pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.28719 · v1 · pith:LTTI7NDKnew · submitted 2026-05-27 · 🌌 astro-ph.EP · astro-ph.IM

A Homogeneous Catalog of Rossiter-McLaughlin Systems: Distinct e-λ Trends in Three Gas-Giant Mass Regimes

Xian-Yu Wang , Songhu Wang , Konstantin Batygin This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 09:39 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.IM
keywords exoplanetsstellar obliquityRossiter-McLaughlinorbital eccentricityplanet massgas giantsspin-orbit misalignmentdynamical history
0
0 comments X

The pith

Planet mass divides close-in gas giants into three groups with distinct eccentricity and obliquity patterns.

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

The paper reanalyzes Rossiter-McLaughlin measurements across 255 systems with a uniform global fit that combines spectral energy distributions, transit light curves, timing data, and radial velocities to produce consistent parameter posteriors. After restricting to 145 single-star systems with reliable masses, the work identifies clear structure in the joint eccentricity-obliquity plane that changes with planet mass. Sub-Saturns can occupy the full range of both eccentricity and misalignment, Jupiters show misalignment only on circular orbits, and objects above roughly three Jupiter masses remain aligned at all eccentricities. A two-dimensional Kolmogorov-Smirnov test confirms that the three mass-binned distributions differ at high significance. These patterns imply that obliquity cannot be read as an isolated record of dynamical history and that models must treat mass, eccentricity, and misalignment together.

Core claim

The joint (e, λ) distributions in three planet-mass regimes are distinct: sub-Saturns (Mp ≤ ~0.3 MJ) occupy the full range of eccentricity and misalignment, Jupiters (~0.3 MJ < Mp ≤ ~3 MJ) are misaligned only when e is near zero, and super-Jupiters and brown dwarfs (Mp > ~3 MJ) are aligned for all eccentricities. These patterns emerge from self-consistent posteriors obtained via global fits to spectral energy distributions, transit photometry, timing, and radial velocities.

What carries the argument

Homogeneous joint global fit to spectral energy distributions, transit light curves, mid-transit times, and in-transit plus out-of-transit radial velocities that yields self-consistent posteriors for stellar and planetary parameters, followed by division into three mass regimes and comparison with a two-dimensional Kolmogorov-Smirnov test on the (e, λ) plane.

If this is right

  • Obliquity depends jointly on eccentricity and planet mass rather than on either quantity alone.
  • Obliquity is not a unique tracer of evolutionary history for close-in giant planets.
  • A unified theoretical framework is required to explain the differing origins of spin-orbit misalignment across the three mass regimes.
  • The joint (e, λ) distributions of the three mass groups differ at high statistical significance according to the two-dimensional Kolmogorov-Smirnov test.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The observed mass-dependent patterns suggest that any complete migration or dynamical-interaction model must include pathways whose efficiency or outcome changes across the 0.3 MJ and 3 MJ thresholds.
  • Extending the catalog to include multi-star systems or planets near the mass boundaries would test whether the reported divisions remain sharp.
  • The trends imply that eccentricity and obliquity measurements must be interpreted together when reconstructing individual system histories.

Load-bearing premise

The joint global fits produce unbiased eccentricity and obliquity posteriors across the original heterogeneous datasets, and the chosen mass boundaries plus the single-star restriction do not create artificial trends.

