Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

A 16 Myr super-Neptune in Upper-Centaurus Lupus and a preliminary survey of transiting planets in Sco-Cen with TESS

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A 16-million-year-old super-Neptune spotted in Sco-Cen

desk verdict The planet validation is solid and worth publishing; the population-level 'excess' claim is not supported by the analysis actually presented. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.00576 v3 pith:Y7BLKJGS submitted 2025-02-01 astro-ph.EP

Sydney Vach , George Zhou , Andrew W. Mann , Madyson G. Barber , Tyler R. Fairnington , Chelsea X. Huang , James G. Rogers , Luke G. Bouma
show 20 more authors
Joachim Krüger Duncan Wright Annabelle E. Niblett Jack M. Nelson Samuel N. Quinn David W. Latham Allyson Bieryla Karen A. Collins Michelle Kunimoto Cristilyn N. Watkins Richard P. Schwarz Kevin I. Collins Ramotholo Sefako Keith Horne Steve B. Howell Catherine A. Clark Colin Littlefield Jessie L. Christiansen Zahra Essack Joshua N. Winn
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords ExoplanetsMiniNeptunesTransitphotometryYoungstarclustersExoplanetastronomyTESSSco-CenPre-main-sequencestars
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

TIC 88785435 b is presented as a validated transiting super-Neptune, with radius $5.03\,R_\oplus$ and a $10.51$-day period, orbiting a K7 dwarf in the Upper-Centaurus Lupus region of the Scorpius-Centaurus association. The authors gather TESS photometry, ground-based transit light curves, spectroscopy, and high-resolution imaging to show that the signal is a genuine planet (false-positive probability below $1.4\times10^{-4}$) and that the host star is a likely $16\pm2$ Myr member of the young association. That combination makes the planet one of the youngest and coolest ($T_{\rm eq}\approx 635$ K) transiting planets known, and a plausible target for atmospheric follow-up. In a companion preliminary survey of Sco-Cen, they recover a population of young Neptune- and Jupiter-sized planets that are rare in the mature Kepler sample, consistent with the idea that newborn close-in planets are born inflated and later shrink.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a joint Markov-chain Monte Carlo global model that simultaneously fits the TESS and LCO transit light curves and the stellar spectral energy distribution against MIST isochrones, with Gaussian priors on age ($16\pm2$ Myr), metallicity, and other spectroscopic parameters. The stellar radius ($0.911\,R_\odot$) produced by this fit converts the transit depth into the planet radius of $5.03\,R_\oplus$ and fixes the orbital parameters. The planetary interpretation is separately secured by the MOLUSC simulation of possible binary configurations feeding a TRICERATOPS false-probability calculation, which returns a false-positive probability below $1.4\times10^{-4}$.

What would settle it

A direct age indicator—such as a much weaker lithium line or a rotation period inconsistent with Upper-Centaurus Lupus members—showing the host star is an older field interloper would collapse the adopted 16 Myr age; with an older stellar radius the derived planet radius ($5.03\,R_\oplus$) and the newborn-super-Neptune designation would no longer hold.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that TIC 88785435 b is a real, very young transiting super-Neptune. On the paper's own terms, the system consists of a pre-main-sequence K7V star ($M_\star = 0.724\,M_\odot$, $R_\star = 0.911\,R_\odot$, $T_{\rm eff}\approx 3998$ K) at a distance of 122 pc, hosting a planet with radius $5.03^{+0.21}_{-0.20}\,R_\oplus$, period $10.508843^{+0.000037}_{-0.000034}$ days, and equilibrium temperature $635\pm16$ K. The authors validate the planet through ground-based transit observations in $g'$ and $i'$ bands, speckle imaging that excludes close stellar companions, and a MOLUSC+TRICERATOPS false-positive analysis giving a probability below $1.4\times10^{-4}$. They place the star in the $\phi$Lup substructure of Upper-Centaurus Lupus and adopt an age of $16\pm2$ Myr from the literature, supported by rotation period, lithium absorption, and H$\alpha$ emission that match UCL members.

