pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2601.22034 · v2 · submitted 2026-01-29 · 🌌 astro-ph.EP · astro-ph.GA

Recognition: no theorem link

The Volatile Inventory of 3I/ATLAS as seen with JWST/MIRI

Matthew Belyakov , Ian Wong , Bryce T. Bolin , M. Ryleigh Davis , Steven J. Bromley , Carey M. Lisse , Michael E. Brown
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 09:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.GA
keywords interstellar objectscometsvolatile inventorymethanecarbon dioxideJWST spectroscopywater production3I/ATLAS
0
0 comments X

The pith

JWST spectra of interstellar object 3I/ATLAS detect methane for the first time and show elevated CO2 relative to water, indicating surface depletion and subsurface release.

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

The paper reports mid-infrared observations of the interstellar object 3I/ATLAS using JWST's MIRI instrument at two post-perihelion distances. Spectra reveal emission bands from water, carbon dioxide, atomic nickel, and methane, with the latter representing the first such detection in any interstellar object. Methane production begins later than water production, which the authors interpret as evidence that outer layers lost volatiles earlier, exposing fresher subsurface material. Production rates show a sharp overall decline over twelve days and confirm a CO2 to H2O ratio much higher than in solar system comets, while water continues to come from icy grains in the coma.

Core claim

The first direct detection of methane in an interstellar object is reported, with its delayed onset relative to water production suggesting past depletion from the outermost layers and emergence from unprocessed subsurface material. Production rate measurements confirm that 3I exhibits a strongly enhanced CO2:H2O mixing ratio relative to typical solar system comets, along with a somewhat enriched CH4:H2O value, and an extended source of water from entrained icy grains.

What carries the argument

The JWST/MIRI medium-resolution spectrometer spectra that capture fluorescence features from water, CO2, and methane, combined with production rate calculations and coma mapping across two epochs.

Load-bearing premise

The timing difference between methane and water release is caused by prior loss of volatiles from the surface layers rather than by temperature-dependent production rates or other dynamical effects.

What would settle it

Spectra taken at smaller heliocentric distances showing methane production rates that do not exceed those predicted by surface-only models, or simultaneous onset of methane and water release in earlier epochs, would undermine the subsurface emergence interpretation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.22034 by Bryce T. Bolin, Carey M. Lisse, Ian Wong, Matthew Belyakov, Michael E. Brown, M. Ryleigh Davis, Steven J. Bromley.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Top panels: median-stacked images derived from the fully calibrated Channel 2 data cubes for the six successful JWST/MIRI observations of 3I. A logarithmic stretch has been applied to accentuate the extended dust coma. The sunward and target velocity directions are indicated. The panels are labeled with the corresponding date and spectral grating setting. Bottom panel: spectra of 3I extracted using a 1 ′′-… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Top panels: continuum-subtracted JWST/MIRI spectra of 3I in the ν2 band of H2O from both epochs, with the best-fit PSG coma fluorescence models overlaid. The contributions from ortho- and para-H2O are shown separately in blue and green, respectively. The line intensities are significantly lower in the second epoch, corresponding to a sizable decrease in H2O production. Bottom left panels: analogous fits to… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Coma maps of H2O, CO2, and CH4, computed as the integrated emission flux across the corresponding fluorescence bands for Observations 6, 15, and 13, respectively. The sunward and target velocity directions are denoted by the white arrows. The target centroids, computed as the photocenter in the median-stacked images ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Radial flux profiles of fluorescing gas-phase species nor￾malized to the azimuthally averaged dust radial profile, where the dust profile is measured from wavelength slices adjacent to the emission features. The shading demarcates the 1σ uncertainty re￾gions. Values of 1 indicate that the gas and dust emission follow the same radial dependence, while elevated values suggest an extended source. Only H2O exh… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Left panel: a compilation of H2O, CO2, and CH4 production rates for 3I published in Combi et al. (2025), Cordiner et al. (2025), Lisse et al. (2025), Xing et al. (2025), Lisse et al. (2026), and this work, plotted as a function of heliocentric distance. The JWST epochs (both NIRSpec and MIRI) are marked with vertical dashed lines, and the JWST/MIRI measurements are shown with larger symbols. Left-facing tr… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present the first spectroscopic characterization of an interstellar object at mid-infrared wavelengths. Post-perihelion observations of 3I/ATLAS using the JWST/MIRI medium-resolution spectrometer were obtained on 2025 December 15--16 and 27 when the object was at heliocentric distances of 2.20 and 2.54 au, respectively. Our 5--28 micron spectra exhibit fluorescence features from several gaseous species, including the $\nu_2$ band of water at 5.8--7.0 microns. the primary $\nu_2$ and associated hot bands of carbon dioxide around 15 microns, and a forbidden transition of atomic nickel at 7.507 microns. We also report the first direct detection of methane in an interstellar object. The delayed onset of methane production relative to water suggests past depletion from the outermost layers, with the observed methane emerging from unprocessed subsurface material. Comparison of the volatile production rates measured during the two epochs indicate a significant reduction in overall outgassing over 12 days, with the measured water activity level dropping more steeply than other species. As shown through near-nucleus coma mapping, 3I continues to display an extended source of water production from icy grains entrained within the coma. Our production rate measurements confirm that 3I exhibits a strongly enhanced CO$_2$:H$_2$O mixing ratio relative to typical solar system comets, as well as a somewhat enriched CH$_4$:H$_2$O value.

