# Spin-Orbit Alignment of the *β* Pictoris Planetary System

Stefan Kraus, Jean-Baptiste Le Bouquin, Alexander Kreplin, Claire L. Davies, Edward Hone, John D. Monnier, Tyler Gardner, Grant Kennedy, Sasha Hinkley

► To cite this version:

Stefan Kraus, Jean-Baptiste Le Bouquin, Alexander Kreplin, Claire L. Davies, Edward Hone, et al. Spin-Orbit Alignment of the *β* Pictoris Planetary System. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 2020, 897, 10.3847/2041-8213/ab9d27. insu-03705196

HAL Id: insu-03705196

https://insu.hal.science/insu-03705196v1

Submitted on 25 Jun 2025

**HAL** is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
**Manuscript version: Published Version**

The version presented in WRAP is the accepted version.

**Persistent WRAP URL:**

http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/145030

**How to cite:**

The repository item page linked to above, will contain details on accessing citation guidance
from the publisher.

**Copyright and reuse:**

The Warwick Research Archive Portal (WRAP) makes this work of researchers of the
University of Warwick available open access under the following conditions.

This article is made available under the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 UK:
England & Wales (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 UK) and may be reused according to the conditions of
the license. For more details see: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

**Publisher's statement:**

Please refer to the repository item page, publisher's statement section, for further
information.

For more information, please contact the WRAP Team at: wrap@warwick.ac.uk
SPIN-ORBIT ALIGNMENT OF THE $\beta$ PICTORIS PLANETARY SYSTEM

STEFAN KRAUS¹, JEAN-BAPTISTE LE BOUQUIN², ALEXANDER KREPLIN¹, CLAIRE L. DAVIES¹, EDWARD HONE¹,
JOHN D. MONNIER³, TYLER GARDNER³, GRANT KENNEDY⁴, SASHA HINKLEY¹

¹ School of Physics, Astrophysics Group, University of Exeter, Stocker Road, Exeter EX4 4QL, UK

² Université d’Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, IPAG, 38000 Grenoble, France

³ Department of Astronomy, University of Michigan, 311 West Hall, 1085 South University Ave, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA

⁴ Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK

Submitted to The Astrophysical Journal Letters on 2020 June 8. Accepted on 2020 June 16.

ABSTRACT

A crucial diagnostic that can tell us about processes involved in the formation and dynamical evolution of planetary systems is the angle between the rotation axis of a star and a planet's orbital angular momentum vector ("spin-orbit" alignment or "obliquity"). Here we present the first spin-orbit alignment measurement for a wide-separation exoplanetary system, namely on the directly-imaged planet $\beta$ Pictoris b. We use VLTI/GRAVITY spectro-interferometry with an astrometric accuracy of 1 $\mu$as (microarcsecond) in the Br\gamma photospheric absorption line to measure the photocenter displacement associated with the stellar rotation. Taking inclination constraints from astroseismology into account, we constrain the 3-dimensional orientation of the stellar spin axis and find that $\beta$ Pic b orbits its host star on a prograde orbit. The angular momentum vectors of the stellar photosphere, the planet, and the outer debris disk are well-aligned with mutual inclinations $\le 3 \pm 5^\circ$, which indicates that $\beta$ Pic b formed in a system without significant primordial misalignments. Our results demonstrate the potential of infrared interferometry to measure the spin-orbit alignment for wide-separation planetary systems, probing a highly complementary regime to the parameter space accessible with the Rossiter-McLaughlin effect. If the low obliquity is confirmed by measurements on a larger sample of wide-separation planets, it would lend support to theories that explain the obliquity in Hot Jupiter systems with dynamical scattering and the Kozai-Lidov mechanism.