Load-bearing premise

The planet is exactly as young as its star: the whole newborn-planet interpretation rests on the star genuinely belonging to the 16-million-year-old Upper-Centaurus Lupus association, a membership inferred from rotation, lithium, and H-alpha emission rather than directly measured.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • TIC 88785435 b joins the small set of validated transiting planets younger than about 20 Myr, and at $T_{\rm eq}\approx 635$ K it is among the coolest such planets, making it a prime target for atmospheric transmission spectroscopy.
  • The preliminary Sco-Cen survey, which recovers members like HIP 67522 b, finds a population of Neptune- and Jupiter-sized close-in planets that are rare in the mature Kepler population, supporting the idea that young planets are born inflated.
  • Dynamical mass measurements of this and similar young planets could distinguish between the small-planet-progenitor scenario and the young-hot-Jupiter scenario.
  • If the age holds, the planet's radius of $5.03\,R_\oplus$ at 16 Myr provides a direct constraint on thermal contraction and atmospheric mass-loss models in the first tens of megayears.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A radial-velocity campaign to measure the planet's mass could discriminate between a gas-rich born-inflated planet and a young close-in giant; the paper does not attempt this, and the outcome is not predicted.
  • If the star's membership were ever refuted, the planet would likely remain a valid super-Neptune but would lose its unique age anchor, so the system's value as a formation probe depends on continued membership verification.
  • The survey's recovered candidates, none of which are statistically validated with TESS data alone, suggest that a larger ground-based follow-up program in Sco-Cen would be needed to map the young-planet occurrence rate, a step the paper leaves to future work.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports the discovery and validation of TIC 88785435 b, a transiting super-Neptune with radius R_b = 5.03(+0.21,-0.20) R_Earth and period P = 10.508843 days around a K7V pre-main-sequence star in the Upper-Centaurus Lupus region of Sco-Cen. The validation rests on TESS photometry from three sectors, four ground-based transit observations in two filters, high-resolution speckle imaging that rules out resolved companions, and a joint MOLUSC/TRICERATOPS false-positive analysis giving a probability below 1.4e-4. The stellar characterization uses Veloce spectroscopy, rotation periods, and Li/H-alpha equivalent widths to support membership and youth, and the global model jointly fits transits and the stellar SED with a 16 +/- 2 Myr age prior adopted from Mamajek et al. (2002). The paper also presents a preliminary TESS survey of 5713 Sco-Cen members, recovering four confirmed planets and three unvalidated candidates, and concludes in Section 7 that the survey finds an excess of larger planets compared to Kepler demographics. That demographic conclusion is not supported by the analysis in the manuscript, because the promised forward-modeling comparison is not presented.

Significance. If the planet validation holds, TIC 88785435 b is a valuable addition to the young transiting planet sample: it is among the youngest and coolest (T_eq = 635 K) known transiting planets amenable to atmospheric follow-up, and the ground-based confirmation plus the very low false-positive probability make the detection itself robust. The manuscript is also transparent about its procedures and uses publicly available data, and the stellar youth indicators are presented in a falsifiable way. The demographic part of the paper, however, is not at the same standard: the claimed excess of large planets in Sco-Cen is asserted without the completeness and injection-recovery analysis that Section 6 promises, and unvalidated candidates are included in the same table as confirmed planets. This weakens the paper's broader claim, although it does not undermine the central discovery.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 6 and Section 7] The demographic conclusion in Section 7 that the Sco-Cen survey finds 'an excess of larger planets compared to the Kepler demographics' is not supported by the analysis presented in Section 6. Section 6 promises 'an initial forward modeling comparison against mature-aged demographics following the methodology outlined in Vach et al. (2024)', but no completeness calculation, injection-recovery map, or occurrence-rate comparison appears in the manuscript. Table 6 includes three unvalidated candidates with false-positive rates of 0.0121, 0.38, and 0.0417, and the text states that no newly identified candidate could be statistically validated with TESS data alone; counting these candidates as planets, or comparing a handful of detections to Kepler rates without accounting for detection sensitivity and young-star variability, cannot establish an excess. I recommend either removing the demographic claim from the abstract and Section 7 or adding the promised forward-modeling analysis using only validated planets.
  2. [Section 4, Table 5, and Section 3.3.1] The headline '16 Myr' age is not measured from the star but is adopted from the literature age of Upper-Centaurus Lupus (Mamajek et al. 2002) and entered as a Gaussian prior in the global model. Section 3.3.1 explicitly states that the authors could not make statistically significant claims regarding membership in the phi Lup substructure, so the youth argument rests on consistency with rotation, Li, and H-alpha distributions rather than a direct measurement. Because the MIST-isochrone fit uses this age prior to derive R_star = 0.911 R_sun, the reported planet radius R_b = 5.03 R_Earth is age-dependent, and a field interloper or older age would shift the radius and undermine the newborn-planet interpretation. The paper should quantify how R_b changes under a wider age prior or an unconstrained age fit, and should state this dependence prominently in the title and abstract claims.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 2.2] The text says the LCO light curves confirm the TESS transits 'in both the g' and r' bands', but Table 1 lists only i' and g' observations; either the r' mention is a typo for i', or an r' observation is missing from the table.
  2. [Section 2.2] The sentence 'The SINISTRO camera is a 4 which observes a 13' x 13' field of view' appears incomplete and should be reworded.
  3. [Section 3.3 and Table 4] The table caption reads 'The derived Li EW are presented in Tabel 4'; 'Tabel' should be 'Table'.
  4. [Abstract] The abstract contains the typo 'long-candence', which should be 'long-cadence'.
  5. [Table 3] The age row lists '16.0 +/- 1.6' with source '7 This work', but Section 4 says the age is adopted from Mamajek et al. (2002); the table source should reflect this adoption rather than implying a new measurement.
  6. [Section 6] The phrase 'false-postive probability' should be 'false-positive probability'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the planet validation and radius derive from external data, while the Sco-Cen demographic 'excess' claim is an unsupported over-interpretation rather than a circular step.