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 paper reports the first mid-infrared spectroscopic observations of the interstellar object 3I/ATLAS using JWST/MIRI at post-perihelion distances of 2.20 and 2.54 au. It presents detections of H2O (ν2 band), CO2 (ν2 and hot bands), atomic nickel, and the first direct detection of CH4 in an interstellar object. Production rates show overall outgassing decline between epochs, with water dropping more steeply, continued extended water production from icy grains, and a strongly enhanced CO2:H2O mixing ratio (plus somewhat enriched CH4:H2O) relative to solar-system comets. The delayed CH4 onset is interpreted as evidence of prior depletion from outermost layers with emergence from unprocessed subsurface material.

Significance. If the detections and quantitative production rates hold, this constitutes the first mid-IR characterization of any interstellar object and the first direct CH4 detection therein, providing direct constraints on the volatile inventory of material formed outside the solar system. The enhanced CO2:H2O ratio and grain-entrained water source add to the growing evidence that interstellar objects can retain distinct compositional signatures from solar-system comets, with potential implications for formation conditions and thermal processing in the interstellar medium.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The central interpretive claim that the delayed onset of methane production relative to water 'suggests past depletion from the outermost layers, with the observed methane emerging from unprocessed subsurface material' is load-bearing for the paper's narrative on volatile history, yet no quantitative nucleus thermal model (incorporating layered composition, sublimation curves for CH4 vs. H2O, or grain entrainment) is referenced to distinguish this from alternatives such as temperature-dependent outgassing or coma dynamics. CH4 being more volatile than H2O makes its later appearance at 2.20–2.54 au counter to naive expectations, and the two-epoch data alone (showing steeper water decline) do not rule out other explanations.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: The assertion that production-rate measurements 'confirm that 3I exhibits a strongly enhanced CO2:H2O mixing ratio relative to typical solar system comets' is a key comparative claim, but the abstract supplies neither the measured mixing ratios with uncertainties nor the specific solar-system reference values or statistical comparison used to establish the enhancement; this quantitative support must be explicit for the claim to be assessable.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The sentence beginning 'the primary ν2 and associated hot bands' uses lowercase 'the' after a period, which should be capitalized for consistency.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: The abstract states detections and ratio claims without any mention of error bars, signal-to-noise, or production-rate uncertainties, which should be summarized even at this level for a data-driven paper.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful and constructive review of our manuscript. We respond point-by-point to the major comments below and have revised the abstract accordingly where appropriate.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central interpretive claim that the delayed onset of methane production relative to water 'suggests past depletion from the outermost layers, with the observed methane emerging from unprocessed subsurface material' is load-bearing for the paper's narrative on volatile history, yet no quantitative nucleus thermal model (incorporating layered composition, sublimation curves for CH4 vs. H2O, or grain entrainment) is referenced to distinguish this from alternatives such as temperature-dependent outgassing or coma dynamics. CH4 being more volatile than H2O makes its later appearance at 2.20–2.54 au counter to naive expectations, and the two-epoch data alone (showing steeper water decline) do not rule out other explanations.