*Subject headings:* stars: rotation — stars: individual ($\beta$ Pictoris) — planets and satellites: individual ($\beta$ Pictoris b) — planets and satellites: dynamical evolution and stability — planetary systems — techniques: interferometric

1. INTRODUCTION

Some of the earliest theories about the planet formation process have been proposed by Kant & Laplace in the 18th century and were based primarily on the observation that the orbits of the solar system planets are well aligned with each other and with the Sun's spin axis. In the solar system the three-dimensional obliquity angle $\psi$, i.e. the angle between the rotation axis of a star and the orbit angular momentum vector of the planets, is $\psi \lesssim 7^\circ$ (Beck & Giles 2005). For transiting extra-solar planetary systems, the sky-projected obliquity angle ($\beta$) can be measured with the Rossiter-McLaughlin (RM) effect (Queloz et al. 2000). For the short-period systems where RM measurements are possible, significant misalignments have been found in about a third of the systems (Winn et al. 2010), with values ranging from $0^\circ$ (indicating a perfectly aligned prograde orbit) to $180^\circ$ (retrograde orbit, e.g. Hébrard et al. 2011). The sky-projected obliquity angle ($\beta$) can then be related to the true obliquity ($\psi$) distribution, either by measuring the line-of-sight inclination of the stellar rotation axis $i_s$, for instance using astroseismology (e.g. Wright et al. 2011; Zwintz et al. 2019), or by invoking statistical arguments (e.g. Muñoz & Perets 2018).

Several possible dynamical mechanisms have been proposed to explain the observed spin-orbit misalignments. In one class of theories, the inclination of the planet's

orbit is excited through multi-body gravitational interactions, such as planet-planet scattering or interactions with stellar-mass companions (Chatterjee et al. 2008; Valsecchi & Rasio 2014). On appeal of this theory is that Kozai-Lidov oscillations & tidal friction can facilitate both inwards migration while increasing simultaneously the obliquity of the planet orbit, thereby explaining key characteristics of the Hot Jupiter population (Kozai 1962; Fabrycky & Tremaine 2007).

Alternatively, it has been proposed that the stellar rotation axis and orbital plane of the planet-forming disk might not be aligned from the start. Misalignments between the stellar rotation axis and disk might be induced by magnetic (Lai et al. 2011) or fluid-dynamical effects (Rogers & Lin 2013). The disk might also be tilted due to turbulent motions in the star-forming cloud (Fielding et al. 2015), due to the complex dynamical interactions in the dense clusters where stars form (Bate et al. 2010), or disk tearing effects induced by the dynamical interactions in multiple systems (Nixon 2012; Kraus et al. 2020).

In order to distinguish between these scenarios, it is essential to probe the planet obliquity distribution over a wide orbit separation range. One fundamental limitation for obtaining obliquity measurements with the RM effect is that this method can only be applied for transiting systems, i.e. systems with typical periods of a few days to tens of days.

For wide-separation planets with astrometric orbits,
the sky-projected obliquity angle can be derived from spectro-interferometric observations, such as provided by ESO's Very Large Telescope Interferometer (VLTI). This method employs measuring wavelength-differential phases in photospheric absorption lines in order to derive the photocenter shift associated with the stellar rotation. Here, we present VLTI/GRAVITY high-spectral resolution data of the β Pictoris system, marking the second time that this technique is applied to a disk-hosting star (following the measurements that indicated good alignment of Fomalhaut's stellar equator with the orbit of its debris disk and dispersing dust cloud; Le Bouquin et al. 2009; Gaspar & Rieke 2020) and the first time that the obliquity angle is measured for a directly-imaged planetary system.

β Pic is a relatively young (age $24 \pm 3$ Myr, Bell et al. 2015) A6V-type star at a distance of $19.45 \pm 0.05$ pc (van Leeuwen 2007) and with a mass of $1.85_{-0.04}^{+0.03} M_{\odot}$ (Wang et al. 2016). (Defrère et al. 2012) measured the stellar diameter to $0.736 \pm 0.019$ mas and the projected rotation velocity is $v \sin i = 130$ km s$^{-1}$ (Royer et al. 2007). The system harbours a large-scale debris disk that exhibits a small-scale misalignment between the extended “primary” disk and a “warped” secondary disk in the inner $85$ au (Burrows et al. 1995; Mouillet et al. 1997; Currie et al. 2011; Dawson et al. 2011).