full rationale

The central discovery chain is self-contained. TIC 88785435 b's period (10.508843 d), radius (5.03 R_Earth), and false-positive probability (<1.4e-4) come from a simultaneous fit to TESS FFI light curves, four ground-based LCO transits, Veloce spectra, SED magnitudes, Gaia parallax, and Zorro speckle-imaging contrast curves (Sections 2, 4, 5). The transit ratio R_p/R_star is measured from data, and R_star is constrained by an MIST-based SED fit; neither is renamed as a prediction. The 16±2 Myr age is an external literature prior adopted from Mamajek et al. (2002) in Sections 3.3.1 and 4 and is separately supported by rotation, Li absorption, and H-alpha emission; it is not derived from the planet, so the '16 Myr super-Neptune' characterization is not self-definitional. Self-citations to Vach et al. (2024) and Vach et al. (2025) provide search, detrending, and joint-modeling methodology, but the planet parameters are recomputed from the present observations, so these citations are not load-bearing. The paper itself flags its survey limitations: no newly identified candidate could be statistically validated with TESS data alone, FPPs reach 0.38, and Table 6 mixes confirmed planets and candidates. Section 6 promises 'an initial forward modeling comparison against mature-aged demographics following the methodology outlined in Vach et al. (2024),' but no completeness or injection-recovery calculation appears, making Section 7's 'excess of larger planets compared to the Kepler demographics' an over-interpretation of a small sample. That is a statistical and evidentiary gap, not a circular reduction: the conclusion is not equal by construction to an input or fitted parameter. Hence no circularity step is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard astrophysical modeling assumptions: association membership, a literature age, MIST isochrones, limb-darkening tables, and a false-positive framework. No new physical entities are introduced. The age assumption is the most consequential free parameter because the planet radius and the newborn interpretation scale with it.

free parameters (8)
  • Stellar age = 16.0 ± 1.6 Myr (Gaussian prior 16 ± 2 Myr)
    Gaussian prior from UCL literature age; the posterior age directly sets the 16 Myr claim and the stellar radius via MIST isochrones, which in turn sets the planet radius.
  • Eccentricity parameters sqrt(e)cos(w), sqrt(e)sin(w) = -0.003+0.136/-0.136; -0.010+0.069/-0.061; derived e = 0.131+0.060/-0.064
    Free parameters in the batman transit model; eccentricity is poorly constrained and affects the derived semi-major axis and transit duration.
  • Limb-darkening coefficients u1, u2 = TESS u1=0.349±0.026, u2=0.256±0.014; i' and g' values in Table 3
    Fitted with Gaussian priors interpolated from Claret (2017); they affect the transit shape and radius ratio.
  • Stellar mass M* = 0.724 ± 0.017 M_sun
    Free parameter in the joint SED+transit fit with priors from spectroscopy and isochrones.
  • Effective temperature Teff = 3998 ± 95 K
    Free parameter with a Gaussian prior from iSpec spectroscopy; affects the SED and stellar radius.
  • Metallicity [m/H] = -0.08 ± 0.11
    Free parameter with a Gaussian prior from iSpec spectroscopy; affects the isochrone interpolation.
  • Parallax = 8.191 ± 0.015 mas
    Gaussian prior from Gaia DR3; sets the distance and stellar luminosity.
  • Detrending coefficients = Not reported individually
    TESS third-order polynomial per transit window; LCO linear trend model in airmass, X, Y, and FWHM. These are nuisance parameters in the global fit.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption TIC 88785435 is a member of Sco-Cen/UCL.
    Adopted from Damiani et al. (2019) and Ratzenböck et al. (2023a), and independently supported by rotation period, Li 6708 A EW, and Halpha emission (Section 3.3.1). The 16 Myr age depends on this membership.
  • domain assumption The age of UCL is 16 ± 2 Myr.
    Used as a Gaussian prior in the global model (Section 4) and in the title; taken from Mamajek et al. (2002), not measured for this star.
  • domain assumption MIST stellar evolution tracks correctly model pre-main-sequence K7V stars.
    SED fitting via minimint and MIST isochrones (Section 4) determines the stellar radius and hence the planet radius.
  • domain assumption Claret (2017) limb-darkening tables are applicable to TESS, Sloan i', and Sloan g' bandpasses.
    Used to set Gaussian priors on u1 and u2 in the transit model (Section 4).
  • domain assumption TRICERATOPS and MOLUSC correctly enumerate astrophysical false-positive scenarios.
    Used to derive the false-positive probability below 1.4e-4 (Section 5).
  • domain assumption Gaia DR3 astrometry is reliable and the target has no unresolved companion affecting RUWE.
    Used in MOLUSC simulations and in the membership analysis (Sections 3.2 and 5).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A 16 Myr super-Neptune in Upper-Centaurus Lupus and a preliminary survey of transiting planets in Sco-Cen with TESS." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Y7BLKJGS

