adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: The Panchromatic Hubble Andromeda Treasury: Triangulum Extended Region (PHATTER). VI. The High-mass Stellar Initial Mass Function of M33
Authors: Tobin M. Wainer, Benjamin F. Williams, L. Clifton Johnson, Daniel R. Weisz, Julianne J. Dalcanton, Anil C. Seth, Andrew Dolphin, Meredith J. Durbin, Eric F. Bell, Zhuo Chen, Puragra Guhathakurta, Eric W. Koch, Christina W. Lindberg, Erik Rosolowsky, Karin M. Sandstrom, Evan D. Skillman, Adam Smercina, Estephani E. TorresVillanueva
Figure caption: The joint and marginalized distributions for the distribution of synthetic cluster MF for 26 synthetic clusters with masses larger than 3.6 log(Mass/M ⊙). The dashed lines represent the 16th, 50th, and 84th percentiles of each marginalized distribution.
Paper: Low-mass Stellar and Substellar Content of the Young Cluster Berkeley 59
Authors: Neelam Panwar, Rishi C., Saurabh Sharma, Devendra K. Ojha, Manash R. Samal, H. P. Singh, Ram Kesh Yadav
Figure caption: Three-color image (red: 4.5 μm; green: 3.6 μm; and blue: CFHT MegaCam r band) of the Be 59 region. The two boxes (marked as “A” and “B”) represent the regions covered with the NICS observations. The white circle represents the extent of the cluster (∼10﹩{}^{{\prime} }﹩; Pandey et al. 2008). “C1” and “C2” are the locations of the two dense clumps identified by Yang & Fukui (1992).
Paper: Low-mass Stellar and Substellar Content of the Young Cluster Berkeley 59
Authors: Neelam Panwar, Rishi C., Saurabh Sharma, Devendra K. Ojha, Manash R. Samal, H. P. Singh, Ram Kesh Yadav
Figure caption: Completeness of the NICS photometry in the J, H, and K bands calculated with an artificial star experiment.
Paper: Low-mass Stellar and Substellar Content of the Young Cluster Berkeley 59
Authors: Neelam Panwar, Rishi C., Saurabh Sharma, Devendra K. Ojha, Manash R. Samal, H. P. Singh, Ram Kesh Yadav
Figure caption: Left panel: J vs. (J−H) CMD for the sources in the region “A.” The green squares represent the YSO candidates identified by Getman et al. (2017). The yellow triangles are the NIR excess sources selected using the NICS observations (see Section 3.3.1). The star symbols are the Class I/II sources selected based on the NICS/IRAC 3.6, 4.5 μm data. The distribution of the stars in the control field of the same area is shown in blue. Right panel: statistically cleaned J vs. (J−H) CMD for the region “A” sources. The yellow curve is the 2 Myr isochrone from PARSEC (Bressan et al. 2012; Pastorelli et al. 2020) and Baraffe et al. (2015) corrected for the adopted distance and reddening. The red dashed line shows the completeness limit.
Paper: Low-mass Stellar and Substellar Content of the Young Cluster Berkeley 59
Authors: Neelam Panwar, Rishi C., Saurabh Sharma, Devendra K. Ojha, Manash R. Samal, H. P. Singh, Ram Kesh Yadav
Figure caption: Color-composite image (turquoise: Spitzer 3.6 and red: 4.5 μm image) of Be 59. The regions covered with the NICS observations are shown with the cyan polygons. The black contours show the density distribution of the YSO candidates in the region, which were identified using the various criteria discussed in Section 3. The cross symbols mark the locations of the massive O-type stars. The dashed green and thick yellow contours show the surface density distributions of the young stellar (0.075–0.9 M ⊙) and BD (<0.075 M ⊙) candidates, respectively.
Paper: Low-mass Stellar and Substellar Content of the Young Cluster Berkeley 59
Authors: Neelam Panwar, Rishi C., Saurabh Sharma, Devendra K. Ojha, Manash R. Samal, H. P. Singh, Ram Kesh Yadav
Figure caption: IMF for the stars in the region “A” of Be 59. The black points are from 103 realizations of the Monte Carlo simulation, where each mass is moved by a random offset within its respective ±1σ uncertainty. The error bars show the Poisson error in the data. The black filled circles are data from previous works (Pandey et al. 2008).