The planet β Pic b has been detected with adaptive optics imaging (Lagrange et al. 2009a) and has an orbital period of ~ 20 yr with a semi-major axis of $10.6 \pm 0.5$ au. It is on a slightly inclined orbit with respect to the primary disk and might be responsible for triggering the warped secondary disk (Lagrange et al. 2012). The orbit is seen with near-edge orientation ($i = 89.04 \pm 0.03^{\circ}$, where $90^{\circ}$ indicates edge-on viewing geometry) and the planet mass has been estimated to $12.8 \pm 2.2 M_{Jup}$ (Lagrange et al. 2009b; Fitzgerald et al. 2009; Wang et al. 2016; Snellen & Brown 2018; Gravity Collaboration et al. 2020). Lagrange et al. (2019) detected the radial velocity signal for a second ~ $9 M_{Jup}$ planet, β Pic c, on a ~ 1,200 day orbit, corresponding to a semi-major axis of ~ 2.7 au.

In Sect. 2 we describe our observational setup, followed by a presentation of our modelling results (Sect. 3), a discussion of the implications (Sect. 4) and our conclusions (Sect. 5).

## 2. OBSERVATIONS

We observed β Pic with the GRAVITY instrument on seven nights between 2016 September 15 and 2016 October 20. The observations combined the light from the four VLTI 1.8m auxiliary telescopes. The telescopes were located on stations A0-G1-J3-K0 (2016 September 15, 17, 18, 19), A0-B2-J2-J3 (2016 October 16), and A0-G1-J2-J3 (2016 October 18 and 20), resulting in projected baseline lengths between 22.93 and 132.36 m (Fig. 1).

The interferograms cover the K-band with spectral resolution $\lambda/\Delta\lambda = 4,000$ and were recorded with detector integration times of 10 s. In total, we recorded 57 exposures of 300 s on-source integration time on β Pic. Interlayed with the observations on the science star, we observed the calibrator star HD 159868.

Wavelength-differential visibilities and phases were ex-

tracted using the GRAVITY pipeline (Release 1.2.4, Lapeyrere et al. 2014). In order to increase the signal-to-noise, we averaged the complex visibilities from the 30 individual frames within an exposure. The sky-projected baseline vectors keep changing within the 5 min exposures due to Earth rotation (at $\lesssim 0.2^{\circ}$/minute), which could potentially smear the measured astrometric signal. However, based on the maximum measured astrometric displacement of $8\mu\text{as}$ (Sect. 3) we estimate that the astrometric error induced by the averaging is less than $0.1\mu\text{as}$ and therefore negligible in our modeling. Furthermore, we note that this effect would only reduce the amplitude of the derived astrometric displacement without biasing the position angles of the derived astrometry vectors, even if the averaging would be applied over a longer time interval.

In individual exposures, we achieve a phase rms (root mean square) down to $0.39^{\circ}$ in the continuum channels near the $Br\gamma$ 2.1667 $\mu$m line. We fit the data from the 57 exposures simultaneously in order to reduce the noise further, resulting in an overall differential astrometric accuracy of $1\mu\text{as}$ (as derived from the rms scatter in the continuum channels; grey points in Fig. 3, right). We reject two observations that exhibit phase rms $> 0.8^{\circ}$ due to poor atmospheric conditions. The spectrum of the pressure-broadened $Br\gamma$ line is shown in Fig. 2 (top).

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>FIG. 1.— uv-plane of VLTI/GRAVITY observations on β Pic.</figcaption></figure>

## 3. RESULTS

We infer the orientation of β Pic's stellar rotation axis from the spatial displacement in the photocenter between the blue- and red-shifted wing of the photospheric $Br\gamma$ absorption line. The photocenter displacement in the line wings with respect to the continuum “center of light” is just ~ $8\mu\text{as}$ or ~1/100th of the stellar diameter, but it can been measured with high significance from our wavelength-differential phases.

The wavelength-differential phase $\phi(\lambda)$ in a given spectral channel, $\lambda$, and on a given baseline vector $\mathbf{B}$ at projected baseline coordinates $(u, v)$ is given by the equation

$$ \phi(\lambda) = \frac{2\pi}{\lambda} \mathbf{B} \cdot \mathbf{x}(\lambda), \qquad (1) $$
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>FIG. 2.— Spectrum (top) and position-velocity diagrams along North-South and East-West direction (bottom).</figcaption></figure>

where $\lambda$ is the wavelength of the considered spectral channel and $\mathbf{x}(\lambda)$ the photocenter displacement vector in the channel with respect to the continuum (Le Bouquin et al. 2009).

