pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.19228 · v1 · pith:XWLZXH3Xnew · submitted 2026-06-17 · 🌌 astro-ph.EP · astro-ph.SR

JWST-TST High Contrast: First Direct Spectroscopy of GJ 504 b reveals Clouds and Possible Metal Enrichment

Aneesh Baburaj , Jean-Baptiste Ruffio , Marshall Perrin , Jerry W. Xuan , William O. Balmer , Yayaati Chachan , Quinn M. Konopacky , Travis S. Barman
show 22 more authors
Mathilde M\^alin Kielan K. W. Hoch Emily Rickman Kimberly Ward-Duong Laurent Pueyo Julien H. Girard Isabel Rebollido Alexis Bidot Christine Chen Kadin Worthen Cicero Lu Jens Kammerer Roeland P. van der Marel Nikole K. Lewis Jeff Valenti Sara Seager Chris Stark R\'emi Soummer Jay Anderson Charles-Philippe Lajoie Mark Clampin C. Matt Mountain
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 19:30 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.SR
keywords exoplanet atmospheresdirect imagingJWST spectroscopyGJ 504 batmospheric retrievalmetal enrichmentplanetary formationmolecular spectroscopy
0
0 comments X

The pith

The first moderate-resolution spectrum of GJ 504 b shows water, methane, carbon monoxide and other molecules along with metal enrichment and salt clouds.

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

The paper reports the extraction of a 2.9 to 5.3 micron spectrum from the directly imaged companion GJ 504 b using JWST NIRSpec data. Advanced post-processing isolates the companion signal at high signal-to-noise, revealing absorption features from multiple molecules. Atmospheric modeling of the spectrum returns an effective temperature near 564 K, a metallicity above solar, a carbon-to-oxygen ratio of 0.64, and clear indications of salt clouds together with disequilibrium chemistry. The derived mass of roughly 25 Jupiter masses matches evolutionary models for an age between 2.5 and 4 billion years. Comparison with the host star shows elevated carbon and possibly oxygen, which the authors link to formation pathways.

Core claim

The authors extract the 2.9--5.3 μm spectrum of GJ 504 b at high signal-to-noise and identify absorption from H₂O, ¹²C¹⁶O, CH₄, CO₂, NH₃, H₂S and isotopologues. Retrievals give an effective temperature of 564 K, surface gravity log g of 4.87, metallicity [M/H] of 0.67, C/O ratio of 0.64, interstellar isotopologue ratios, and evidence for disequilibrium chemistry plus salt clouds. The implied mass of 25 Jupiter masses agrees with evolutionary models for an age of 2.5--4 Gyr, while the metal enrichment relative to the primary tentatively favors planet-like formation.

What carries the argument

The forward-modeling framework with angular differential imaging applied to the NIRSpec point cloud, which isolates the companion spectrum from the star.

If this is right

  • The retrieved mass of about 25 Jupiter masses lies within the range predicted by evolutionary models for an age of 2.5 to 4 billion years.
  • The atmosphere shows super-stellar carbon and possibly oxygen relative to the host star, with sulfur abundances matching the star.
  • Strong signs of disequilibrium chemistry and salt clouds appear in the retrieved atmospheric structure.
  • The overall metal enrichment is consistent with planet-like formation but does not rule out stellar-like abundances.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Similar spectral extraction on other faint companions could produce a larger sample of directly measured atmospheric metallicities.
  • The measured isotopologue ratios could be compared with disk chemistry models to test formation location if additional data become available.
  • Confirmation that the companion is enriched relative to the star would favor core-accretion scenarios over disk fragmentation.

Load-bearing premise

The post-processing and forward modeling steps isolate the companion spectrum without introducing significant artificial signals or biases.