Paper: Low-mass Stellar and Substellar Content of the Young Cluster Berkeley 59
Authors: Neelam Panwar, Rishi C., Saurabh Sharma, Devendra K. Ojha, Manash R. Samal, H. P. Singh, Ram Kesh Yadav
Figure caption: The VPD for the stars in the cluster region (radius ≤﹩{10}^{{\prime} }﹩) is shown with the black dots. The distribution of the stars in a control field of a similar area, a two-dimensional kernel density estimation, is shown with the color bar. The green squares represent the YSOs identified by Getman et al. (2017).
Paper: Low-mass Stellar and Substellar Content of the Young Cluster Berkeley 59
Authors: Neelam Panwar, Rishi C., Saurabh Sharma, Devendra K. Ojha, Manash R. Samal, H. P. Singh, Ram Kesh Yadav
Figure caption: The membership probability (top panel) and parallax values (bottom panel) for the stars in the cluster region as a function of the G magnitude (blue dots). The red circles show the members with P  μ  > 80% and the green squares represent the YSO candidates from Getman et al. (2017).
Paper: Low-mass Stellar and Substellar Content of the Young Cluster Berkeley 59
Authors: Neelam Panwar, Rishi C., Saurabh Sharma, Devendra K. Ojha, Manash R. Samal, H. P. Singh, Ram Kesh Yadav
Figure caption: Gaia DR3 CMD for the stars in the cluster region. The red circles are the member stars with high membership probability (>80%) within the PM ellipse shown in the VPD and parallax values within 2σ of the median. Known YSO candidates from Getman et al. (2017) are shown with the blue crosses (Class III), magenta stars (Class II), and yellow triangles (probable members).
Paper: Low-mass Stellar and Substellar Content of the Young Cluster Berkeley 59
Authors: Neelam Panwar, Rishi C., Saurabh Sharma, Devendra K. Ojha, Manash R. Samal, H. P. Singh, Ram Kesh Yadav
Figure caption: Left panel: the variation of the star-to-BD ratio with the radial distance from the cluster center. The blue filled squares represent the massive “O”-type stars. Right panel: the cumulative distribution of the BD and stellar candidates as a function of the radial distance from the cluster center.
Paper: Low-mass Stellar and Substellar Content of the Young Cluster Berkeley 59
Authors: Neelam Panwar, Rishi C., Saurabh Sharma, Devendra K. Ojha, Manash R. Samal, H. P. Singh, Ram Kesh Yadav
Figure caption: Left panel: J vs. (J−H) CMD for the sources in the region “B.” Right panel: statistically cleaned J vs. (J−H) CMD for the sources in the region “B.” The yellow curve is the 2 Myr isochrone from PARSEC (Bressan et al. 2012; Pastorelli et al. 2020) and Baraffe et al. (2015) scaled for the adopted distance and reddening. The other symbols are the same as in Figure 7.
Paper: Low-mass Stellar and Substellar Content of the Young Cluster Berkeley 59
Authors: Neelam Panwar, Rishi C., Saurabh Sharma, Devendra K. Ojha, Manash R. Samal, H. P. Singh, Ram Kesh Yadav
Figure caption: Optical–NIR CMD for the stars in the region “A.” The red circles are the member stars selected based on the Gaia DR3 data. Known YSO candidates from Getman et al. (2017) are shown with green squares (probable members). The red dashed line represents the completeness of the data.