    Authors: We agree that a dedicated quantitative thermal model would provide stronger discrimination between interpretations. Our two-epoch observations show a clear temporal offset in CH4 production relative to H2O (despite CH4's higher volatility), which we interpret as consistent with prior depletion of the outer layers. We will revise the abstract to present this as a plausible interpretation supported by the data rather than a definitive conclusion, and we will add references to existing literature on layered cometary thermal models and volatile sublimation in the revised manuscript. This is a partial revision, as we do not introduce new modeling in this observational paper. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The assertion that production-rate measurements 'confirm that 3I exhibits a strongly enhanced CO2:H2O mixing ratio relative to typical solar system comets' is a key comparative claim, but the abstract supplies neither the measured mixing ratios with uncertainties nor the specific solar-system reference values or statistical comparison used to establish the enhancement; this quantitative support must be explicit for the claim to be assessable.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this observation. The full manuscript reports the specific production rates and derived mixing ratios (with uncertainties) from both epochs, along with direct comparison to literature values for solar-system comets. We will update the abstract to explicitly include the measured CO2:H2O ratios with uncertainties and the reference solar-system values used for the comparison, making the claim quantitatively assessable. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: direct observations and standard rate calculations

full rationale

The paper reports JWST/MIRI mid-IR spectra of 3I/ATLAS at two post-perihelion epochs, identifying fluorescence bands of H2O, CO2, CH4, and Ni via direct spectral features. Production rates are derived from these measured line fluxes using established cometary fluorescence models and coma mapping; no equations define a target quantity in terms of a fitted parameter that is then re-presented as a prediction. The enhanced CO2:H2O and CH4:H2O ratios are stated as comparisons to literature solar-system comet values, not as outputs forced by internal fits. The delayed-CH4 interpretation is offered as a qualitative suggestion without a quantitative thermal model or self-referential derivation that would close a loop. No self-citation load-bearing steps appear in the derivation chain.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work relies on standard cometary spectroscopy techniques for band identification and production-rate conversion; no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard molecular fluorescence excitation models for cometary gases at given heliocentric distances
    Used to convert observed line fluxes into production rates for water, CO2, and methane.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5605 in / 1265 out tokens · 42586 ms · 2026-05-16T09:28:47.261816+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Coma Physics of an Interstellar Object: JWST Spatial-Spectral Mapping of 3I/ATLAS

    astro-ph.EP 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    JWST spatial-spectral maps of 3I/ATLAS reveal CO as the primary volatile with H2O and CO2 abundances of 40.5% and 41.6% relative to CO, anisotropic distributions for apolar molecules, and a flat H2O OPR of 2.7.

  2. Interstellar Object 3I/ATLAS Observed from Mars by China's Tianwen-1 Spacecraft

    astro-ph.EP 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Tianwen-1 provided the first out-of-plane imaging of 3I/ATLAS, indicating large dust grains (hundreds of micrometers) ejected at 3-10 m/s with steady-state outflow and a mass loss rate of about 1000 kg/s.

  3. Origin and evolution of NiI and FeI in the coma of the interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS throughout its trajectory

    astro-ph.EP 2026-05 conditional novelty 6.0

    Post-perihelion UVES spectra of interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS reveal elevated NiI and FeI production explained by direct sublimation of Ni(CO)4 and Fe(CO)5 from subsurface layers, with a transient heat source accounting...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 72 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    R., et al

    Argyriou, I., Glasse, A., Law, D. R., et al. 2023, A&A, 675, A111, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346489 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 Collaboratio...