@misc{pith2026250200576,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A 16 Myr super-Neptune in Upper-Centaurus Lupus and a preliminary survey of transiting planets in Sco-Cen with TESS},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Y7BLKJGS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.00576}
}
abstract

Measuring the properties of planets younger than about 50 Myr helps to test different planetary formation and evolution models. NASA's Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) has observed nearly the entire sky, including a wide range of star-forming regions and young stellar clusters, expanding our census of the newborn planet population. In this work, we present the discovery of the TIC 88785435 planetary system located in the Upper-Centaurus Lupus (UCL) region of the Scorpius-Centaurus OB association (Sco-Cen) and a preliminary survey of the planet population within Sco-Cen. TIC 88785435 is a pre-main sequence, K7V dwarf ($M_\star = 0.72M_\odot$, $R_\star = 0.91R_\odot$, $T_\mathrm{eff}$ = 3998K, V = 11.7 mag) located within the bounds of UCL. We investigate the distribution of rotation periods measured from the TESS long-cadence data and the Halpha and Li abundances from the spectra of TIC 88785435. TESS long-candence data reveal that TIC 88785435 hosts a transiting super-Neptune ($R_b = 5.03R_\oplus$, P = 10.51 days), TIC 88785435 b. Ground-based follow-up validates the planetary nature of TIC 88785435 b. Using the TESS data, we perform a preliminary survey to investigate how TIC 88785435 b compares to the population of newly born planets located within Sco-Cen.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.00576 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Top three panels: TESS FFI light curves (grey) for TIC 88785435 across Sectors 11, 38, and 65. We model the stellar activity using a spline fit and the transits are modeled with batman using our best-fit parameters from our global model (purple). The transits of TIC 88785435 b are marked by purple triangles. Bottom two panels: Phase-folded TESS transit and best-fit model of the super-Neptune, TIC 88785435 b, and the… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Phase-folded ground-based transit observations of TIC 88785435 b (grey, binned in purple). Overlaid are our best-fit transit models via batman for each observation. Telescope, located at Siding Spring Observatory, Australia (Gilbert et al. 2018). Veloce is an echelle spectrograph with a resolving power of R ∼ 75,000, fed via a fiber bundle 2.4" in diameter. We made use of observations from the red-optical arm of Vel… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Gemini South 8 m blue (562 nm) and red (832 nm) arm diffraction limited images and 5σ contrast curves of TIC 88785435. No companions were found within detection limits. The derived parameters (Teff = 3998±95 K, logg = 4.19± 0.37) are in agreement with the empirically derived values from the TIC (Teff = 4000±130 K, logg = 4.29±0.13). Fur￾ther, the metallicity derived here (m/H = −0.08±0.11) is con￾sistent with that o… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Galactic coordinates (l, b) of literature Sco-Cen (grey) members (see Luhman 2022, and references within). TIC 88785435 (red star) is a member of the classically defined UCL subpopulation. Ratzenböck et al. (2023a) identified TIC 88785435 as a high confidence candidate…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Stellar rotation period as a function of effective temper￾ature for TIC 88785435 (red star) from the TESS light curves. We plot UCL/LCC members with rotation periods presented in Rebull et al. (2022) (grey squares). The subset of stars identified as candi￾date members …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Upper panel: Lomb-Scargle periodogram for TIC 88785435. The Lomb-Scargle for each individual sector is plot￾ted in grey, with the averaged power spectra across all three sectors plotted in red. We measured a rotation period of 8.49 days for TIC 88785435. Lower panel: P…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Lithium (left) and Hα (right) equivalent widths of TIC 88785435 (red), ϕ Lup candidate members (salmon), and literature established Sco-Cen members (grey). We plot the EAGLES (Jeffries et al. 2023) lithium distribution curve calculated for the age of UCL (16 Myr). Posi…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Vetting plot for the Sector 65 observations of TIC 89071455. The TESS light curve is presented in the left panel, with the transit times marked by the red triangles. The stellar variability is modeled via a spline (blue). The phase-folded light curve using the best-fit…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Vetting plot for the Sector 37 observations of TIC 273586149 (same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Left panel: TESS Sector 65 QLP (purple), SPOC FFI PDCSAP (salmon), and SPOC FFI SAP (green) light curves of TIC 88785435. Right panel: Phase folded TESS QLP (purple), SPOC FFI PDCSAP (salmon), and SPOC FFI SAP (green) light curves of TIC 88785435 b [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:f…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. OpenAlex reports about 2 citations worldwide. Full citation record