Paper: An Earth-sized Planet on the Verge of Tidal Disruption
Authors: Fei Dai, Andrew W. Howard, Samuel Halverson, Jaume Orell-Miquel, Enric Pallé, Howard Isaacson, Benjamin Fulton, Ellen M. Price, Mykhaylo Plotnykov, Leslie A. Rogers, Diana Valencia, Kimberly Paragas, Michael Greklek-McKeon, Jonathan Gomez Barrientos, Heather A. Knutson, Erik A. Petigura, Lauren M. Weiss, Rena Lee, Casey L. Brinkman, Daniel Huber, Gumundur Stefánsson, Kento Masuda, Steven Giacalone, Cicero X. Lu, Edwin S. Kite, Renyu Hu, Eric Gaidos, Michael Zhang, Ryan A. Rubenzahl, Joshua N. Winn, Te Han, Corey Beard, Rae Holcomb, Aaron Householder, Gregory J. Gilbert, Jack Lubin, J. M. Joel Ong, Alex S. Polanski, Nicholas Saunders, Judah Van Zandt, Samuel W. Yee, Jingwen Zhang, Jon Zink, Bradford Holden, Ashley Baker, Max Brodheim, Ian J. M. Crossfield, William Deich, Jerry Edelstein, Steven R. Gibson, Grant M. Hill, Sharon R Jelinsky, Marc Kassis, Russ R. Laher, Kyle Lanclos, Scott Lilley, Joel N. Payne, Kodi Rider, Paul Robertson, Arpita Roy, Christian Schwab, Abby P. Shaum, Martin M. Sirk, Chris Smith, Adam Vandenberg, Josh Walawender, Sharon X. Wang, Shin-Ywan (Cindy) Wang, Edward Wishnow, Jason T. Wright, Sherry Yeh, José A. Caballero, Juan C. Morales, Felipe Murgas, Evangelos Nagel, Ansgar Reiners, Andreas Schweitzer, Hugo M. Tabernero, Mathias Zechmeister, Alton Spencer, David R. Ciardi, Catherine A. Clark, Michael B. Lund, Douglas A. Caldwell, Karen A. Collins, Richard P. Schwarz, Khalid Barkaoui, Cristilyn Watkins, Avi Shporer, Norio Narita, Akihiko Fukui, Gregor Srdoc, David W. Latham, Jon M. Jenkins, George R. Ricker, Sara Seager, Roland Vanderspek
Figure caption: Top: the phase-curve variation of TOI-6255 b observed by TESS. The red curve shows the best-fit phase curve and secondary eclipse model. The phase curve is only detected at a 2σ level with two sectors of TESS observations in the optical. Bottom: the amount of thermal emission (red dotted line) and reflected light (orange solid line) in the TESS band as a function of the Bond albedo. The blue dashed line is the measured amount of planetary flux over the stellar flux (F  p /F ⋆) and the associated 1σ confidence interval (blue area). The phase-curve variation in TESS is likely a combination of thermal emission and reflected light.
Paper: An Earth-sized Planet on the Verge of Tidal Disruption
Authors: Fei Dai, Andrew W. Howard, Samuel Halverson, Jaume Orell-Miquel, Enric Pallé, Howard Isaacson, Benjamin Fulton, Ellen M. Price, Mykhaylo Plotnykov, Leslie A. Rogers, Diana Valencia, Kimberly Paragas, Michael Greklek-McKeon, Jonathan Gomez Barrientos, Heather A. Knutson, Erik A. Petigura, Lauren M. Weiss, Rena Lee, Casey L. Brinkman, Daniel Huber, Gumundur Stefánsson, Kento Masuda, Steven Giacalone, Cicero X. Lu, Edwin S. Kite, Renyu Hu, Eric Gaidos, Michael Zhang, Ryan A. Rubenzahl, Joshua N. Winn, Te Han, Corey Beard, Rae Holcomb, Aaron Householder, Gregory J. Gilbert, Jack Lubin, J. M. Joel Ong, Alex S. Polanski, Nicholas Saunders, Judah Van Zandt, Samuel W. Yee, Jingwen Zhang, Jon