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346489 2023

  2. [2]

    M., et al

    Banzatti, A., Salyk, C., Pontoppidan, K. M., et al. 2025, AJ, 169, 165, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ada962

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ada962 2025

  3. [3]

    J., et al

    Belyakov, M., Fremling, C., Graham, M. J., et al. 2025, RNAAS, 9, 194, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/adf059

    work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/adf059 2025

  4. [4]

    C., Gordon, K

    Bohlin, R. C., Gordon, K. D., & Tremblay, P.-E. 2014, PASP, 126, 711, doi: 10.1086/677655

    work page doi:10.1086/677655 2014

  5. [5]

    T., & Lisse, C

    Bolin, B. T., & Lisse, C. M. 2020, MNRAS, 497, 4031, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2192

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2192 2020

  6. [6]

    T., Weaver, H

    Bolin, B. T., Weaver, H. A., Fernandez, Y . R., et al. 2018, ApJL, 852, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaa0c9

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaa0c9 2018

  7. [7]

    T., Lisse, C

    Bolin, B. T., Lisse, C. M., Kasliwal, M. M., et al. 2020, AJ, 160, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab9305

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab9305 2020

  8. [8]

    T., Belyakov, M., Fremling, C., et al

    Bolin, B. T., Belyakov, M., Fremling, C., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 542, L139, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slaf078

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slaf078 2025

  9. [9]

    P., Villanueva, G

    Bonev, B. P., Villanueva, G. L., DiSanti, M. A., et al. 2017, AJ, 153, 241, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa64dd

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa64dd 2017

  10. [10]

    J., Neff, B., Loch, S

    Bromley, S. J., Neff, B., Loch, S. D., et al. 2021, PSJ, 2, 228, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/ac2dff

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/ac2dff 2021

  11. [11]

    E., & Fraser, W

    Brown, M. E., & Fraser, W. C. 2023, PSJ, 4, 130, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/ace2ba

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/ace2ba 2023

  12. [12]

    R., Palumbo, M

    Brucato, J. R., Palumbo, M. E., & Strazzulla, G. 1997, Icar, 125, 135, doi: 10.1006/icar.1996.5561

    work page doi:10.1006/icar.1996.5561 1997

  13. [13]

    2025, JWST Calibration Pipeline, v1.20.2„ Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.17515973

    Bushouse, H., Eisenhamer, J., Dencheva, N., et al. 2025, JWST Calibration Pipeline, v1.20.2„ Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.17515973

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.17515973 2025

  14. [14]

    NSF-DOE Vera C. Rubin Observatory Observations of Interstellar Comet 3I/ATLAS (C/2025 N1)

    Chandler, C. O., Bernardinelli, P. H., Juri´c, M., et al. 2025, arXiv, arXiv:2507.13409, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.13409

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.13409 2025

  15. [15]

    R., Mâkinen, T., Bertaux, J.-L., et al

    Combi, M. R., Mâkinen, T., Bertaux, J.-L., et al. 2025, arXiv, arXiv:2512.22354, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2512.22354

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.22354 2025

  16. [16]

    A., Roth, N

    Cordiner, M. A., Roth, N. X., Kelley, M. S. P., et al. 2025, ApJL, 991, L43, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae0647 de la Fuente Marcos, R., Alarcon, M. R., Licandro, J., et al. 2025, A&A, 700, L9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556439 Dello Russo, N., Kawakita, H., Vervack, R. J., & Weaver, H. A. 2016, Icar, 278, 301, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2016.05.039

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae0647 2025

  17. [17]

    2025, MPEC, 2025-N12, doi: 10.48377/MPEC/2025-N12

    Denneau, L., Siverd, R., Tonry, J., et al. 2025, MPEC, 2025-N12, doi: 10.48377/MPEC/2025-N12

    work page doi:10.48377/mpec/2025-n12 2025

  18. [18]

    P., Wong, I., Brunetto, R., et al

    Emery, J. P., Wong, I., Brunetto, R., et al. 2024, Icar, 414, 116017, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2024.116017

    work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2024.116017 2024

  19. [19]

    D., Noonan, J

    Feinstein, A. D., Noonan, J. W., & Seligman, D. Z. 2025, ApJL, 991, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adfd4d