What would settle it

An independent spectrum of GJ 504 b at similar wavelengths that fails to recover the reported molecular absorption bands would falsify the extracted spectrum and derived abundances.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.19228 by Alexis Bidot, Aneesh Baburaj, Charles-Philippe Lajoie, Chris Stark, Christine Chen, Cicero Lu, C. Matt Mountain, Emily Rickman, Isabel Rebollido, Jay Anderson, Jean-Baptiste Ruffio, Jeff Valenti, Jens Kammerer, Jerry W. Xuan, Julien H. Girard, Kadin Worthen, Kielan K. W. Hoch, Kimberly Ward-Duong, Laurent Pueyo, Mark Clampin, Marshall Perrin, Mathilde M\^alin, Nikole K. Lewis, Quinn M. Konopacky, R\'emi Soummer, Roeland P. van der Marel, Sara Seager, Travis S. Barman, William O. Balmer, Yayaati Chachan.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Detection map of companion GJ 504 b around the primary GJ 504 A using the medium resolution IFU mode of JW ST/NIRSpec in the 2.9–5.3 µm range. (Left) Median spectral cube before starlight subtraction generated using stage 3 of the JWST science calibration pipeline (Bushouse et al. 2024). (Right) Signal-to-noise (S/N) detection maps for GJ 504 using the BREADS forward modeling framework introduced in Ruffio… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Different stages of PSF subtraction using ADI, shown for NRS1 (Top panel) and NRS2 (Bottom panel). Each image involves linear interpolation of the 2D point cloud and is shown only for visualization purposes. In each panel, the left-most image shows the flux-calibrated detector image from roll 1 before PSF subtraction. The middle image shows the reference PSF model generated from roll 2 after masking the co… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: SNR maps and contrast curves for PSF subtraction using ADI, shown for NRS1 (Top panel) and NRS2 (Bottom panel). In each panel, the left-hand figure shows the SNR map, with GJ 504 b detected at an SNR> 10 after renormalization of the NIRSpec fluxes to the F356W (NRS1) and F444W (NRS2) filters respectively. The right-hand figure shows the 5-sigma contrast curve. The gray dashed line indicates the median stel… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Sensitivity limits for ADI (orange solid line) and FM (violet dot-dashed line), expressed in the F356W filter for NRS1 and the F444W filter for NRS2. The gray dashed line indicates the median stellar PSF profile, with the gray scatter points showing the variability in the stellar PSF from NIRSpec at different position angles. Similar variability in the contrast limits for ADI and FM are shown as the orange… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Post-ADI NIRSpec G395H spectrum of GJ 504 b (cyan) with the dominant molecular opacity sources − H2O, CO, CH4, CO2, and NH3 marked. The gray shaded region indicates the 1σ error on the extracted flux. Ground-based photometric points from Kuzuhara et al. (2013) and Skemer et al. (2016) are marked for reference. 12C 18O (HITRAN), H2O (HITRAN) and its isotopologue HDO (HITEMP), CH4 (Hargreaves et al. 2020) an… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (Top): Best-fit spline-filtered cloudy model (KCl & ZnS clouds) from petitRADTRANS (yellow) fit to the spline-filtered NIRSpec G395H spectrum (black) of GJ 504 b. The residuals between the model and data are shown in gray and the flux errors multiplied by the error inflation term are shown in gold. The shaded regions on the upper set of plots showcase the wavelength regions where trace species are detectab… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The same cloudy model (KCl & ZnS clouds) as the spline-filtered spectra, but fit to the photometry (green points) and the ADI-subtracted NIRSpec spectrum of GJ 504 b (red). Gray indicate the 1σ flux errors on the ADI spectrum. The blue points indicate the synthetic photometric points generated using the low-resolution model. 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Temperature (K) 10 6 10 5 10 4 10 3 10 2 10 1 10 0 10 1 10 2 … view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Pressure-temperature profile from a clear retrieval (no clouds) depicted using 200 randomly drawn P-T curves (orange) from the posterior chains. The P-T profile for a pre-computed radiative-convective equilibrium (RCE) model from the Sonora Elfowl grid (black dotted/dot-dashed lines; Mukherjee et al. 2024) is shown for reference. The retrieved profile deviates from RCE around 0.1−1 bar indicating missing o… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Emission contribution function for a clear atmosphere retrieval. These functions show the contribution to the emitted flux as a function of wavelength at different pressures