Zink, Bradford Holden, Ashley Baker, Max Brodheim, Ian J. M. Crossfield, William Deich, Jerry Edelstein, Steven R. Gibson, Grant M. Hill, Sharon R Jelinsky, Marc Kassis, Russ R. Laher, Kyle Lanclos, Scott Lilley, Joel N. Payne, Kodi Rider, Paul Robertson, Arpita Roy, Christian Schwab, Abby P. Shaum, Martin M. Sirk, Chris Smith, Adam Vandenberg, Josh Walawender, Sharon X. Wang, Shin-Ywan (Cindy) Wang, Edward Wishnow, Jason T. Wright, Sherry Yeh, José A. Caballero, Juan C. Morales, Felipe Murgas, Evangelos Nagel, Ansgar Reiners, Andreas Schweitzer, Hugo M. Tabernero, Mathias Zechmeister, Alton Spencer, David R. Ciardi, Catherine A. Clark, Michael B. Lund, Douglas A. Caldwell, Karen A. Collins, Richard P. Schwarz, Khalid Barkaoui, Cristilyn Watkins, Avi Shporer, Norio Narita, Akihiko Fukui, Gregor Srdoc, David W. Latham, Jon M. Jenkins, George R. Ricker, Sara Seager, Roland Vanderspek
Figure caption: The ESM (Kempton et al. 2018) vs. planet radius, for planets smaller than 2 R ⊕ (super-Earths). TOI-6255 b has an ESM of 24 and hence is more favorable than many planets for which JWST observations have already been scheduled (orange). It is also the most Earth-like in size among the currently confirmed exoplanet sample.
Paper: An Earth-sized Planet on the Verge of Tidal Disruption
Authors: Fei Dai, Andrew W. Howard, Samuel Halverson, Jaume Orell-Miquel, Enric Pallé, Howard Isaacson, Benjamin Fulton, Ellen M. Price, Mykhaylo Plotnykov, Leslie A. Rogers, Diana Valencia, Kimberly Paragas, Michael Greklek-McKeon, Jonathan Gomez Barrientos, Heather A. Knutson, Erik A. Petigura, Lauren M. Weiss, Rena Lee, Casey L. Brinkman, Daniel Huber, Gumundur Stefánsson, Kento Masuda, Steven Giacalone, Cicero X. Lu, Edwin S. Kite, Renyu Hu, Eric Gaidos, Michael Zhang, Ryan A. Rubenzahl, Joshua N. Winn, Te Han, Corey Beard, Rae Holcomb, Aaron Householder, Gregory J. Gilbert, Jack Lubin, J. M. Joel Ong, Alex S. Polanski, Nicholas Saunders, Judah Van Zandt, Samuel W. Yee, Jingwen Zhang, Jon Zink, Bradford Holden, Ashley Baker, Max Brodheim, Ian J. M. Crossfield, William Deich, Jerry Edelstein, Steven R. Gibson, Grant M. Hill, Sharon R Jelinsky, Marc Kassis, Russ R. Laher, Kyle Lanclos, Scott Lilley, Joel N. Payne, Kodi Rider, Paul Robertson, Arpita Roy, Christian Schwab, Abby P. Shaum, Martin M. Sirk, Chris Smith, Adam Vandenberg, Josh Walawender, Sharon X. Wang, Shin-Ywan (Cindy) Wang, Edward Wishnow, Jason T. Wright, Sherry Yeh, José A. Caballero, Juan C. Morales, Felipe Murgas, Evangelos Nagel, Ansgar Reiners, Andreas Schweitzer, Hugo M. Tabernero, Mathias Zechmeister, Alton Spencer, David R. Ciardi, Catherine A. Clark, Michael B. Lund, Douglas A. Caldwell, Karen A. Collins, Richard P. Schwarz, Khalid Barkaoui, Cristilyn Watkins, Avi Shporer, Norio Narita, Akihiko Fukui, Gregor Srdoc, David W. Latham, Jon M. Jenkins, George R. Ricker, Sara Seager, Roland Vanderspek
Figure caption: Phase-folded and binned MuSCAT3 (Narita et al. 2020) observation of TOI-6255 b. The transit parameters inferred from MuSCAT3 observations are consistent with those from TESS.