What would settle it

Finding even one misaligned super-Jupiter on a significantly eccentric orbit, or a sub-Saturn that is both highly misaligned and circular, would contradict the reported separation of the three regimes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.28719 by Konstantin Batygin, Songhu Wang, Xian-Yu Wang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: An example plot for the global modeling of HD 209458, the first exoplanetary system with RM measurement (D. Queloz et al. 2000). From left to right, each panel represents the fits to the spectral energy distribution (SED), TESS transits, radial velocities, and Rossiter-McLaughlin effects. Figures for all systems can be found here. Sweeney 1971). This bias is not easily corrected a pos￾teriori, because its … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Sky-projected obliquity as a function of orbital eccentricity, shown separately for sub-Saturns (left), Jupiters (center), and more super Jupiters and brown dwarfs (right). Orange circles indicate individual systems, while the blue shading represents the underlying density distribution. The vertical dashed lines mark e = 0.1, and the horizontal dashed lines represent λ = 40◦ . Systems with eccentricities >… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Stellar obliquity ($\lambda$) and orbital eccentricity ($e$) trace the dynamical histories of close-in giant planets, but the current observational picture is assembled from heterogeneous analyses that have obscured population-level trends. In this work, we homogeneously refit systems with Rossiter-McLaughlin (RM) measurements by performing a joint global fit to spectral energy distributions, transit light curves, mid-transit times, out-of-transit and in-transit radial velocities, yielding self-consistent posterior distributions for the physical and orbital parameters of both stars and planets across 255 systems. Restricting to 145 single-star systems with reliable planet-mass measurements, we uncover pronounced structure in the $e-\lambda$ plane that depends on planet mass: (i) sub-Saturns ($M_{\rm p} \leq \sim0.3M_{\rm J}$) can be both eccentric and misaligned; (ii) Jupiters ($\sim0.3M_{\rm J}<M_{\rm p} \leq \sim3 M_{\rm J}$) are misaligned only on circular orbits; and (iii) super Jupiters and brown dwarfs ($M_{\rm p}>\sim3M_{\rm J}$) are aligned across the full eccentricity range. A two-dimensional Kolmogorov-Smirnov test shows that the joint $(e,\lambda)$ distributions differ significantly among these three mass regimes. These trends demonstrate that $\lambda$ depends jointly on eccentricity and planet mass, implying that obliquity alone is not a unique tracer of evolutionary history and underscoring the need for a unified framework for the origins of spin-orbit misalignment. The full catalog from this work is publicly available at https://www.stellarobliquity.com .

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a homogeneous reanalysis of 255 Rossiter-McLaughlin systems via joint global fits to SEDs, transit light curves, mid-transit times, and RVs, producing self-consistent posteriors. After restricting to 145 single-star systems with reliable planet masses, it reports three distinct regimes in the joint (e, λ) distribution: sub-Saturns (Mp ≲ 0.3 MJ) that can be both eccentric and misaligned; Jupiters (0.3 MJ ≲ Mp ≲ 3 MJ) that are misaligned only when circular; and super-Jupiters/brown dwarfs (Mp ≳ 3 MJ) that remain aligned across all eccentricities. A two-dimensional Kolmogorov-Smirnov test is used to establish that the three mass-binned distributions differ significantly.

Significance. If the reported trends survive validation, the work supplies a publicly released homogeneous catalog that strengthens the empirical basis for mass-dependent migration and dynamical histories. The demonstration that λ is not independent of e within each mass bin directly challenges the common practice of treating obliquity as a standalone tracer and motivates a unified theoretical framework.

major comments (2)
  1. [Fitting procedure (abstract and §2–3)] Fitting procedure (abstract and §2–3): the central claim that the joint global fits yield unbiased λ and e posteriors across all 145 systems rests on an untested assumption. Because RV semi-amplitude scales with Mp, sub-Saturn systems have systematically lower-SNR RVs; no injection-recovery tests, recovery of injected λ/e values, or per-system comparison of new vs. literature posteriors are described to rule out SNR-dependent bias that could artificially produce the reported mass trends.
  2. [Mass-boundary definition and sample selection (§4)] Mass-boundary definition and sample selection (§4): the boundaries at ~0.3 MJ and ~3 MJ and the restriction to single-star systems with “reliable” masses are load-bearing for the three-regime claim. No justification is given for why these particular cuts were chosen, nor are robustness checks (e.g., varying the boundaries by ±0.1 MJ or relaxing the single-star criterion) reported to show that the KS-test significance is insensitive to the selection.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the phrase “self-consistent posterior distributions” is used without quantifying how consistency was verified across the heterogeneous input datasets.
  2. [Data availability] The public catalog URL is given, but the manuscript does not state which posterior quantiles or derived quantities are included in the release.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments. We respond to each major point below and indicate the revisions we will incorporate.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Fitting procedure (abstract and §2–3): the central claim that the joint global fits yield unbiased λ and e posteriors across all 145 systems rests on an untested assumption. Because RV semi-amplitude scales with Mp, sub-Saturn systems have systematically lower-SNR RVs; no injection-recovery tests, recovery of injected λ/e values, or per-system comparison of new vs. literature posteriors are described to rule out SNR-dependent bias that could artificially produce the reported mass trends.