in the atmosphere, with darker colors indicating greater flux contribution at those pressures. The gray dashed line indicates the wavelength-weighted contribution function. In clear atmospheres, there is increased flux from deeper lay… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Emission contribution function for a cloudy retrieval with KCl & ZnS clouds. The gray dashed line indicates the wavelength-weighted contribution function. The KCl cloud deck at ∼ 1 bar block the flux emerging from deeper in the atmosphere from reaching the surface, reducing the contribution of molecular opacities to the overall flux. The reduced contribution is also witnessed in the sharp decrease in the … view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Retrieved mass-mixing ratios (MMR) with pres￾sure for molecules in the atmosphere of GJ 504 b. The solid curves are under the assumptions of carbon and NH3 dise￾quilibrium chemistry and a constant-over-pressure CO2 and PH3. Dashed lines indicate the MMR profiles under chemi￾cal equilibrium, which would under-predict the CO and CO2 abundance, and over-predict the CH4, NH3, and PH3 abun￾dance. However, as d… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Effective temperature and luminosity of GJ 504 b, obtained using the posterior chains of the cloudy model retrieval with KCl & ZnS clouds [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: ATMO 2020 isochrones (Phillips et al. 2020) for solar metallicity, cloudless atmospheres with disequilibrium chemistry. The isochrones show the dependence of luminosity and radius (left), and luminosity and temperature (right) on age of a substellar object. GJ 504 b is marked with a solid black circle, with its retrieved luminosity, temperature, and radius indicating an age 2.5–4.0 Gyr. 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 Ra… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Isochrones from Saumon & Marley (2008) showing the dependence of luminosity and radius on age of a substellar object. (Left) Evolutionary models corresponding to high-metallicity, cloudless atmospheres, and (Right) Evolutionary models corresponding to solar metallicity, hybrid cloudy/cloudless atmospheres. GJ 504 b is marked with a solid black circle. 16. From our fiducial (KCl + ZnS) cloud model, GJ 504 … view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: (Left) Metal enrichment of GJ 504 b relative to stellar (dashed line). C is enriched 2.5× stellar, O has an enrichment of 2.1× stellar. N is stellar, though we heavily caveat this measurement (Section 5.8). The S abundance is stellar, indicating a lack of atmospheric enrichment by solid accretion. (Right) Abundance ratios for GJ 504 b, with the dashed line indicating the stellar values. All three abundanc… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Characterizing the coldest directly imaged companions through direct spectroscopy has only recently become possible with the James Webb Space Telescope. We present moderate-resolution (R $\sim$ 2,700) spectroscopic observations of the directly imaged planetary-mass companion (PMC), GJ 504 b, using the $JWST$/NIRSpec. As the coldest imaged PMC of the pre-JWST era GJ 504 b is too faint for ground-based spectroscopy, with only photometric observations possible. Leveraging advanced post-processing techniques with a forward modeling framework, we detect the companion at high signal-to-noise (S/N$>$300). We also present the first successful PSF subtraction with angular differential imaging (ADI) in the NIRSpec point cloud, detecting GJ 504 b at S/N$>10$ and reaching contrast limits $<10^{-4}$. The extracted 2.9--5.3 $\mu m$ spectra show strong signatures of several molecular species, including H$_2$O, $^{12}$C$^{16}$O, CH$_4$, CO$_2$, NH$_3$, H$_2$S, $^{13}$C$^{16}$O, and $^{12}$C$^{18}$O. Atmospheric modeling of the spectra using \texttt{petitRADTRANS}, yields an effective temperature = 564$\pm$4 K, surface gravity $\log{g}$ = 4.87$^{+0.13}_{-0.12}$, metallicity [M/H] = 0.67$^{+0.13}_{-0.12}$, C/O ratio = 0.64$^{+0.02}_{-0.02}$, interstellar $^{12}$C/$^{13}$C and $^{16}$O/$^{18}$O isotopologue ratios, and strong evidence of disequilibrium chemistry and salt clouds. The retrieved parameters indicate a mass 25.2$^{+8.4}_{-6.0}$ $M_\mathrm{Jup}$, which is in agreement with the mass range (19--27 $M_\mathrm{Jup}$) obtained from ATMO evolutionary models, implying an age of 2.5--4.0 Gyr. Lastly, we compare the abundances of GJ 504 b to its primary, obtaining a stellar abundance of sulfur (S), super-stellar carbon (C), and possibly, oxygen (O). The observed metal enrichment tentatively supports planet-like formation, but does not entirely exclude stellar abundances for GJ 504 b.