Paper: An Earth-sized Planet on the Verge of Tidal Disruption
Authors: Fei Dai, Andrew W. Howard, Samuel Halverson, Jaume Orell-Miquel, Enric Pallé, Howard Isaacson, Benjamin Fulton, Ellen M. Price, Mykhaylo Plotnykov, Leslie A. Rogers, Diana Valencia, Kimberly Paragas, Michael Greklek-McKeon, Jonathan Gomez Barrientos, Heather A. Knutson, Erik A. Petigura, Lauren M. Weiss, Rena Lee, Casey L. Brinkman, Daniel Huber, Gumundur Stefánsson, Kento Masuda, Steven Giacalone, Cicero X. Lu, Edwin S. Kite, Renyu Hu, Eric Gaidos, Michael Zhang, Ryan A. Rubenzahl, Joshua N. Winn, Te Han, Corey Beard, Rae Holcomb, Aaron Householder, Gregory J. Gilbert, Jack Lubin, J. M. Joel Ong, Alex S. Polanski, Nicholas Saunders, Judah Van Zandt, Samuel W. Yee, Jingwen Zhang, Jon Zink, Bradford Holden, Ashley Baker, Max Brodheim, Ian J. M. Crossfield, William Deich, Jerry Edelstein, Steven R. Gibson, Grant M. Hill, Sharon R Jelinsky, Marc Kassis, Russ R. Laher, Kyle Lanclos, Scott Lilley, Joel N. Payne, Kodi Rider, Paul Robertson, Arpita Roy, Christian Schwab, Abby P. Shaum, Martin M. Sirk, Chris Smith, Adam Vandenberg, Josh Walawender, Sharon X. Wang, Shin-Ywan (Cindy) Wang, Edward Wishnow, Jason T. Wright, Sherry Yeh, José A. Caballero, Juan C. Morales, Felipe Murgas, Evangelos Nagel, Ansgar Reiners, Andreas Schweitzer, Hugo M. Tabernero, Mathias Zechmeister, Alton Spencer, David R. Ciardi, Catherine A. Clark, Michael B. Lund, Douglas A. Caldwell, Karen A. Collins, Richard P. Schwarz, Khalid Barkaoui, Cristilyn Watkins, Avi Shporer, Norio Narita, Akihiko Fukui, Gregor Srdoc, David W. Latham, Jon M. Jenkins, George R. Ricker, Sara Seager, Roland Vanderspek
Figure caption: The contrast curve as function of radial distance from TOI-6255 using Palomar/PHARO observations (Hayward et al. 2001). The inset shows the high-contrast image of TOI-6255. We could rule out companions <6.5 mag within at 0.″5.
Paper: Colorado Ultraviolet Transit Experiment Near-ultraviolet Transmission Spectroscopy of the Ultrahot Jupiter KELT-9b
Authors: Arika Egan, Kevin France, Aickara Gopinathan Sreejith, Luca Fossati, Tommi Koskinen, Brian Fleming, Nicholas Nell, Ambily Suresh, P. Wilson Cauley, Jean-Michel Desert, Pascal Petit, Aline A. Vidotto
Figure caption: CUTE raw, broadband NUV light-curve best fits, and residuals for KELT-9b Visit 1 (blue circles) and Visit 2 (orange squares). Each data point represents a 5 minutes exposure. Top: the uncorrected counts normalized to the median of the first three CUTE orbits, which are out of transit. Middle: the normalized counts with the best-fit instrument systematics model removed, 1σ error bars and each visit’s light-curve model in their respective colors. The 1σ R p/R ⋆ regions are transparently shown in each visit’s respective colors. The black line transit is the optical transit light curve from Wong et al. (2020). Bottom: the residuals with 1σ error bars. The two light curves are shown on the same plot to emphasize the difference in systematics across each visit.