  1. The Longest-period Young Transiting Exoplanets. A Duo of Puffy Giants inside a Debris Disk

    astro-ph.EP 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    HD 114082 hosts two puffy, moderate-to-low-mass giants on nearly circular, coplanar, near-resonant orbits of 225.55 and ~314 days, the longest-period young transiting exoplanets known.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

95 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    602C `\.=

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

    2021

  4. [4]

    P., Tollerud , E

    Astropy Collaboration , Robitaille , T. P., Tollerud , E. J., et al. 2013, , 558, A33, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 2013

  5. [5]

    M., Sip o cz , B

    Astropy Collaboration , Price-Whelan , A. M., Sip o cz , B. M., et al. 2018, , 156, 123, 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f 2018

  6. [6]

    M., Lim , P

    Astropy Collaboration , Price-Whelan , A. M., Lim , P. L., et al. 2022, , 935, 167, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74 2022

  7. [7]

    2024 a , Nature Astronomy, 8, 899, 10.1038/s41550-024-02257-0

    Barat , S., D \'e sert , J.-M., Vazan , A., et al. 2024 a , Nature Astronomy, 8, 899, 10.1038/s41550-024-02257-0

    doi:10.1038/s41550-024-02257-0 2024

  8. [8]

    M., et al

    Barat , S., D \'e sert , J.-M., Goyal , J. M., et al. 2024 b , arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.14995, 10.48550/arXiv.2407.14995

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2407.14995 2024

Show all 95 references
  1. [9]

    G., Thao , P

    Barber , M. G., Thao , P. C., Mann , A. W., et al. 2024 a , arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.04763, 10.48550/arXiv.2407.04763

    2024 doi arXiv

  2. [10]

    G., Mann , A

    Barber , M. G., Mann , A. W., Vanderburg , A., et al. 2024 b , , 635, 574, 10.1038/s41586-024-08123-3

    2024 doi

  3. [11]

    Barnes , S. A. 2007, , 669, 1167, 10.1086/519295

    2007 doi

  4. [12]

    2014, , 569, A111, 10.1051/0004-6361/201423945

    Blanco-Cuaresma , S., Soubiran , C., Heiter , U., & Jofr \'e , P. 2014, , 569, A111, 10.1051/0004-6361/201423945

    2014 doi

  5. [13]

    G., Palumbo , E

    Bouma , L. G., Palumbo , E. K., & Hillenbrand , L. A. 2023, , 947, L3, 10.3847/2041-8213/acc589

    2023 doi

  6. [14]

    W., & Bouma , L

    Boyle , A. W., & Bouma , L. G. 2023, , 166, 14, 10.3847/1538-3881/acd3e8

    2023 doi

  7. [15]

    T., Gillen , E., Queloz , D., et al

    Briegal , J. T., Gillen , E., Queloz , D., et al. 2022, , 513, 420, 10.1093/mnras/stac898

    2022 doi

  8. [16]

    M., Baliber , N., Bianco , F

    Brown , T. M., Baliber , N., Bianco , F. B., et al. 2013, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 125, 1031, 10.1086/673168

    2013 doi

  9. [17]

    Castelli , F., & Kurucz , R. L. 2004, ArXiv Astrophysics e-prints

    2004

  10. [18]

    L., Zink , J

    Christiansen , J. L., Zink , J. K., Hardegree-Ullman , K. K., et al. 2023, , 166, 248, 10.3847/1538-3881/acf9f9

    2023 doi

  11. [19]

    2017, , 600, A30, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629705

    Claret , A. 2017, , 600, A30, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629705

    2017 doi

  12. [20]

    2019, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol

    Collins , K. 2019, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 233, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts \#233, 140.05

    2019

  13. [21]

    A., Kielkopf , J

    Collins , K. A., Kielkopf , J. F., Stassun , K. G., & Hessman , F. V. 2017, , 153, 77, 10.3847/1538-3881/153/2/77

    2017 doi

  14. [22]

    M., Wright , E

    Cutri , R. M., Wright , E. L., Conrow , T., et al. 2021, VizieR Online Data Catalog: AllWISE Data Release (Cutri+ 2013) , VizieR On-line Data Catalog: II/328. Originally published in: IPAC/Caltech (2013)

    2013

  15. [23]

    2019, , 623, A112, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833994

    Damiani , F., Prisinzano , L., Pillitteri , I., Micela , G., & Sciortino , S. 2019, , 623, A112, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833994