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 reports the first moderate-resolution (R~2700) 2.9-5.3 μm JWST/NIRSpec spectrum of the directly imaged planetary-mass companion GJ 504 b. Leveraging forward modeling and the first application of angular differential imaging (ADI) in the NIRSpec point cloud, the authors detect the companion at S/N>10 (overall detection S/N>300), extract a spectrum showing absorption from H₂O, ¹²C¹⁶O, CH₄, CO₂, NH₃, H₂S, ¹³C¹⁶O and ¹²C¹⁸O, and perform petitRADTRANS retrievals yielding Teff=564±4 K, log g=4.87^{+0.13}_{-0.12}, [M/H]=0.67^{+0.13}_{-0.12}, C/O=0.64^{+0.02}_{-0.02} together with evidence for disequilibrium chemistry and salt clouds. The implied mass (25.2^{+8.4}_{-6.0} M_Jup) is consistent with ATMO evolutionary models (age 2.5-4.0 Gyr), and the abundances are compared to the primary to discuss formation pathways.

Significance. If the extracted spectrum is free of post-processing artifacts, the result is significant: it constitutes the first direct spectroscopy of a cold directly imaged exoplanet and demonstrates a new ADI capability in NIRSpec that could be applied to other faint companions. The precise retrievals and tentative metal-enrichment constraint provide concrete data for testing planet-formation scenarios.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3 (post-processing/ADI description)] §3 (post-processing/ADI description): The manuscript presents the first successful ADI in the NIRSpec point cloud but provides no quantification of residual speckle power after subtraction and no injection-recovery tests at the reported contrast (<10^{-4}). Because the molecular detections and the retrieved [M/H] and C/O values rest directly on the fidelity of this spectrum, the absence of these validation metrics is load-bearing.
  2. [§4 (atmospheric retrievals)] §4 (atmospheric retrievals): The reported parameter uncertainties (e.g., Teff ±4 K, C/O ±0.02) are extremely small. The text does not describe how systematic errors arising from the spectrum extraction or from the choice of forward-model assumptions are propagated into the posterior; this directly affects the strength of the claims on metallicity, disequilibrium chemistry, and formation implications.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The statement that the retrieved isotopologue ratios are 'interstellar' should be accompanied by the actual numerical values and their uncertainties for immediate clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments and positive assessment of the significance of our results. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3 (post-processing/ADI description)] The manuscript presents the first successful ADI in the NIRSpec point cloud but provides no quantification of residual speckle power after subtraction and no injection-recovery tests at the reported contrast (<10^{-4}). Because the molecular detections and the retrieved [M/H] and C/O values rest directly on the fidelity of this spectrum, the absence of these validation metrics is load-bearing.

    Authors: We agree that additional quantitative validation of the ADI subtraction is warranted given the importance of the extracted spectrum. In the revised manuscript we will add (i) maps and power spectra quantifying residual speckle noise after subtraction and (ii) injection-recovery tests performed at contrasts below 10^{-4} to demonstrate the fidelity of the detection and spectrum. These additions will directly support the robustness of the molecular identifications and retrieved abundances. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4 (atmospheric retrievals)] The reported parameter uncertainties (e.g., Teff ±4 K, C/O ±0.02) are extremely small. The text does not describe how systematic errors arising from the spectrum extraction or from the choice of forward-model assumptions are propagated into the posterior; this directly affects the strength of the claims on metallicity, disequilibrium chemistry, and formation implications.

    Authors: The quoted uncertainties are the statistical 1σ intervals from the petitRADTRANS posterior. We will revise the text to state this explicitly and add a new subsection that (a) discusses possible systematic contributions from the ADI extraction and from model assumptions (cloud prescription, line lists, disequilibrium chemistry) and (b) presents retrievals on perturbed versions of the spectrum to quantify the effect on [M/H] and C/O. This will allow a more balanced assessment of the formation implications. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in spectral extraction or atmospheric retrieval

full rationale

The paper reports new JWST/NIRSpec observations of GJ 504 b and applies standard forward-modeling plus ADI post-processing to extract the 2.9–5.3 μm spectrum at S/N > 10. Atmospheric parameters are then retrieved by fitting the petitRADTRANS grid to that extracted spectrum. No step reduces by construction to its own inputs, no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction, and no load-bearing premise rests on a self-citation chain. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external data and established modeling tools.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on fitted atmospheric parameters and standard modeling assumptions rather than new theoretical derivations.