To maximise the signal-to-noise on the derived photocenter displacement vectors $\mathbf{x}(\lambda)$ for a given spectral channel $\lambda$, we arrange the $n$ measured differential phases in vector $\phi(\lambda)$ and the corresponding baseline vectors in the $n \times 2$-dimensional matrix $B$. Using the inverse matrix of $B$ we can rewrite eq. 1 as:

$$ \mathbf{x}(\lambda) = \frac{\lambda}{2\pi} B^{-1} \phi(\lambda)^{\top} \quad (2) $$

Applying this equation to our data results in the photocenter vectors shown in Fig. 3. The right ascension and declination components of these vectors are also shown as position-velocity diagrams in Fig. 2 (bottom). The data show that the photocenter in the blue-shifted wing of the Brγ line is displaced to the North-East (Fig. 3, right). As the line is in absorption, this indicates that the blue-shifted absorption is strongest on the south-western side of the star, and thus the photocenter shifts to the North-East. Accordingly, the blue-shifted (approaching) side of the rotating photosphere is towards the South-West. The phases predicted by the model are overplotted on the measured differential phases in Fig. 4.

In order to determine the position angle of the stellar rotation axis quantitatively, we parameterize the wavelength-dependence of the photocenter displacement between the blue- and red-shifted line wing with a S-shaped function $S(\lambda) = a(\lambda) \cdot \exp(-a(\lambda)^2)$, where $a(\lambda) = 2(\lambda - \lambda_{Br\gamma})/w_{Br\gamma}$, and $\lambda_{Br\gamma}$ and $w_{Br\gamma}$ are the central wavelength and width of the line. This function provides a good approximation for the photocenter displacement due to rotation in a marginally resolved photosphere. We fit this function to the astrometry vectors $\mathbf{x}(\lambda)$ in the complex plane:

$$ \mathbf{x}(\lambda) = c \cdot S(\lambda), \quad (3) $$

where $c$ is a complex number. The phase of $c$ gives the position angle of the spatial displacement between the blue- and red-shifted line wings, i.e. the stellar equator is oriented along $\Omega_s = \tan^{-1}(\Re c/\Im c)$. We determine the uncertainties through bootstrapping.

For our data set on β Pic, we derive the sky-projected position angle of the equator to $\Omega_s = 29 \pm 4^{\circ}$, with the south-western side of the photosphere approaching the observer<fnref n="1" />. The bottom panel of Fig. 2 shows the model function overplotted on the measured astrometric signals.

There are some small residuals between model and data that might indicate a tiny (1-2 $\mu$s) offset between the line photocenter and the continuum photocenter to the West (see red-shifted wing in the bottom panel of Fig. 2). Such an offset could indicate that the continuum photocenter is slightly shifted with respect to the center of the stellar photosphere, for instance due to stellar surface structures, diffuse disk emission, or a point source within the ~0.1" field-of-view. However, the residuals have a low significance and data with higher signal-to-noise and higher angular resolution is needed to investigate this further. Also, future differential phases measurements at higher spectral resolution could derive an independent estimate for the inclination of the photosphere (see model images of a inclined rotating photosphere in Fig. 8 of Kraus et al. 2012) or detect subtle effects in the velocity field, such as related to differential rotation. However, we do not expect these effects to contribute to the residuals in our measurements.

## 4. DISCUSSION

Together with the inclination estimate of $i_s = 89.1^{\circ}$ derived from the pulsation frequency spectrum<fnref n="2" /> (Zwintz et al. 2019), our measurement of $\Omega_s$ defines the full spatial orientation of the stellar rotation axis, enabling a comparison with the spatial orientation of the planetary orbit and of the large-scale debris disk.