    2019 doi

  16. [24]

    J., Petigura , E

    David , T. J., Petigura , E. A., Luger , R., et al. 2019, , 885, L12, 10.3847/2041-8213/ab4c99

    2019 doi

  17. [25]

    J., Hillenbrand , L

    David , T. J., Hillenbrand , L. A., Petigura , E. A., et al. 2016, , 534, 658, 10.1038/nature18293

    2016 doi

  18. [26]

    T., Hoogerwerf , R., de Bruijne , J

    de Zeeuw , P. T., Hoogerwerf , R., de Bruijne , J. H. J., Brown , A. G. A., & Blaauw , A. 1999, , 117, 354, 10.1086/300682

    1999 doi

  19. [27]

    D., Rees , D

    Donati , J.-F., Semel , M., Carter , B. D., Rees , D. E., & Collier Cameron , A. 1997, , 291, 658, 10.1093/mnras/291.4.658

    1997 doi

  20. [28]

    2016, , 222, 8, 10.3847/0067-0049/222/1/8

    Dotter , A. 2016, , 222, 8, 10.3847/0067-0049/222/1/8

    2016 doi

  21. [29]

    2022 a , in Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, Vol

    Fernandes , R., Mulders , G., Pascucci , I., Bergsten , G., & Koskinen , T. 2022 a , in Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, Vol. 54, 102.47

    2022

  22. [30]

    B., Mulders , G

    Fernandes , R. B., Mulders , G. D., Pascucci , I., et al. 2022 b , , 164, 78, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac7b29

    2022 doi

  23. [31]

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

    Foreman-Mackey , D., Hogg , D. W., Lang , D., & Goodman , J. 2013, , 125, 306, 10.1086/670067

    2013 doi

  24. [32]

    Gaia Collaboration , Vallenari , A., Brown , A. G. A., et al. 2023, , 674, A1, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940

    2023 doi

  25. [33]

    Giacalone , S., & Dressing , C. D. 2020, triceratops: Candidate exoplanet rating tool . 2002.004

    2020

  26. [34]

    D., Jensen , E

    Giacalone , S., Dressing , C. D., Jensen , E. L. N., et al. 2021, , 161, 24, 10.3847/1538-3881/abc6af

    2021 doi

  27. [35]

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

    Gilbert , J., Bergmann , C., Bloxham , G., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 10702, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy VII, ed. C. J. Evans , L. Simard , & H. Takami , 107020Y, 10.1117/12.2312399

    2018 doi

  28. [36]

    C., & Henning , T

    Goldman , B., R \"o ser , S., Schilbach , E., Mo \'o r , A. C., & Henning , T. 2018, , 868, 32, 10.3847/1538-4357/aae64c

    2018 doi

  29. [37]

    Gray , D. F. 2005, The Observation and Analysis of Stellar Photospheres ( Cambridge University Press )

    2005

  30. [38]

    A., Levine , S

    Henden , A. A., Levine , S. E., Terrell , D., Smith , T. C., & Welch , D. 2012, JAAVSO, 40, 430

    2012

  31. [39]

    B., Everett , M

    Howell , S. B., Everett , M. E., Sherry , W., Horch , E., & Ciardi , D. R. 2011, , 142, 19, 10.1088/0004-6256/142/1/19

    2011 doi

  32. [40]

    B., Sobeck , C., Haas , M., et al

    Howell , S. B., Sobeck , C., Haas , M., et al. 2014, , 126, 398, 10.1086/676406

    2014 doi

  33. [41]

    X., Vanderburg , A., P \'a l , A., et al

    Huang , C. X., Vanderburg , A., P \'a l , A., et al. 2020 a , Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 4, 204, 10.3847/2515-5172/abca2e

    2020 doi

  34. [42]

    2020 b , Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 4, 206, 10.3847/2515-5172/abca2d

    ---. 2020 b , Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 4, 206, 10.3847/2515-5172/abca2d

    2020 doi

  35. [43]

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

    2007 doi

  36. [44]

    Ida , S., & Lin , D. N. C. 2004, , 604, 388, 10.1086/381724

    2004 doi

  37. [45]

    D., Jackson , R

    Jeffries , R. D., Jackson , R. J., Wright , N. J., et al. 2023, , 523, 802, 10.1093/mnras/stad1293

    2023 doi

  38. [46]

    2013, Tapir: A web interface for transit/eclipse observability , Astrophysics Source Code Library

    Jensen , E. 2013, Tapir: A web interface for transit/eclipse observability , Astrophysics Source Code Library. 1306.007

    2013

  39. [47]

    Kerr , R. M. P., Rizzuto , A. C., Kraus , A. L., & Offner , S. S. R. 2021, , 917, 23, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac0251