free parameters (4)
  • effective temperature = 564 K
    Retrieved from fitting the model to the observed spectrum.
  • surface gravity = 4.87
    Fitted parameter in atmospheric model.
  • metallicity = 0.67
    Fitted to match spectral features.
  • C/O ratio = 0.64
    Retrieved from molecular abundances.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The petitRADTRANS code accurately models the radiative transfer in the atmosphere under the assumed conditions.
    Used for atmospheric modeling as stated in the abstract.
  • domain assumption The post-processing techniques correctly subtract the PSF and extract the companion signal.
    Basis for the spectral extraction and detection.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 6147 in / 1546 out tokens · 45635 ms · 2026-06-26T19:30:18.191670+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

142 extracted references · 134 canonical work pages · 4 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    S., & Marley, M

    Ackerman, A. S., & Marley, M. S. 2001, ApJ, 556, 872, doi: 10.1086/321540

    work page doi:10.1086/321540 2001

  2. [2]

    Sappey, B. 2024, jruffio/breads: Accepted HD19467B paper, 0.2, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.11391503 4 https://whereistheplanet.com/ 5 https://docs.h5py.org/ Aguilera-G´ omez, C., Ram´ ırez, I., & Chanam´ e, J. 2018, A&A, 614, A55, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201732209

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.11391503 2024

  3. [3]

    Rajpurohit, A. S. 2013, Memorie della Societa Astronomica Italiana Supplementi, 24, 128, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1302.6559

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1302.6559 2013

  4. [4]

    F., Spiegelman, F., Leininger, T., & Molliere, P

    Allard, N. F., Spiegelman, F., Leininger, T., & Molliere, P. 2019, A&A, 628, A120, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935593 28

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935593 2019

  5. [5]

    N., & Liu, M

    Allers, K. N., & Liu, M. C. 2013, ApJ, 772, 79, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/772/2/79 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. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A....

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/772/2/79 2013

  6. [6]

    Gerasimov, R., & Hoch, K. K. W. 2026, AJ, 171, 21, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ae1a6b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ae1a6b 2026

  7. [7]

    M., Theissen, C

    Baburaj, A., Konopacky, Q. M., Theissen, C. A., et al. 2025, AJ, 169, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad8dfc

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad8dfc 2025

  8. [8]

    O., Franson, K., Chomez, A., et al

    Balmer, W. O., Franson, K., Chomez, A., et al. 2025, AJ, 169, 30, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad9265

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad9265 2025

  9. [9]

    Hauschildt, P. H. 2003, A&A, 402, 701, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030252 Bardalez Gagliuffi, D. C., Balmer, W. O., Pueyo, L., et al. 2025, ApJL, 988, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ade30f

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20030252 2003

  10. [10]

    2015, A&A, 582, A83, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526332

    Baudino, J.-L., B´ ezard, B., Boccaletti, A., et al. 2015, A&A, 582, A83, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526332

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201526332 2015

  11. [11]

    A., Mukherjee, S., Cushing, M

    Beiler, S. A., Mukherjee, S., Cushing, M. C., et al. 2024, ApJ, 973, 60, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6759

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad6759 2024

  12. [12]

    2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.22979, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2602.22979

    Bellotti, S., Pezzotti, C., Buldgen, G., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.22979, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2602.22979

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.22979 2026

  13. [13]

    Bernath, P. F. 2020, JQSRT, 240, 106687, doi: 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2019.106687 B¨ oker, T., Arribas, S., L¨ utzgendorf, N., et al. 2022, A&A, 661, A82, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142589

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jqsrt.2019.106687 2020

  14. [14]

    M., et al

    Bonnefoy, M., Perraut, K., Lagrange, A. M., et al. 2018, A&A, 618, A63, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201832942

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201832942 2018

  15. [15]

    2004, The Messenger, 117, 17

    Bonnet, H., Abuter, R., Baker, A., et al. 2004, The Messenger, 117, 17

    2004

  16. [16]

    P., Blunt, S

    Bowler, B. P., Blunt, S. C., & Nielsen, E. L. 2020, AJ, 159, 63, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab5b11

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab5b11 2020

  17. [17]

    Burgasser, A. J. 2007, ApJ, 659, 655, doi: 10.1086/511027

    work page doi:10.1086/511027 2007

  18. [18]

    J., Kirkpatrick, J

    Burgasser, A. J., Kirkpatrick, J. D., Cruz, K. L., et al. 2006, ApJS, 166, 585, doi: 10.1086/506327

    work page doi:10.1086/506327 2006

  19. [19]

    2024, JWST Calibration Pipeline, 1.15.1, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.12692459