The primary disk is likely seen nearly exactly edge-on, while the warped disk is tilted by $+4.0 \pm 0.6^{\circ}$ in position angle with respect to the primary disk (Golimowski et al. 2006; Lagrange et al. 2012) and inclined by $6 \pm 1^{\circ}$ with respect to the line of sight, with the north-western part

<footnote n="1">¹ We follow the convention to measure position angles East of North.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² The existing astroseismology measurements constrain the inclination value, but provide no information on the hemisphere that faces towards Earth, resulting in a degeneracy between $i_s$ and $180 - i_s$. Due to the near-edge viewing geometry, this degeneracy adds only a small uncertainty that we take into account when computing mutual inclinations.</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>FIG. 3.— Left: Scattered light image of β Pic's large-scale debris disk and of β Pic b (credit: ESO, Lagrange et al. 2009a), with the CO blue-shifted disk lobe and the side of the disk facing towards the observer indicated. Middle: The orbit of β Pic b (orbital elements from Gravity Collaboration et al. 2020), with the plane of the primary disk and the plane of the warped disk marked as grey and orange line, respectively. The position of β Pic b at the time of our observations has been marked with blue points. Right: Photocenter displacements measured in the Brγ line (color points) and in the continuum (grey points). The line channels are colored based on their wavelength, using the same color-coding as Fig. 2. Given that the line is in absorption, the photocenters in the red-shifting wing of the line are displaced towards the side of photosphere that is approaching the observer (and equivalent for the blue-shifted wing and the receding side of the star). The solid black line gives the best-fit position angle for the equatorial plane of the star, with the dashed black lines giving the 1σ error intervals. In all panels, North is top and East is left.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>FIG. 4.— Measured differential phases (points), overplotted with the model phases that correspond to our best-fit photocenter model (line). Each panel shows the measured phases for one of the 6 baselines, averaged over the full data recording sequence.</figcaption></figure>
of the disk being tipped nearer to Earth (Ahmic et al. 2009, see Fig. 3, left and middle). In order to compute the mutual inclination between the different planes, we adopt the orbital elements of β Pic b published by Gravity Collaboration et al. (2020), including an orbital inclination $i_p = 89.04 \pm 0.03^{\circ}$ and the longitude of the ascending node $\Omega_p = 31.88 \pm 0.05^{\circ}$. For the primary disk plane we adopt $\Omega_{d,p} = 29.3_{-0.3}^{+0.2}^{\circ}$ (Lagrange et al. 2012) and $i_{d,p} = 90.0 \pm 0.1^{\circ}$ (Ahmic et al. 2009). The warped secondary disk is oriented along $\Omega_{d,s} = 33.3 \pm 0.6^{\circ}$ (Lagrange et al. 2012), a slight tilt ($i_{d,s} = 84.0 \pm 1.0^{\circ}$, Ahmic et al. 2009) that causes the north-western side of the disk to face towards the observer. This minimal tilt has been deduced from GPI scattered light imaging that show excess scattered light from the north-western side of the disk, likely due to dust forward scattering (Millar-Blanchaer et al. 2015).

The direction of rotation of the disk has been measured by Dent et al. (2014). They detected a molecular gas clump at a separation at ~85 au that might have been produced by the collision of icy bodies in β Pic's debris belt. The kinematics of the CO clump defines the rotation direction of the disk, with the approaching (blue-shifted) line wing to the South-West. Accordingly, the rotation direction deduced from our observations matches the rotation direction for the large-scale disk. Also, it matches the direction of rotation that has been deduced for β Pic b, indicating that the planet is on a prograde orbit.

The sky-projected orientation of the different planes is shown in Fig. 3. The orbital plane of β Pic b is intermediate between the plane of the primary disk (grey line in Fig. 3) and of the warp disk (orange line), as already noted by Lagrange et al. (2012).

Our measurements determine the sky-projected obliquity angle to $3 \pm 4^{\circ}$. We compute the mutual inclination angle $\psi$ between the angular momentum vectors of the stellar photosphere (s) and the planetary orbit (p) by adopting the equation from Fekel (1981)

$$ \cos \psi = \cos i_s \cos i_p + \sin i_s \sin i_p \cos(\Omega_p - \Omega_s), \quad (4) $$

which yields $i_p = 3 \pm 5^{\circ}$ for the planetary orbit. For the primary and secondary disk, the obliquity angles are $i_{d,p} = 1 \pm 4^{\circ}$ and $i_{d,s} = 7 \pm 8^{\circ}$, respectively. This shows that the orbital planes both of the planet and of the primary debris disk are well aligned with the stellar spin, suggesting that the planet formed in a coplanar disk whose angular momentum vector was well-aligned with the stellar rotation axis. Any migration to the planet's current location cannot have occured via mechanisms that would have inflated its mutual inclination.

