , J. L., Louie , D. R., et al. 2018, , 130, 114401

    2018

  69. [69]

    2023, , 670, A136

    Kiefer , F., H \'e brard , G., Martioli , E., et al. 2023, , 670, A136

    2023

  70. [70]

    Kipping , D. M. 2013, , 435, 2152

    2013

  71. [71]

    2002, , 391, 369

    Kov \'a cs , G., Zucker , S., & Mazeh , T. 2002, , 391, 369

    2002

  72. [72]

    2025, , 701, A216

    Larue , P., Delfosse , X., Carmona , A., et al. 2025, , 701, A216

    2025

  73. [73]

    2007, , 461, 1185

    Lecavelier Des Etangs , A. 2007, , 461, 1185

    2007

  74. [74]

    2008, , 481, L83

    Lecavelier Des Etangs , A., Pont , F., Vidal-Madjar , A., & Sing , D. 2008, , 481, L83

    2008

  75. [75]

    D., et al

    Li , J., Tenenbaum , P., Twicken , J. D., et al. 2019, , 131, 024506

    2019

  76. [76]

    Lightkurve Collaboration , Cardoso , J. V. d. M., Hedges , C., et al. 2018, Lightkurve: Kepler and TESS time series analysis in Python , Astrophysics Source Code Library

    2018

  77. [77]

    Lopez , E. D. & Fortney , J. J. 2013, , 776, 2

    2013

  78. [78]

    2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 1399

    Luo , H., Dorn , C., & Deng , J. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 1399

    2024

  79. [79]

    & Pall \'e , E

    Luque , R. & Pall \'e , E. 2022, Science, 377, 1211

    2022

  80. [80]

    2022, , 660, A86

    Martioli , E., H \'e brard , G., Fouqu \'e , P., et al. 2022, , 660, A86

    2022

Showing first 80 references.