    Bushouse, H., Eisenhamer, J., Dencheva, N., et al. 2024, JWST Calibration Pipeline, 1.15.1, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.12692459

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.12692459 2024

  20. [20]

    I., Lucas, P

    Canty, J. I., Lucas, P. W., Roche, P. F., & Pinfield, D. J. 2013, MNRAS, 435, 2650, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1477

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1477 2013

  21. [21]

    2025, ApJ, 994, 43, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0cbf

    Murray-Clay, R. 2025, ApJ, 994, 43, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0cbf

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae0cbf 2025

  22. [22]

    A., Lothringer, J., & Blake, G

    Chachan, Y., Knutson, H. A., Lothringer, J., & Blake, G. A. 2023, ApJ, 943, 112, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aca614

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aca614 2023

  23. [23]

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

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

  24. [24]

    2018, ApJ, 854, 172, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaac7d

    Charnay, B., B´ ezard, B., Baudino, J.-L., et al. 2018, ApJ, 854, 172, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaac7d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaac7d 2018

  25. [25]

    I., & Goldreich, P

    Chiang, E. I., & Goldreich, P. 1997, The Astrophysical

    1997

  26. [26]

    368-376., 490, 368, doi: 10.1086/304869

    Journal, Volume 490, Issue 1, pp. 368-376., 490, 368, doi: 10.1086/304869

    work page doi:10.1086/304869

  27. [27]

    2016, ApJ, 823, 102, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102

    Choi, J., Dotter, A., Conroy, C., et al. 2016, ApJ, 823, 102, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.3847/0004-637x/823/2/102 2016

  28. [28]

    I., Bergin, E

    Cleeves, L. I., Bergin, E. A., Alexander, C. M. O. D., et al. 2014, Science, 345, 1590, doi: 10.1126/science.1258055

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1258055 2014

  29. [29]

    Crossfield, I. J. M. 2023, ApJL, 952, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ace35f da Silva, R., Porto de Mello, G. F., Milone, A. C., et al. 2012, A&A, 542, A84, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201118751 de Regt, S., Gandhi, S., Snellen, I. A. G., et al. 2024, Astron. Astrophys., 688, A116, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348508 Di Mauro, M. P., Reda, R., Mathur, S., et al. 2022...

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ace35f 2023

  30. [30]

    Beichman, C. A. 2009, ApJ, 707, 79, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/707/1/79 D’Orazi, V., Desidera, S., Gratton, R. G., et al. 2017, A&A, 598, A19, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629283

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/707/1/79 2009

  31. [31]

    J., Liu, M

    Dupuy, T. J., Liu, M. C., Leggett, S. K., et al. 2015, ApJ, 805, 56, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/805/1/56

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/805/1/56 2015

  32. [32]

    1993, A&A, 275, 101

    Edvardsson, B., Andersen, J., Gustafsson, B., et al. 1993, A&A, 275, 101

    1993

  33. [33]

    2003, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Eisenhauer, F., Abuter, R., Bickert, K., et al. 2003, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 4841, Instrument Design and Performance for Optical/Infrared Ground-based Telescopes, ed. M. Iye & A. F. M. Moorwood, 1548–1561, doi: 10.1117/12.459468

    work page doi:10.1117/12.459468 2003

  34. [34]

    C., Balfe, J., Loomis, R., et al

    Fayolle, E. C., Balfe, J., Loomis, R., et al. 2016, 816, L28, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/816/2/L28

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8205/816/2/l28 2016

  35. [35]

    2013, A&A, 551, A126, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220857

    Feuchtgruber, H., Lellouch, E., Orton, G., et al. 2013, A&A, 551, A126, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220857

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201220857 2013

  36. [36]

    2016, JOSS, 1, 24, doi: 10.21105/joss.00024

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

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.00024 2016

  37. [37]

    2015, ApJ, 806, 163, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/806/2/163 Gaia Collaboration

    Fuhrmann, K., & Chini, R. 2015, ApJ, 806, 163, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/806/2/163 Gaia Collaboration. 2020, VizieR Online Data Catalog: Gaia EDR3 (Gaia Collaboration, 2020), VizieR On-line Data Catalog: I/350. Originally published in: 2021A&A...649A...1G, doi: 10.26093/cds/vizier.1350 29

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/806/2/163 2015

  38. [38]