Paper: Colorado Ultraviolet Transit Experiment Near-ultraviolet Transmission Spectroscopy of the Ultrahot Jupiter KELT-9b
Authors: Arika Egan, Kevin France, Aickara Gopinathan Sreejith, Luca Fossati, Tommi Koskinen, Brian Fleming, Nicholas Nell, Ambily Suresh, P. Wilson Cauley, Jean-Michel Desert, Pascal Petit, Aline A. Vidotto
Figure caption: Top: a 2D CUTE CCD image of a single 5 minutes exposure. The image is bias-subtracted and corrected for bad pixels and cosmic rays. The spectral extraction region is outlined in white, and the background region is outlined in orange. Bottom: the summed 1D spectrum after background subtraction, smoothed with a Gaussian filter for display purposes.
Paper: Colorado Ultraviolet Transit Experiment Near-ultraviolet Transmission Spectroscopy of the Ultrahot Jupiter KELT-9b
Authors: Arika Egan, Kevin France, Aickara Gopinathan Sreejith, Luca Fossati, Tommi Koskinen, Brian Fleming, Nicholas Nell, Ambily Suresh, P. Wilson Cauley, Jean-Michel Desert, Pascal Petit, Aline A. Vidotto
Figure caption: Top: transmission spectrum for Visit 1 and Visit 2 with 100 Å wide bins, corresponding to R ∼ 28. Bottom: transmission spectrum for Visit 1 and Visit 2 with 25 Å wide bins, corresponding to R ∼112. On both plots, the Roche Lobe radius is shown as the red dashed line, and the visible light R p/R ⋆ from Wong et al. (2020) is shown as the black solid line.
Paper: Colorado Ultraviolet Transit Experiment Near-ultraviolet Transmission Spectroscopy of the Ultrahot Jupiter KELT-9b
Authors: Arika Egan, Kevin France, Aickara Gopinathan Sreejith, Luca Fossati, Tommi Koskinen, Brian Fleming, Nicholas Nell, Ambily Suresh, P. Wilson Cauley, Jean-Michel Desert, Pascal Petit, Aline A. Vidotto
Figure caption: Top: the principal components for Visit 1. Bottom: the principal components for Visit 2, both plotted against the KELT-9b orbital phase. Each PC’s variance is shown in the respective plot title.
Paper: Colorado Ultraviolet Transit Experiment Near-ultraviolet Transmission Spectroscopy of the Ultrahot Jupiter KELT-9b
Authors: Arika Egan, Kevin France, Aickara Gopinathan Sreejith, Luca Fossati, Tommi Koskinen, Brian Fleming, Nicholas Nell, Ambily Suresh, P. Wilson Cauley, Jean-Michel Desert, Pascal Petit, Aline A. Vidotto
Figure caption: Left: light curves for Visits 1 and 2 for a 100 Å wide bin centered at 3033 Å. Right: light curves for Visits 1 and 2 for a 25 Å wide bin centered at 2520 Å.
Paper: Assessing Exoplanetary System Architectures with DYNAMITE Including Observational Upper Limits
Authors: Jamie Dietrich
Figure caption:  DYNAMITE predictions in orbital period space for the HD 219134 system. Top left: Full predictions for 0.5–730 days; the bimodal peak with the sharp cutoff between planet g and h is due to the long period ratio between those two planets, where it is more likely to find a planet close to the Kepler ratio with g or with h, but not necessarily both. Top right: zoom-in on peak around 12.4 days. Bottom left: zoom region with transit upper limit equal to smallest found planet. Bottom right: zoom region with transit upper limit and TTV limit of 3 minutes on the transiting planets. I see that an additional Earth-size planet injected at a orbital period of P ∼ 12 days would still be likely to exist as it likely would not violate the transit and TTV limits for planets b and c. Habitable zones are shown as in Figure 1.
Paper: Assessing Exoplanetary System Architectures with DYNAMITE Including Observational Upper Limits
Authors: Jamie Dietrich
Figure caption:  DYNAMITE predictions in orbital period space for HD 20794 where the RV limit is 60 cm s−1 (left) and 25 cm s−1 (right) for the system with the 644 day planet from Cretignier et al. (2023) on an eccentric orbit (top) and on a circular orbit (middle), as well as with the planet excluded (bottom). Both the 60 cm s−1 limits and 25 cm s−1 limits do not significantly change the predicted values from those made without limits (see Figure 7) except for slightly reducing the likelihood near the innermost planet candidate g. Habitable zones are shown as in Figure 1.