    Authors: We agree that systematic validation is important for confirming that our posteriors are unbiased, particularly given the SNR variation with planet mass. Our joint global fitting follows established methods, and we compared new posteriors to literature values for overlapping systems with generally good agreement. However, the original manuscript did not include injection-recovery tests. In the revised manuscript we will add a new subsection in §3 presenting injection-recovery tests performed on a representative subset of systems spanning the full mass range (including low-SNR sub-Saturns) to explicitly demonstrate recovery of injected λ and e values without bias. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Mass-boundary definition and sample selection (§4): the boundaries at ~0.3 MJ and ~3 MJ and the restriction to single-star systems with “reliable” masses are load-bearing for the three-regime claim. No justification is given for why these particular cuts were chosen, nor are robustness checks (e.g., varying the boundaries by ±0.1 MJ or relaxing the single-star criterion) reported to show that the KS-test significance is insensitive to the selection.

    Authors: The boundaries were selected to mark the locations where the joint (e, λ) behavior visibly changes, consistent with the canonical sub-Saturn, Jupiter, and super-Jupiter mass divisions in the broader exoplanet population. The single-star restriction is required to ensure clean λ measurements. The submitted manuscript did not provide explicit justification or robustness tests. In revision we will expand the relevant section to justify the boundaries with reference to the observed distribution and to population studies, and we will report the results of robustness checks in which the boundaries are shifted by ±0.1 MJ and the single-star criterion is relaxed, confirming that the KS-test significance and three-regime structure remain unchanged. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; empirical catalog with external statistical test

full rationale

The paper performs joint global fits to heterogeneous observational datasets (SEDs, light curves, RVs, transit times) to produce self-consistent posteriors for e and λ across 145 systems, then applies a 2D KS test to compare the joint (e, λ) distributions in three mass bins. No load-bearing step reduces by construction to a fitted input, self-citation chain, or ansatz; the reported trends emerge from the data and the external nonparametric test. The analysis is self-contained against external benchmarks with no derivation that is equivalent to its inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on standard assumptions of stellar and planetary parameter fitting (limb darkening, Gaussian process noise models, etc.) and on the reliability of published RM datasets. No new entities are postulated. Mass boundaries appear chosen rather than derived from a uniqueness theorem.

free parameters (1)
  • mass boundaries (~0.3 MJ and ~3 MJ)
    Approximate thresholds used to define the three regimes; chosen to separate observed behaviors rather than derived from first principles.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Joint global fit to SEDs, light curves, transit times, and RVs produces unbiased posteriors for λ and e
    Invoked when claiming the homogeneous catalog removes heterogeneity-induced biases.
  • domain assumption Single-star systems with reliable planet masses form an unbiased subsample
    Used to restrict the sample to 145 systems.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5862 in / 1467 out tokens · 21028 ms · 2026-06-29T09:39:56.878534+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

299 extracted references · 290 canonical work pages · 11 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    C., Tinney, C

    Addison, B. C., Tinney, C. G., Wright, D. J., & Bayliss, D. 2016, ApJ, 823, 29, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/823/1/29

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/823/1/29 2016

  2. [2]

    C., Tinney, C

    Addison, B. C., Tinney, C. G., Wright, D. J., et al. 2013, ApJL, 774, L9, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/774/1/L9

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/774/1/l9 2013

  3. [3]

    C., Wang, S., Johnson, M

    Addison, B. C., Wang, S., Johnson, M. C., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 197, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aade91

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aade91 2018

  4. [4]

    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

  5. [5]