    2023, ApJL, 957, L36, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad07e2

    Gandhi, S., de Regt, S., Snellen, I., et al. 2023, ApJL, 957, L36, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad07e2

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad07e2 2023

  39. [39]

    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

  40. [40]

    L., & Rankin, J

    Gonzalez, G., Carlson, M. K., & Tobin, R. W. 2010, MNRAS, 403, 1368, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.16195.x Gonz´ alez Picos, D., Snellen, I. A. G., de Regt, S., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A298, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451936

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.16195.x 2010

  41. [41]

    2016, Astronomy and Computing, 16, 41, doi: 10.1016/j.ascom.2016.04.001

    Greenfield, P., & Miller, T. 2016, Astronomy and Computing, 16, 41, doi: 10.1016/j.ascom.2016.04.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ascom.2016.04.001 2016

  42. [42]

    J., Gordon, I

    Hargreaves, R. J., Gordon, I. E., Rey, M., et al. 2020, ApJS, 247, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab7a1a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab7a1a 2020

  43. [43]

    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

  44. [44]

    , year = 2005, month = apr, volume =

    Harris, G. J., Tennyson, J., Kaminsky, B. M., Pavlenko, Y. V., & Jones, H. R. A. 2006, MNRAS, 367, 400, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09960.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09960.x 2006

  45. [45]

    A., Rosenthal, L., Fulton, B

    Hirsch, L. A., Rosenthal, L., Fulton, B. J., et al. 2021, AJ, 161, 134, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abd639

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abd639 2021

  46. [46]

    Hoch, K. K. W., Konopacky, Q. M., Theissen, C. A., et al. 2023, AJ, 166, 85, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ace442

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ace442 2023

  47. [47]

    Hoch, K. K. W., Theissen, C. A., Barman, T. S., et al. 2024, AJ, 168, 187, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad6cd3

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad6cd3 2024

  48. [48]

    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

  49. [49]

    2016, A&A, 591, A72, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201628099

    Ida, S., Guillot, T., & Morbidelli, A. 2016, A&A, 591, A72, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201628099

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201628099 2016

  50. [50]

    2022, A&A, 661, A80, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142663

    Jakobsen, P., Ferruit, P., Alves de Oliveira, C., et al. 2022, A&A, 661, A80, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142663

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142663 2022

  51. [51]

    D., Kuzuhara, M., et al

    Janson, M., Brandt, T. D., Kuzuhara, M., et al. 2013, ApJL, 778, L4, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/778/1/L4

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/778/1/l4 2013

  52. [52]

    S., et al

    Kama, M., Shorttle, O., Jermyn, A. S., et al. 2019, ApJ, 885, 114, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab45f8

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab45f8 2019

  53. [53]

    D., et al

    Kammerer, J., Lawson, K., Perrin, M. D., et al. 2024, AJ, 168, 51, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad4ffe

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad4ffe 2024

  54. [54]

    A., Ruiz Diaz, A., et al

    Kiman, R., Beichman, C. A., Ruiz Diaz, A., et al. 2026, AJ, 171, 60, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ae230f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ae230f 2026

  55. [55]

    2013, Science, 339, 1398, doi: 10.1126/science.1232003

    Marois, C. 2013, Science, 339, 1398, doi: 10.1126/science.1232003

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1232003 2013

  56. [56]

    2016, ARA&A, 54, 271, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023307

    Kratter, K., & Lodato, G. 2016, ARA&A, 54, 271, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023307

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023307 2016

  57. [57]

    2013, ApJ, 774, 11, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/774/1/11

    Kuzuhara, M., Tamura, M., Kudo, T., et al. 2013, ApJ, 774, 11, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/774/1/11

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/774/1/11 2013

  58. [58]

    2025, Nature, 642, 905, doi: 10.1038/s41586-025-09150-4

    Lagrange, A.-M., Wilkinson, C., Mˆ alin, M., et al. 2025, Nature, 642, 905, doi: 10.1038/s41586-025-09150-4

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-025-09150-4 2025

  59. [59]

    Laird, J. B. 1985, ApJ, 289, 556, doi: 10.1086/162916

    work page doi:10.1086/162916 1985

  60. [60]

    2006, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Larkin, J., Barczys, M., Krabbe, A., et al. 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, 62691A, doi: 10.1117/12.672061

    work page doi:10.1117/12.672061 2006

  61. [61]