Our observation provides a first glimpse on the spin-orbit alignment distribution for wide-separation planets, adding new constraints that will help to test hypotheses that have been put forward to explain the origin of the obliquity in short-period planet systems. For the case of β Pic b, we can rule out scenarios that induce stellar obliquities as part of the star formation process or during the disk evolution. The mechanisms that have been proposed to produce such primordial misalignments include planet formation either in a non-coplanar (i.e. warped) disk or in a disk whose angular momenta

tum vector has been shifted with respect to the rotation axis of the star, for instance due to magnetic (Lai et al. 2011) or hydrodynamical effects (Rogers & Lin 2013), or due to turbulence in the cloud that formed the star initially (Bate et al. 2010; Thies et al. 2011; Fielding et al. 2015). A key prediction of these primordial formation scenarios is that they can induce obliquities not only for short-separation, but also wide-separation planets, such as β Pic b.

## 5. CONCLUSIONS

We measured the sky-projected obliquity angle for the planet-host star β Pictoris to $3 \pm 4^{\circ}$. Incorporating the inclination constraints derived with astroseismology we constrain the 3-dimensional orientation of the stellar rotation axis and determine the mutual inclination angle between the angular momentum vector of the star and of β Pic b to $3 \pm 5^{\circ}$, indicating that the stellar spin axis is well aligned with the planetary orbit, as well as with the primary disk.

Our finding of spin-orbit alignment for β Pic b suggests that this planet formed in a coplanar disks without primordial misalignments. This is in contrast to theories that describe the occurrence of obliquities as a natural by-product of the star formation process, for instance through turbulent motions in the star-forming cloud (Fielding et al. 2015) or magnetic (Lai et al. 2011) and fluid-dynamical effects (Rogers & Lin 2013) during disk formation. In case our finding of a well-aligned system is representative for wide-separation planets, it would suggest that the population of Hot Jupiters on oblique orbits (found in RM survey at orbit separations between ~0.02 and 0.3 au) are likely transferred to oblique orbits through dynamical processes post-formation. Possible mechanisms include planet-planet scattering, stellar flybys, or the Kozai-Lidov mechanism, where a wide companion orbiting a close binary on a highly inclined orbit can induce oscillations in inclination/eccentricity of the close pair (e.g. Fabrycky & Tremaine 2007).

Observations on a larger sample of planet-hosting stars will be critical to test this hypothesis and to extend the obliquity distribution presently covered by RM-based surveys (~0.3 au) out to planets with orbital separations at tens or hundreds of au. For such wide-separation systems, infrared interferometry at high spectral dispersion provides the only technique to measure the sky-projected obliquity angle. At present, spin-orbit alignment measurements with VLTI are limited to nearby stars with large apparent diameters and to pressure-broadened lines of relatively fast-rotating stars, which strongly limits the numbers of stars that are accessible with this technique. A dedicated high-spectral resolution ($R = 25,000$), short-wavelength instrument operating in the J-band (1-1.4µm) and optimised for precision phase measurements, such as the proposed VLTI visitor instrument BIFROST (Kraus 2019), will be able to mitigate these limitations and enable spin-orbit measurements for hundreds of systems in the planet samples that are expected from direct-imaging facilities (JWST and ELTs) and the GAIA astrometry mission. Modeling the obliquity distribution that will be provided by such next-generation instruments will allow testing of the theories that have been put forward to explain the origin of planet obliquity on a statistically significant sample, of-
fering direct insights on the planet formation process and
the dynamical evolution that shapes the architecture of
planetary systems.

We thank Gilles Duvert for helpful input on GRAV-
ITY data reduction. We acknowledge support from
an ERC Starting grant (Grant Agreement #639889).
J.D.M. acknowledges funding from National Science
Foundation grant nsf-ast1506540 and NASA grant
NNX16AD43G. G.M.K. is supported by the Royal

Society as a Royal Society University Research fellow.
Based on observations made with ESO telescopes at
Paranal Observatory under program IDs 60.A-9165(A)
and 098.C-0702(A). Some of the presented data has
been recorded as part of a GRAVITY Science Veri-
fication program and we thank the SV team, which
is composed of ESO employees and GRAVITY con-
sortium members, for carrying out the observations
(https://www.eso.org/sci/activities/vltsv/gravitysv.html).