    L., Chen, X., Ciardi, D., et al

    Akeson, R. L., Chen, X., Ciardi, D., et al. 2013, PASP, 125, 989, doi: 10.1086/672273

    work page doi:10.1086/672273 2013

  6. [6]

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

    Snellen, I. 2007, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 370, Solar and Stellar Physics Through Eclipses, ed. O. Demircan, S. O. Selam, & B. Albayrak, 218

    2007

  7. [7]

    N., Butler, R

    Albrecht, S., Winn, J. N., Butler, R. P., et al. 2012a, ApJ, 744, 189, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/744/2/189

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/744/2/189

  8. [8]

    N., Johnson, J

    Albrecht, S., Winn, J. N., Johnson, J. A., et al. 2011, ApJ, 738, 50, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/738/1/50

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/738/1/50 2011

  9. [9]

    N., Johnson, J

    Albrecht, S., Winn, J. N., Johnson, J. A., et al. 2012b, ApJ, 757, 18, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/18

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/757/1/18

  10. [10]

    H., Dawson, R

    Albrecht, S. H., Dawson, R. I., & Winn, J. N. 2022, PASP, 134, 082001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ac6c09

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ac6c09 2022

  11. [11]

    M., H´ ebrard, G., D´ ıaz, R

    Almenara, J. M., H´ ebrard, G., D´ ıaz, R. F., et al. 2022, A&A, 663, A134, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142964

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142964 2022

  12. [12]

    M., Torres, G., et al

    Alonso, R., Brown, T. M., Torres, G., et al. 2004, ApJL, 613, L153, doi: 10.1086/425256

    work page doi:10.1086/425256 2004

  13. [13]

    2008, A&A, 482, L21, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200809431

    Alonso, R., Auvergne, M., Baglin, A., et al. 2008, A&A, 482, L21, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200809431

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:200809431 2008

  14. [14]

    I., et al

    Alsubai, K., Mislis, D., Tsvetanov, Z. I., et al. 2017, AJ, 153, 200, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa6340

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa6340 2017

  15. [15]

    I., Latham, D

    Alsubai, K., Tsvetanov, Z. I., Latham, D. W., et al. 2018, AJ, 155, 52, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aaa000

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aaa000 2018

  16. [16]

    I., Latham, D

    Alsubai, K., Tsvetanov, Z. I., Latham, D. W., et al. 2019, AJ, 157, 74, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aaf80a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aaf80a 2019

  17. [17]

    D., Giannios, D., & Mimica, P

    Alsubai, K. A., Parley, N. R., Bramich, D. M., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 417, 709, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19316.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19316.x 2011

  18. [18]

    R., Hellier, C., Gillon, M., et al

    Anderson, D. R., Hellier, C., Gillon, M., et al. 2010, ApJ, 709, 159, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/709/1/159

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/709/1/159 2010

  19. [19]

    R., Collier Cameron, A., Hellier, C., et al

    Anderson, D. R., Collier Cameron, A., Hellier, C., et al. 2011a, A&A, 531, A60, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201016208

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201016208

  20. [20]

    R., Collier Cameron, A., Gillon, M., et al

    Anderson, D. R., Collier Cameron, A., Gillon, M., et al. 2011b, A&A, 534, A16, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117597

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201117597

  21. [21]

    R., Collier Cameron, A., Hellier, C., et al

    Anderson, D. R., Collier Cameron, A., Hellier, C., et al. 2011c, ApJL, 726, L19, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/726/2/L19

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/726/2/l19 2041

  22. [22]

    R., Ciardi, D

    Anderson, D. R., Collier Cameron, A., Gillon, M., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 422, 1988, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20635.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20635.x 2012

  23. [23]

    R., Collier Cameron, A., Delrez, L., et al

    Anderson, D. R., Collier Cameron, A., Delrez, L., et al. 2014a, MNRAS, 445, 1114, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1737

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1737

  24. [24]

    Six newly-discovered hot Jupiters transiting F/G stars: WASP-87b, WASP-108b, WASP-109b, WASP-110b, WASP-111b & WASP-112b