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adfd4d 2025

  20. [20]

    2024, in Comets III, ed

    Fitzsimmons, A., Meech, K., Matrà, L., & Pfalzner, S. 2024, in Comets III, ed. K. J. Meech, M. R. Combi, D. Bockelée-Morvan, S. N. Raymodn, & M. E. Zolensky, 731–766, doi: 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816553631-ch022

    work page doi:10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816553631-ch022 2024

  21. [21]

    C., Dones, L., V olk, K., Womack, M., & Nesvorý, D

    Fraser, W. C., Dones, L., V olk, K., Womack, M., & Nesvorý, D. 2024, in Comets III, ed. K. J. Meech, M. R. Combi, D. Bockelée-Morvan, S. N. Raymodn, & M. E. Zolensky, 121–152, doi: 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816553631-ch005

    work page doi:10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816553631-ch005 2024

  22. [22]

    A., Howard, W

    Gibson, A., MacGregor, M. A., Howard, W. S., et al. 2025, ApJL, 993, L29, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae11a1

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae11a1 2025

  23. [23]

    L., van Dishoeck, E

    Grant, S. L., van Dishoeck, E. F., Tabone, B., et al. 2023, ApJL, 947, L6, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acc44b 13

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acc44b 2023

  24. [24]

    2021, Natur, 593, 375, doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03485-4

    Guzik, P., & Drahus, M. 2021, Natur, 593, 375, doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03485-4

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03485-4 2021

  25. [25]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Natur, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 2020

  26. [26]

    2020, PSJ, 1, 83, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/abc17b Hénault, E., Baklouti, D., Brunetto, R., et al

    Haser, L., Oset, S., & Bodewits, D. 2020, PSJ, 1, 83, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/abc17b Hénault, E., Baklouti, D., Brunetto, R., et al. 2025, Icar, 441, 116669, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2025.116669

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/abc17b 2020

  27. [27]

    J., Brunetto, R., Cruikshank, D

    Holler, B. J., Brunetto, R., Cruikshank, D. P., et al. 2025, RNAAS, 9, 241, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/ae03a2

    work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/ae03a2 2025

  28. [28]

    B., Shappee, B

    Hoogendam, W. B., Shappee, B. J., Wray, J. J., et al. 2025, arXiv, arXiv:2510.11779, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.11779

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.11779 2025

  29. [29]

    B., Jones, D

    Hoogendam, W. B., Jones, D. O., Yang, B., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.16983. https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.16983

    work page arXiv 2026

  30. [30]

    J., Dorsey, R

    Hopkins, M. J., Dorsey, R. C., Forbes, J. C., et al. 2025, ApJL, 990, L30, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adfbf4

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adfbf4 2025

  31. [31]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, CSE, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55 Hutsemékers, D., Manfroid, J., Jehin, E., Opitom, C., & Moulane, Y . 2021, A&A, 652, L1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141554 Hutsemékers, D., Manfroid, J., Jehin, E., et al. 2025, arXiv, arXiv:2509.26053, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2509.26053

    work page doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 2007

  32. [32]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.06475, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2407.06475

    Jewitt, D. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.06475, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2407.06475

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2407.06475 2024

  33. [33]

    2025, ApJL, 990, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adf8d8

    Jewitt, D., Hui, M.-T., Mutchler, M., Kim, Y ., & Agarwal, J. 2025, ApJL, 990, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adf8d8

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adf8d8 2025

  34. [34]

    2019, ApJL, 886, L29, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab530b —

    Jewitt, D., & Luu, J. 2019, ApJL, 886, L29, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab530b —. 2025, ApJL, 994, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae1832

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab530b 2019

  35. [35]

    2025, ApJL, 990, L65, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adfbdf

    Kareta, T., Champagne, C., McClure, L., et al. 2025, ApJL, 990, L65, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adfbdf

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

  36. [36]

    2020, ApJL, 895, L34, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab9228

    Kim, Y ., Jewitt, D., Mutchler, M., et al. 2020, ApJL, 895, L34, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab9228