    Law, D. R., E. Morrison, J., Argyriou, I., et al. 2023, AJ, 166, 45, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acdddc

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

  62. [62]

    K., Marley, M

    Leggett, S. K., Marley, M. S., Freedman, R., et al. 2007, ApJ, 667, 537, doi: 10.1086/519948

    work page doi:10.1086/519948 2007

  63. [63]

    K., Tremblin, P., Esplin, T

    Leggett, S. K., Tremblin, P., Esplin, T. L., Luhman, K. L., & Morley, C. V. 2017, ApJ, 842, 118, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6fb5

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa6fb5 2017

  64. [64]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.21364, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.21364

    Lei, E., & Molli` ere, P. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.21364, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.21364

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.21364 2024

  65. [65]

    Lew, B. W. P., Roellig, T., Batalha, N. E., et al. 2024, AJ, 167, 237, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad3425

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad3425 2024

  66. [66]

    2020, Nature Astronomy, 4, 609, doi: 10.1038/s41550-020-1009-3

    Li, C., Ingersoll, A., Bolton, S., et al. 2020, Nature Astronomy, 4, 609, doi: 10.1038/s41550-020-1009-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-020-1009-3 2020

  67. [67]

    C., Leggett, S

    Liu, M. C., Leggett, S. K., Golimowski, D. A., et al. 2006, ApJ, 647, 1393, doi: 10.1086/505561

    work page doi:10.1086/505561 2006

  68. [68]

    Luck, R. E. 2017, AJ, 153, 21, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/153/1/21

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/153/1/21 2017

  69. [69]

    2019, ARA&A, 57, 617, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051846

    Madhusudhan, N. 2019, ARA&A, 57, 617, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051846

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051846 2019

  70. [70]

    V., & Lunine, J

    Madhusudhan, N., Mousis, O., Johnson, T. V., & Lunine, J. I. 2011, ApJ, 743, 191, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/743/2/191

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/743/2/191 2011

  71. [71]

    2012, A&A, 541, A40, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201218800 Mˆ alin, M., Boccaletti, A., Charnay, B., Kiefer, F., & B´ ezard, B

    Mora, A. 2012, A&A, 541, A40, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201218800 Mˆ alin, M., Boccaletti, A., Charnay, B., Kiefer, F., & B´ ezard, B. 2023, A&A, 671, A109, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245094 Mˆ alin, M., Boccaletti, A., Perrot, C., et al. 2025a, A&A, 693, A315, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452695 Mˆ alin, M., Ward-Duong, K., Grant, S. L., et al. 2025b, A&A, 704,...

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201218800 2012

  72. [72]

    2006, ApJ, 641, 556, doi: 10.1086/500401

    Nadeau, D. 2006, ApJ, 641, 556, doi: 10.1086/500401

    work page doi:10.1086/500401 2006

  73. [73]

    2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Marston, A., Hargis, J., Levay, K., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 10704, Observatory Operations:

    2018

  74. [74]

    Strategies, Processes, and Systems VII, 1070413, doi: 10.1117/12.2311973

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2311973

  75. [75]

    C., Mace, G

    Martin, E. C., Mace, G. N., McLean, I. S., et al. 2017, ApJ, 838, 73, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6338

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa6338 2017

  76. [76]

    C., Carter, A

    Matthews, E. C., Carter, A. L., Pathak, P., et al. 2024, Nature, 633, 789, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07837-8

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07837-8 2024

  77. [77]

    R., Kirkpatrick, J

    McGovern, M. R., Kirkpatrick, J. D., McLean, I. S., et al. 2004, ApJ, 600, 1020, doi: 10.1086/379849 30

    work page doi:10.1086/379849 2004

  78. [78]

    W., Meyer, M

    Meynardie, W. W., Meyer, M. R., MacDonald, R. J., et al. 2025, ApJ, 994, 237, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0ad0

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae0ad0 2025

  79. [79]

    2005, ApJ, 634, 1126, doi: 10.1086/497123

    Wyckoff, S. 2005, ApJ, 634, 1126, doi: 10.1086/497123

    work page doi:10.1086/497123 2005

  80. [80]

    E., Biller, B

    Miles, B. E., Biller, B. A., Patapis, P., et al. 2023, ApJL, 946, L6, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acb04a

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acb04a 2023

Showing first 80 references.