Facilities: VLTI

REFERENCES

Ahmic, M., Croll, B., & Artymowicz, P. 2009, ApJ, 705, 529

Bate, M. R., Lodato, G., & Pringle, J. E. 2010, MNRAS, 401,
1505

Beck, J. G., & Giles, P. 2005, ApJ, 621, L153

Bell, C. P. M., Mamajek, E. E., & Naylor, T. 2015, MNRAS, 454, 593

Burrows, C. J., Krist, J. E., Stapelfeldt, K. R., & WFPC2
Investigation Definition Team. 1995, in American Astronomical
Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 187, American Astronomical
Society Meeting Abstracts, 32.05

Chatterjee, S., Ford, E. B., Matsumura, S., & Rasio, F. A. 2008, ApJ, 686, 580

Currie, T., Thalmann, C., Matsumura, S., Madhusudhan, N.,
Burrows, A., & Kuchner, M. 2011, ApJ, 736, L33

Dawson, R. I., Murray-Clay, R. A., & Fabrycky, D. C. 2011, ApJ, 743, L17

Defrère, D., et al. 2012, A&A, 546, L9

Dent, W. R. F., et al. 2014, Science, 343, 1490

Fabrycky, D., & Tremaine, S. 2007, ApJ, 669, 1298

Fekel, F. C., J. 1981, ApJ, 246, 879

Fielding, D. B., McKee, C. F., Socrates, A., Cunningham, A. J.,
& Klein, R. I. 2015, MNRAS, 450, 3306

Fitzgerald, M. P., Kalas, P. G., & Graham, J. R. 2009, ApJ, 706, L41

Gaspar, A., & Rieke, G. 2020, Proceedings of the National
Academy of Science, 117, 9712

Golimowski, D. A., et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 3109

Gravity Collaboration et al. 2020, A&A, 633, A110

Hébrard, G., et al. 2011, A&A, 527, L11

Kozai, Y. 1962, AJ, 67, 591

Kraus, S. 2019, in The Very Large Telescope in 2030, 36

Kraus, S., et al. 2012, ApJ, 744, 19

. 2020, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2004.01204

Lagrange, A. M., et al. 2009a, A&A, 493, L21

. 2009b, A&A, 506, 927

. 2012, A&A, 542, A40

. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 1135

Lai, D., Foucart, F., & Lin, D. N. C. 2011, MNRAS, 412, 2790

Lapeyrere, V., et al. 2014, in Proc. SPIE, Vol. 9146, Optical and
Infrared Interferometry IV, 91462D

Le Bouquin, J.-B., Absil, O., Benisty, M., Massi, F., Mérand, A.,
& Stefl, S. 2009, A&A, 498, L41

Millar-Blanchaer, M. A., et al. 2015, ApJ, 811, 18

Mouillet, D., Larwood, J. D., Papaloizou, J. C. B., & Lagrange, A. M. 1997, MNRAS, 292, 896

Muñoz, D. J., & Perets, H. B. 2018, AJ, 156, 253

Nixon, C. J. 2012, MNRAS, 423, 2597

Queloz, D., Eggenberger, A., Mayor, M., Perrier, C., Beuzit, J. L., Naef, D., Sivan, J. P., & Udry, S. 2000, A&A, 359, L13

Rogers, T. M., & Lin, D. N. C. 2013, ApJ, 769, L10

Royer, F., Zorec, J., & Gómez, A. E. 2007, A&A, 463, 671

Snellen, I. A. G., & Brown, A. G. A. 2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 883

Thies, I., Kroupa, P., Goodwin, S. P., Stamatellos, D., & Whitworth, A. P. 2011, MNRAS, 417, 1817

Valsecchi, F., & Rasio, F. A. 2014, ApJ, 786, 102

van Leeuwen, F. 2007, A&A, 474, 653

Wang, J. J., et al. 2016, AJ, 152, 97

Winn, J. N., Fabrycky, D., Albrecht, S., & Johnson, J. A. 2010, ApJ, 718, L145

Wright, D. J., et al. 2011, ApJ, 728, L20

Zwintz, K., et al. 2019, A&A, 627, A28