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab9228 2020

  37. [37]

    Ralchenko, Reader, J., & and NIST ASD Team

    Kramida, A., Yu. Ralchenko, Reader, J., & and NIST ASD Team. 2024, NIST Atomic Spectra Database (ver. 5.12), [Online]. Available: https://physics.nist.gov/asd[2016, January 31]. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD

    work page 2024

  38. [38]

    L., Toth, I., Fernandez, Y

    Lamy, P. L., Toth, I., Fernandez, Y . R., & Weaver, H. A. 2004, in Comets II, ed. M. C. Festou, H. U. Keller, & H. A. Weaver, 223 Le Roy, L., Altwegg, K., Balsiger, H., et al. 2015, A&A, 583, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526450

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201526450 2004

  39. [39]

    M., Gladstone, G

    Lisse, C. M., Gladstone, G. R., Young, L. A., et al. 2022, PSJ, 3, 112, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/ac6097

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/ac6097 2022

  40. [40]

    M., Bach, Y

    Lisse, C. M., Bach, Y . P., Crill, B. P., et al. 2025, arXiv, arXiv:2512.07318, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2512.07318

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.07318 2025

  41. [41]

    M., Bach, Y ., Bryan, S

    Lisse, C. M., Bach, Y ., Bryan, S. A., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.06759, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.06759

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.06759 2026

  42. [42]

    2003, ApJ, 591, 1220, doi: 10.1086/375492

    Lodders, K. 2003, ApJ, 591, 1220, doi: 10.1086/375492

    work page doi:10.1086/375492 2003

  43. [43]

    2021, Natur, 593, 372, doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03435-0

    Manfroid, J., Hutsemékers, D., & Jehin, E. 2021, Natur, 593, 372, doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03435-0

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03435-0 2021

  44. [44]

    2025, ApJL, 994, L51, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae1f91

    Martinez-Palomera, J., Tuson, A., Hedges, C., et al. 2025, ApJL, 994, L51, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae1f91

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae1f91 2025

  45. [45]

    J., DiSanti, M

    McKay, A. J., DiSanti, M. A., Kelley, M. S. P., et al. 2019, AJ, 158, 128, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab32e4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab32e4 2019

  46. [46]

    J., Weryk, R., Micheli, M., et al

    Meech, K. J., Weryk, R., Micheli, M., et al. 2017, Natur, 552, 378, doi: 10.1038/nature25020 Mejía, C., Bender, M., Severin, D., et al. 2015, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B, 365, 477, doi: 10.1016/j.nimb.2015.09.039

    work page doi:10.1038/nature25020 2017

  47. [47]

    2012, ApJ, 752, 15, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/752/1/15

    Ootsubo, T., Kawakita, H., Hamada, S., et al. 2012, ApJ, 752, 15, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/752/1/15

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/752/1/15 2012

  48. [48]

    2025, MNRAS, 544, L31, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slaf095

    Opitom, C., Snodgrass, C., Jehin, E., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 544, L31, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slaf095

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slaf095 2025

  49. [49]

    N., et al

    Pinilla-Alonso, N., Brunetto, R., De Prá, M. N., et al. 2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 230, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02433-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-024-02433-2 2025

  50. [50]

    M., Salyk, C., Banzatti, A., et al

    Pontoppidan, K. M., Salyk, C., Banzatti, A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 158, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad20f0

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad20f0 2024

  51. [51]

    2023, Icar, 394, 115396, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2022.115396

    Quirico, E., Bacmann, A., Wolters, C., et al. 2023, Icar, 394, 115396, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2022.115396

    work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2022.115396 2023

  52. [52]

    P., Puzia, T

    Rahatgaonkar, R., Carvajal, J. P., Puzia, T. H., et al. 2025, ApJL, 995, L34, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae1cbc

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae1cbc 2025

  53. [53]

    2024, Detection and Flagging of Showers and Snowballs in

    Regan, M. 2024, Detection and Flagging of Showers and Snowballs in

    work page 2024

  54. [54]