    Anderson, D. R., Brown, D. J. A., Collier Cameron, A., et al. 2014b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1410.3449, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1410.3449

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1410.3449

  25. [25]

    R., Collier Cameron, A., Hellier, C., et al

    Anderson, D. R., Collier Cameron, A., Hellier, C., et al. 2015a, A&A, 575, A61, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423591

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423591

  26. [26]

    R., Triaud, A

    Anderson, D. R., Triaud, A. H. M. J., Turner, O. D., et al. 2015b, ApJL, 800, L9, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/800/1/L9

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/800/1/l9 2041

  27. [27]

    R., Collier Cameron, A., Delrez, L., et al

    Anderson, D. R., Collier Cameron, A., Delrez, L., et al. 2017, A&A, 604, A110, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730439

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201730439 2017

  28. [28]

    A low-density hot Jupiter in a near-aligned, 4.5-day orbit around a $V$ = 10.8, F5V star

    Anderson, D. R., Bouchy, F., Brown, D. J. A., et al. 2018a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1809.07709, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1809.07709

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1809.07709

  29. [29]

    The discovery of WASP-134b, WASP-134c, WASP-137b, WASP-143b and WASP-146b: three hot Jupiters and a pair of warm Jupiters orbiting Solar-type stars

    Anderson, D. R., Bouchy, F., Brown, D. J. A., et al. 2018b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1812.09264, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1812.09264

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1812.09264

  30. [30]

    2022, AJ, 163, 227, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac6094

    Angelo, I., Naoz, S., Petigura, E., et al. 2022, AJ, 163, 227, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac6094

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac6094 2022

  31. [31]

    2009, A&A, 506, 411, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200810860

    Auvergne, M., Bodin, P., Boisnard, L., et al. 2009, A&A, 506, 411, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200810860

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200810860 2009

  32. [32]

    ´A., Knutson, H., Pont, F., et al

    Bakos, G. ´A., Knutson, H., Pont, F., et al. 2006, ApJ, 650, 1160, doi: 10.1086/506316

    work page doi:10.1086/506316 2006

  33. [33]

    ´A., Torres, G., P´ al, A., et al

    Bakos, G. ´A., Torres, G., P´ al, A., et al. 2010, ApJ, 710, 1724, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/710/2/1724

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/710/2/1724 2010

  34. [34]

    ´A., Hartman, J., Torres, G., et al

    Bakos, G. ´A., Hartman, J., Torres, G., et al. 2011, ApJ, 742, 116, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/742/2/116

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/742/2/116 2011

  35. [35]

    ´A., Hartman, J

    Bakos, G. ´A., Hartman, J. D., Torres, G., et al. 2012, AJ, 144, 19, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/144/1/19

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/144/1/19 2012

  36. [36]

    2009, A&A, 503, 601, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200811466

    Barbieri, M., Alonso, R., Desidera, S., et al. 2009, A&A, 503, 601, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200811466

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200811466 2009

  37. [37]

    J., Hellier, C., et al

    Barkaoui, K., Pozuelos, F. J., Hellier, C., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 909, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02259-y Barrag´ an, O., Gandolfi, D., Smith, A. M. S., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 1765, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3207

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-024-02259-y 2024

  38. [38]

    Barros, S. C. C., Faedi, F., Collier Cameron, A., et al. 2011, A&A, 525, A54, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015800

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201015800 2011

  39. [39]

    Bate, M. R. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 5618, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty169

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty169 2018

  40. [40]

    2009, MNRAS, 400, 1029, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15519.x

    Bate, M. R., Lodato, G., & Pringle, J. E. 2010, MNRAS, 401, 1505, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15773.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15773.x 2010

  41. [41]

    2012, Nature, 491, 418, doi: 10.1038/nature11560 13

    Batygin, K. 2012, Nature, 491, 418, doi: 10.1038/nature11560 13

    work page doi:10.1038/nature11560 2012

  42. [42]