    2021 doi

  40. [48]

    2022, , 657, A7, 10.1051/0004-6361/202142146

    Kervella , P., Arenou , F., & Th \'e venin , F. 2022, , 657, A7, 10.1051/0004-6361/202142146

    2022 doi

  41. [49]

    2021, segasai/minimint: Minimint 0.3.0 , v0.3.0, Zenodo, 10.5281/zenodo.5610692

    Koposov , S. 2021, segasai/minimint: Minimint 0.3.0 , v0.3.0, Zenodo, 10.5281/zenodo.5610692

    2021 doi

  42. [50]

    2002, , 391, 369, 10.1051/0004-6361:20020802

    Kov \'a cs , G., Zucker , S., & Mazeh , T. 2002, , 391, 369, 10.1051/0004-6361:20020802

    2002 doi

  43. [51]

    2015, , 127, 1161, 10.1086/683602

    Kreidberg , L. 2015, , 127, 1161, 10.1086/683602

    2015 doi

  44. [52]

    Kunimoto , M., & Matthews , J. M. 2020, , 159, 248, 10.3847/1538-3881/ab88b0

    2020 doi

  45. [53]

    A., et al

    Lambrechts , M., Morbidelli , A., Jacobson , S. A., et al. 2019, , 627, A83, 10.1051/0004-6361/201834229

    2019 doi

  46. [54]

    J., Chiang , E., & Ormel , C

    Lee , E. J., Chiang , E., & Ormel , C. W. 2014, , 797, 95, 10.1088/0004-637X/797/2/95

    2014 doi

  47. [55]

    D., Fortney , J

    Lopez , E. D., Fortney , J. J., & Miller , N. 2012, , 761, 59, 10.1088/0004-637X/761/1/59

    2012 doi

  48. [56]

    Luhman , K. L. 2022, , 163, 24, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac35e2

    2022 doi

  49. [57]

    E., & Hillenbrand , L

    Mamajek , E. E., & Hillenbrand , L. A. 2008, , 687, 1264, 10.1086/591785

    2008 doi

  50. [58]

    E., Meyer , M

    Mamajek , E. E., Meyer , M. R., & Liebert , J. 2002, , 124, 1670, 10.1086/341952

    2002 doi

  51. [59]

    2002, , 580, L171, 10.1086/345520

    Mandel , K., & Agol , E. 2002, , 580, L171, 10.1086/345520

    2002 doi

  52. [60]

    W., Gaidos , E., Mace , G

    Mann , A. W., Gaidos , E., Mace , G. N., et al. 2016, , 818, 46, 10.3847/0004-637X/818/1/46

    2016 doi

  53. [61]

    W., Gaidos , E., Vanderburg , A., et al

    Mann , A. W., Gaidos , E., Vanderburg , A., et al. 2017, , 153, 64, 10.1088/1361-6528/aa5276

    2017 doi

  54. [62]

    W., Wood , M

    Mann , A. W., Wood , M. L., Schmidt , S. P., et al. 2022, , 163, 156, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac511d

    2022 doi

  55. [63]

    H., Harbeck , D.-R., et al

    McCully , C., Volgenau , N. H., Harbeck , D.-R., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 10707, , 107070K, 10.1117/12.2314340

    2018 doi

  56. [64]

    R., Irwin , J., Charbonneau , D., et al

    Newton , E. R., Irwin , J., Charbonneau , D., et al. 2017, , 834, 85, 10.3847/1538-4357/834/1/85

    2017 doi

  57. [65]

    R., Mann , A

    Newton , E. R., Mann , A. W., Tofflemire , B. M., et al. 2019, , 880, L17, 10.3847/2041-8213/ab2988

    2019 doi

  58. [66]

    E., & Wu , Y

    Owen , J. E., & Wu , Y. 2013, , 775, 105, 10.1088/0004-637X/775/2/105

    2013 doi

  59. [67]

    2016, , 817, 107, 10.3847/0004-637X/817/2/107

    ---. 2016, , 817, 107, 10.3847/0004-637X/817/2/107

    2016 doi

  60. [68]

    2017, , 847, 29, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa890a

    ---. 2017, , 847, 29, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa890a

    2017 doi

  61. [69]

    J., Mamajek , E

    Pecaut , M. J., Mamajek , E. E., & Bubar , E. J. 2012, , 746, 154, 10.1088/0004-637X/746/2/154

    2012 doi

  62. [70]

    2020, , 582, 497, 10.1038/s41586-020-2400-z

    Plavchan , P., Barclay , T., Gagn \'e , J., et al. 2020, , 582, 497, 10.1038/s41586-020-2400-z