Paper: Assessing Exoplanetary System Architectures with DYNAMITE Including Observational Upper Limits
Authors: Jamie Dietrich
Figure caption:  DYNAMITE predictions in orbital period space for HD 20794 including planet h with an eccentric orbit (left), including planet h with a circular orbit (center), and excluding planet h (right). Planets b and d are shown as confirmed, as they are found in all four analyses, whereas planet candidates c (Pepe et al. 2011) and e, f, and g (Feng et al. 2017a) are shown as unconfirmed, where DYNAMITE does not know of their possible existence or parameters. Habitable zones are shown as in Figure 1.
Paper: Assessing Exoplanetary System Architectures with DYNAMITE Including Observational Upper Limits
Authors: Jamie Dietrich
Figure caption:  DYNAMITE predictions in planet radius space for the HD 219134 system. Left: Full predictions for 0.1−4R ⊕. Middle: predictions with transit upper limit equal to smallest found planet. Right: Predictions with transit upper limit and TTV limit of 3 minutes on the transiting planets. I see a relatively sharp drop-off in planet radius at the the transit limit when it is included, as only some of the planets of those sizes would transit. However, the TTV limit does not noticeably change the predictions for planet radius.
Paper: Assessing Exoplanetary System Architectures with DYNAMITE Including Observational Upper Limits
Authors: Jamie Dietrich
Figure caption: The predicted planet radius distribution as calculated from an assumed planet orbital inclination similar to the stellar rotation axis of 7° and a volatile-rich atmosphere for the mass–radius relationship from Otegi et al. (2020), with no RV limits enforced (left) and with a 0.5 m s−1 RV limit enforced (right). There is no significant difference between the relative likelihoods for the different planet radii.
Paper: Assessing Exoplanetary System Architectures with DYNAMITE Including Observational Upper Limits
Authors: Jamie Dietrich
Figure caption:  DYNAMITE predictions for the planet radius (top) and orbital inclination (bottom) for no RV limits (left) and 25 cm s−1 RV limits (right). The planet radius distribution is calculated using the Otegi et al. (2020) M–R relationship and a draw from the inclination distribution to get the hypothetical mass from the ﹩m\sin i﹩ value. The strict RV limit significantly lowers the likelihood of higher-mass planets as well as planets closer to an edge-on orbital inclination, as both of these would have higher RV semi-amplitudes.
Paper: Assessing Exoplanetary System Architectures with DYNAMITE Including Observational Upper Limits
Authors: Jamie Dietrich
Figure caption: The period phase coverage for tau Ceti with RV observations from NEID and EXPRES, shown in number of visits to a specific phase per orbital period (expressed as a fraction compared to 2 yr). The tentative signal from Tuomi et al. (2013) is shown as a red line. With the number of visits being above 10 for most of the phases at this period, I find it unlikely the signal is a real planet.
Paper: Volatile Elements Characterized by MarSCoDe in Materials at Zhurong Landing Site
Authors: Yizhong Zhang, Xin Ren, Zhaopeng Chen, Yuxuan Luo, Wangli Chen, Jianjun Liu, Xiangfeng Liu, Zhenqiang Zhang, Weiming Xu, Rong Shu, Chunlai Li
Figure caption: The volatile element characteristic peaks in some samples collected by MarSCoDe LIBS in ground experiments and in situ detection. (a) Cl 837.82 nm peak in the LIBS spectrum of GBW07447 and GBW07449 targets collected in ground experiments. GBW07105 is used as a blank control. (b) S 564 nm peak in the LIBS spectra of MCCT gypsum target collected in in situ calibration on Sol 50, GBW07162 (6.67 SO3 wt%) and GBW07164 (14.86 SO3 wt%) targets. GBW07105 is used as a blank control. (c) H 656.47 nm peak along with C 657.99 nm peak in the LIBS spectra of the MCCT gypsum target collected in in situ calibration. The spectral data were normalized to O peak area around 778 nm and offset for clarity.