    2025, ApJ, 985, 87, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adccc4

    Batygin, K. 2025, ApJ, 985, 87, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adccc4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adccc4 2025

  43. [43]

    H., & Laughlin, G

    Batygin, K., Bodenheimer, P. H., & Laughlin, G. P. 2016, ApJ, 829, 114, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/829/2/114

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/829/2/114 2016

  44. [44]

    2013, AJ, 146, 113, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/146/5/113 Beaug´ e, C., & Nesvorn´ y, D

    Bayliss, D., Zhou, G., Penev, K., et al. 2013, AJ, 146, 113, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/146/5/113 Beaug´ e, C., & Nesvorn´ y, D. 2012, ApJ, 751, 119, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/751/2/119

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/146/5/113 2013

  45. [45]

    C., Vanderburg, A., Adams, F

    Becker, J. C., Vanderburg, A., Adams, F. C., Rappaport, S. A., & Schwengeler, H. M. 2015, ApJL, 812, L18, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/812/2/L18

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/812/2/l18 2015

  46. [46]

    2019, A&A, 630, A81, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935598

    Benatti, S., Nardiello, D., Malavolta, L., et al. 2019, A&A, 630, A81, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935598

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935598 2019

  47. [47]

    2021, A&A, 650, A66, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140416

    Benatti, S., Damasso, M., Borsa, F., et al. 2021, A&A, 650, A66, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140416

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140416 2021

  48. [48]

    Y., Krushinsky, V

    Benni, P., Burdanov, A. Y., Krushinsky, V. V., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 505, 4956, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1567

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1567 2021

  49. [49]

    2025, Nature, 644, 356, doi: 10.1038/s41586-025-09324-0

    Wu, Y.-L. 2025, Nature, 644, 356, doi: 10.1038/s41586-025-09324-0

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-025-09324-0 2025

  50. [50]

    D., Bakos, G

    Bieryla, A., Hartman, J. D., Bakos, G. ´A., et al. 2014, AJ, 147, 84, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/147/4/84

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/147/4/84 2014

  51. [51]

    G., et al

    Bieryla, A., Collins, K., Beatty, T. G., et al. 2015, AJ, 150, 12, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/150/1/12

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/150/1/12 2015

  52. [52]

    2024, MNRAS, 527, 10955, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3785

    Bieryla, A., Zhou, G., Garc´ ıa-Mej´ ıa, J., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 10955, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3785

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3785 2024

  53. [53]

    2014, A&A, 566, A98, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201323153

    Blanco-Cuaresma, S., Soubiran, C., Jofr´ e, P., & Heiter, U. 2014, A&A, 566, A98, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201323153

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201323153 2014

  54. [54]

    J., Southworth, J., Ginski, C., et al

    Bohn, A. J., Southworth, J., Ginski, C., et al. 2020, A&A, 635, A73, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937127

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201937127 2020

  55. [55]

    C., Granados Contreras, A

    Boley, A. C., Granados Contreras, A. P., & Gladman, B. 2016, ApJL, 817, L17, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/817/2/L17

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8205/817/2/l17 2016

  56. [56]

    2012, A&A, 546, A27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219623

    Bonfils, X., Gillon, M., Udry, S., et al. 2012, A&A, 546, A27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219623

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201219623 2012

  57. [57]

    S., Desidera, S., Benatti, S., et al

    Bonomo, A. S., Desidera, S., Benatti, S., et al. 2017, A&A, 602, A107, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629882

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629882 2017

  58. [58]

    F., Raspantini, I., et al

    Borsa, F., Lanza, A. F., Raspantini, I., et al. 2021, A&A, 653, A104, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140559

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140559 2021

  59. [59]

    J., Koch, D., Basri, G., et al

    Borucki, W. J., Koch, D., Basri, G., et al. 2010, Science, 327, 977, doi: 10.1126/science.1185402

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1185402 2010

  60. [60]

    2010, A&A, 519, A98, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014817 Bou´ e, G., Montalto, M., Boisse, I., Oshagh, M., & Santos, N