    S., Thomas, C

    Rivkin, A. S., Thomas, C. A., Wong, I., et al. 2023, PSJ, 4, 214, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/ad04d8

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/ad04d8 2023

  55. [55]

    X., Cordiner, M

    Roth, N. X., Cordiner, M. A., Bockelée-Morvan, D., et al. 2025, arXiv, arXiv:2511.20845, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2511.20845 Salazar Manzano, L. E., Lin, H. W., Taylor, A. G., et al. 2025, ApJL, 993, L23, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae1232

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.20845 2025

  56. [56]

    2025, A&A, 702, L3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556717

    Santana-Ros, T., Ivanova, O., Mykhailova, S., et al. 2025, A&A, 702, L3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556717

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556717 2025

  57. [57]

    L., & Brown, M

    Schaller, E. L., & Brown, M. E. 2007, ApJL, 659, L61, doi: 10.1086/516709

    work page doi:10.1086/516709 2007

  58. [58]

    Z., Micheli, M., Farnocchia, D., et al

    Seligman, D. Z., Micheli, M., Farnocchia, D., et al. 2025, ApJL, 989, L36, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adf49a

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adf49a 2025

  59. [59]

    Perihelion Asymmetry in the Water Production Rate of the Interstellar Object 3I/ATLAS

    Tan, H., Yan, X., & Li, J.-Y . 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.15443, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.15443

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.15443 2026

  60. [60]

    G., & Seligman, D

    Taylor, A. G., & Seligman, D. Z. 2025, ApJL, 990, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adfa28

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adfa28 2025

  61. [61]

    L., Liuzzi, G., Faggi, S., et al

    Villanueva, G. L., Liuzzi, G., Faggi, S., et al. 2022, Fundamentals of the Planetary Spectrum Generator

    work page 2022

  62. [62]

    L., Mumma, M

    Villanueva, G. L., Mumma, M. J., DiSanti, M. A., et al. 2011, Icar, 216, 227, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2011.08.024

    work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2011.08.024 2011

  63. [63]

    L., Smith, M

    Villanueva, G. L., Smith, M. D., Protopapa, S., Faggi, S., & Mandell, A. M. 2018, JQSRT, 217, 86, doi: 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2018.05.023

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jqsrt.2018.05.023 2018

  64. [64]

    E., et al

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

    work page doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 2020

  65. [65]

    2015, PASP, 127, 646, doi: 10.1086/682281

    Wells, M., Pel, J.-W., Glasse, A., et al. 2015, PASP, 127, 646, doi: 10.1086/682281

    work page doi:10.1086/682281 2015

  66. [66]

    2025, jwstspec, v0.6„ Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.17186395

    Wong, I. 2025, jwstspec, v0.6„ Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.17186395

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.17186395 2025

  67. [67]

    E., Emery, J

    Wong, I., Brown, M. E., Emery, J. P., et al. 2024, PSJ, 5, 87, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/ad2fc3

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/ad2fc3 2024

  68. [68]

    E., Bockélee-Morvan, D., Harker, D

    Woodward, C. E., Bockélee-Morvan, D., Harker, D. E., et al. 2025, PSJ, 6, 139, doi: 10.3847/PSJ/add1d5

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/add1d5 2025

  69. [69]

    2025, ApJL, 991, L50, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae08ab

    Xing, Z., Oset, S., Noonan, J., & Bodewits, D. 2025, ApJL, 991, L50, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae08ab

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae08ab 2025

  70. [70]

    J., Connelley, M., Zhao, R., & Keane, J

    Yang, B., Meech, K. J., Connelley, M., Zhao, R., & Keane, J. V . 2025, ApJL, 992, L9, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae08a7

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae08a7 2025

  71. [71]

    Ye, Q., Kelley, M. S. P., Hsieh, H. H., et al. 2025, ApJL, 993, L31, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae147b

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae147b 2025

  72. [72]

    2025, arXiv, arXiv:2510.25035, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.25035

    Zhang, Q., & Battams, K. 2025, arXiv, arXiv:2510.25035, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.25035

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.25035 2025