    2020 doi

  63. [71]

    o ck , S., Gro schedl , J. E., M \

    Ratzenb \"o ck , S., Gro schedl , J. E., M \"o ller , T., et al. 2023 a , , 677, A59, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243690

    2023 doi

  64. [72]

    E., Alves , J., et al

    Ratzenb \"o ck , S., Gro schedl , J. E., Alves , J., et al. 2023 b , , 678, A71, 10.1051/0004-6361/202346901

    2023 doi

  65. [73]

    M., Stauffer , J

    Rebull , L. M., Stauffer , J. R., Cody , A. M., et al. 2018, , 155, 196, 10.3847/1538-3881/aab605

    2018 doi

  66. [74]

    M., Stauffer , J

    Rebull , L. M., Stauffer , J. R., Hillenbrand , L. A., et al. 2022, , 164, 80, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac75f1

    2022 doi

  67. [75]

    R., Winn , J

    Ricker , G. R., Winn , J. N., Vanderspek , R., et al. 2015, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 1, 014003, 10.1117/1.JATIS.1.1.014003

    2015 doi

  68. [76]

    C., Ireland , M

    Rizzuto , A. C., Ireland , M. J., & Kraus , A. L. 2015, , 448, 2737, 10.1093/mnras/stv207

    2015 doi

  69. [77]

    C., Mann , A

    Rizzuto , A. C., Mann , A. W., Vanderburg , A., Kraus , A. L., & Covey , K. R. 2017, , 154, 224, 10.3847/1538-3881/aa9070

    2017 doi

  70. [78]

    C., Newton , E

    Rizzuto , A. C., Newton , E. R., Mann , A. W., et al. 2020, , 160, 33, 10.3847/1538-3881/ab94b7

    2020 doi

  71. [79]

    G., & Owen , J

    Rogers , J. G., & Owen , J. E. 2021, , 503, 1526, 10.1093/mnras/stab529

    2021 doi

  72. [80]

    G., Schlichting , H

    Rogers , J. G., Schlichting , H. E., & Owen , J. E. 2023, , 947, L19, 10.3847/2041-8213/acc86f

    2023 doi

  73. [81]

    J., Howell , S

    Scott , N. J., Howell , S. B., Gnilka , C. L., et al. 2021, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 8, 138, 10.3389/fspas.2021.716560

    2021

  74. [82]

    2003, , 585, 1038, 10.1086/346105

    Seager , S., & Mall \'e n-Ornelas , G. 2003, , 585, 1038, 10.1086/346105

    2003 doi

  75. [83]

    F., Cutri , R

    Skrutskie , M. F., Cutri , R. M., Stiening , R., et al. 2006, , 131, 1163, 10.1086/498708

    2006 doi

  76. [84]

    G., Oelkers , R

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

    2019 doi

  77. [85]

    C., Mann , A

    Thao , P. C., Mann , A. W., Feinstein , A. D., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.16355, 10.48550/arXiv.2409.16355

    2024 doi arXiv

  78. [86]

    X., et al

    Vach , S., Zhou , G., Huang , C. X., et al. 2024 a , , 167, 210, 10.3847/1538-3881/ad3108

    2024 doi

  79. [87]

    2024 b , arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.19680, 10.48550/arXiv.2407.19680

    ---. 2024 b , arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.19680, 10.48550/arXiv.2407.19680

    2024 doi arXiv

  80. [88]

    C., & Varoquaux , G

    van der Walt , S., Colbert , S. C., & Varoquaux , G. 2011, Computing in Science and Engineering, 13, 22, 10.1109/MCSE.2011.37

    2011 doi

  81. [89]

    X., Rodriguez , J

    Vanderburg , A., Huang , C. X., Rodriguez , J. E., et al. 2019, , 881, L19, 10.3847/2041-8213/ab322d

    2019 doi

  82. [90]

    E., et al

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

    2020 doi

  83. [91]

    A., Morgan , D

    West , A. A., Morgan , D. P., Bochanski , J. J., et al. 2011, , 141, 97, 10.1088/0004-6256/141/3/97

    2011 doi

  84. [92]

    L., Mann , A

    Wood , M. L., Mann , A. W., & Kraus , A. L. 2021, , 162, 128, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac0ae9

    2021 doi

  85. [93]

    L., Mann , A

    Wood , M. L., Mann , A. W., Barber , M. G., et al. 2023, , 165, 85, 10.3847/1538-3881/aca8fc

    2023 doi

  86. [94]

    T., Girard , T

    Zacharias , N., Finch , C. T., Girard , T. M., et al. 2013, , 145, 44, 10.1088/0004-6256/145/2/44

    2013 doi

  87. [95]

    N., Irwin , J., et al

    Zhou , G., Quinn , S. N., Irwin , J., et al. 2021, , 161, 2, 10.3847/1538-3881/abba22

    2021 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.