    Bouchy, F., Hebb, L., Skillen, I., et al. 2010, A&A, 519, A98, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014817 Bou´ e, G., Montalto, M., Boisse, I., Oshagh, M., & Santos, N. C. 2013, A&A, 550, A53, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220146

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201014817 2010

  61. [61]

    2015, A&A, 579, A55, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201525750

    Bourrier, V., Lecavelier des Etangs, A., H´ ebrard, G., et al. 2015, A&A, 579, A55, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201525750

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201525750 2015

  62. [62]

    2018, A&A, 619, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833154

    Bourrier, V., Dumusque, X., Dorn, C., et al. 2018, A&A, 619, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833154

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833154 2018

  63. [63]

    2020, A&A, 635, A205, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936640

    Bourrier, V., Ehrenreich, D., Lendl, M., et al. 2020, A&A, 635, A205, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936640

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936640 2020

  64. [64]

    2021, A&A, 654, A152, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141527

    Bourrier, V., Lovis, C., Cretignier, M., et al. 2021, A&A, 654, A152, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141527

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141527 2021

  65. [65]

    R., Allart, R., et al

    Bourrier, V., Zapatero Osorio, M. R., Allart, R., et al. 2022a, A&A, 663, A160, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142559

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142559

  66. [66]

    2022b, A&A, 668, A31, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243778

    Bourrier, V., Deline, A., Krenn, A., et al. 2022b, A&A, 668, A31, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243778

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243778

  67. [67]

    2023, A&A, 669, A63, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245004

    Bourrier, V., Attia, M., Mallonn, M., et al. 2023, A&A, 669, A63, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245004

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245004 2023

  68. [68]

    Braak, C. J. T. 2006, Statistics and Computing, 16, 239

    2006

  69. [69]

    L., Stef´ ansson, G., et al

    Brady, M., Bean, J. L., Stef´ ansson, G., et al. 2025, AJ, 169, 64, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad9c66

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad9c66 2025

  70. [70]

    T., Petigura, E

    Brady, M. T., Petigura, E. A., Knutson, H. A., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aad773

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aad773 2018

  71. [71]

    2016, PASP, 128, 124402, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/128/970/124402

    Brahm, R., Jones, M., Espinoza, N., et al. 2016, PASP, 128, 124402, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/128/970/124402

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/128/970/124402 2016

  72. [72]

    2018, MNRAS, 477, 2572, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty795

    Brahm, R., Espinoza, N., Jord´ an, A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 477, 2572, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty795

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty795 2018

  73. [73]

    D., Wittenmyer, R

    Brahm, R., Nielsen, L. D., Wittenmyer, R. A., et al. 2020, AJ, 160, 235, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abba3b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abba3b 2020

  74. [74]

    D., Watson, C

    Brothwell, R. D., Watson, C. A., H´ ebrard, G., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 440, 3392, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu520

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu520 2014

  75. [75]

    Brown, D. J. A., Collier Cameron, A., D´ ıaz, R. F., et al. 2012a, ApJ, 760, 139, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/760/2/139

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/760/2/139

  76. [76]

    Brown, D. J. A., Cameron, A. C., Anderson, D. R., et al. 2012b, MNRAS, 423, 1503, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20973.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20973.x 2012

  77. [77]

    Brown, D. J. A., Anderson, D. R., Doyle, A. P., et al. 2014, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1412.7761, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1412.7761

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1412.7761 2014

  78. [78]

    Brown, D. J. A., Triaud, A. H. M. J., Doyle, A. P., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 464, 810, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2316

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2316 2017

  79. [79]

    M., Charbonneau, D., Gilliland, R

    Brown, T. M., Charbonneau, D., Gilliland, R. L., Noyes, R. W., & Burrows, A. 2001, ApJ, 552, 699, doi: 10.1086/320580

    work page doi:10.1086/320580 2001

  80. [80]

    L., & Olemskoy, S

    Bruntt, H., Bedding, T. R., Quirion, P. O., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 405, 1907, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16575.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16575.x 2010

Showing first 80 references.