adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Migration and Evolution of giant ExoPlanets (MEEP). I. Nine Newly Confirmed Hot Jupiters from the TESS Mission
Authors: Jack Schulte, Joseph E. Rodriguez, Allyson Bieryla, Samuel N. Quinn, Karen A. Collins, Samuel W. Yee, Andrew C. Nine, Melinda Soares-Furtado, David W. Latham, Jason D. Eastman, Khalid Barkaoui, David R. Ciardi, Diana Dragomir, Mark E. Everett, Steven Giacalone, Ismael Mireles, Felipe Murgas, Norio Narita, Avi Shporer, Ivan A. Strakhov, Stephanie Striegel, Martin Vaňko, Noah Vowell, Gavin Wang, Carl Ziegler, Michael Bellaver, Paul Benni, Serge Bergeron, Henri M. J. Boffin, César Briceño, Catherine A. Clark, Kevin I. Collins, Jerome P. de Leon, Courtney D. Dressing, Phil Evans, Emma Esparza-Borges, Jeremy Fedewa, Akihiko Fukui, Tianjun Gan, Ivan S. Gerasimov, Joel D. Hartman, Holden Gill, Michaël Gillon, Keith Horne, Ferran Grau Horta, Steve B. Howell, Keisuke Isogai, Emmanuël Jehin, Jon M. Jenkins, Raine Karjalainen, John F. Kielkopf, Kathryn V. Lester, Colin Littlefield, Michael B. Lund, Andrew W. Mann, Mason McCormack, Edward J. Michaels, Shane Painter, Enric Palle, Hannu Parviainen, David-Michael Peterson, Francisco J. Pozuelos, Zachary Raup, Phillip Reed, Howard M. Relles, George R. Ricker, Arjun B. Savel, Richard P. Schwarz, S. Seager, Ramotholo Sefako, Gregor Srdoc, Chris Stockdale, Hannah Sullivan, Mathilde Timmermans, Joshua N. Winn
Figure caption: Same as Figure 6, but for TOI-3919. Notably, the best-fit RVs for TOI-3919 imply a linear RV trend of ﹩-{0.79}_{-0.30}^{+0.31}﹩ m s−1 day−1, which was included in our fit per our prescription to fit for an RV trend if it is favored to greater than 1σ.
Paper: Migration and Evolution of giant ExoPlanets (MEEP). I. Nine Newly Confirmed Hot Jupiters from the TESS Mission
Authors: Jack Schulte, Joseph E. Rodriguez, Allyson Bieryla, Samuel N. Quinn, Karen A. Collins, Samuel W. Yee, Andrew C. Nine, Melinda Soares-Furtado, David W. Latham, Jason D. Eastman, Khalid Barkaoui, David R. Ciardi, Diana Dragomir, Mark E. Everett, Steven Giacalone, Ismael Mireles, Felipe Murgas, Norio Narita, Avi Shporer, Ivan A. Strakhov, Stephanie Striegel, Martin Vaňko, Noah Vowell, Gavin Wang, Carl Ziegler, Michael Bellaver, Paul Benni, Serge Bergeron, Henri M. J. Boffin, César Briceño, Catherine A. Clark, Kevin I. Collins, Jerome P. de Leon, Courtney D. Dressing, Phil Evans, Emma Esparza-Borges, Jeremy Fedewa, Akihiko Fukui, Tianjun Gan, Ivan S. Gerasimov, Joel D. Hartman, Holden Gill, Michaël Gillon, Keith Horne, Ferran Grau Horta, Steve B. Howell, Keisuke Isogai, Emmanuël Jehin, Jon M. Jenkins, Raine Karjalainen, John F. Kielkopf, Kathryn V. Lester, Colin Littlefield, Michael B. Lund, Andrew W. Mann, Mason McCormack, Edward J. Michaels, Shane Painter, Enric Palle, Hannu Parviainen, David-Michael Peterson, Francisco J. Pozuelos, Zachary Raup, Phillip Reed, Howard M. Relles, George R. Ricker, Arjun B. Savel, Richard P. Schwarz, S. Seager, Ramotholo Sefako, Gregor Srdoc, Chris Stockdale, Hannah Sullivan, Mathilde Timmermans, Joshua N. Winn
Figure caption: Same as Figure 6, but for TOI-2368. Notably, the best-fit RVs for TOI-2368 imply a linear RV trend of 0.21 ± 0.11 m s−1 day−1, which was included in our fit per our prescription to fit for an RV trend if it is favored to greater than 1σ.
Paper: Migration and Evolution of giant ExoPlanets (MEEP). I. Nine Newly Confirmed Hot Jupiters from the TESS Mission
Authors: Jack Schulte, Joseph E. Rodriguez, Allyson Bieryla, Samuel N. Quinn, Karen A. Collins, Samuel W. Yee, Andrew C. Nine, Melinda Soares-Furtado, David W. Latham, Jason D. Eastman, Khalid Barkaoui, David R. Ciardi, Diana Dragomir, Mark E. Everett, Steven Giacalone, Ismael Mireles, Felipe Murgas, Norio Narita, Avi Shporer, Ivan A. Strakhov, Stephanie Striegel, Martin Vaňko, Noah Vowell, Gavin Wang, Carl Ziegler, Michael Bellaver, Paul Benni, Serge Bergeron, Henri M. J. Boffin, César Briceño, Catherine A. Clark, Kevin I. Collins, Jerome P. de Leon, Courtney D. Dressing, Phil Evans, Emma Esparza-Borges, Jeremy Fedewa, Akihiko Fukui, Tianjun Gan, Ivan S. Gerasimov, Joel D. Hartman, Holden Gill, Michaël Gillon, Keith Horne, Ferran Grau Horta, Steve B. Howell, Keisuke Isogai, Emmanuël Jehin, Jon M. Jenkins, Raine Karjalainen, John F. Kielkopf, Kathryn V. Lester, Colin Littlefield, Michael B. Lund, Andrew W. Mann, Mason McCormack, Edward J. Michaels, Shane Painter, Enric Palle, Hannu Parviainen, David-Michael Peterson, Francisco J. Pozuelos, Zachary Raup, Phillip Reed, Howard M. Relles, George R. Ricker, Arjun B. Savel, Richard P. Schwarz, S. Seager, Ramotholo Sefako, Gregor Srdoc, Chris Stockdale, Hannah Sullivan, Mathilde Timmermans, Joshua N. Winn
Figure caption: Same as Figure 6, but for TOI-5232.
Paper: Migration and Evolution of giant ExoPlanets (MEEP). I. Nine Newly Confirmed Hot Jupiters from the TESS Mission
Authors: Jack Schulte, Joseph E. Rodriguez, Allyson Bieryla, Samuel N. Quinn, Karen A. Collins, Samuel W. Yee, Andrew C. Nine, Melinda Soares-Furtado, David W. Latham, Jason D. Eastman, Khalid Barkaoui, David R. Ciardi, Diana Dragomir, Mark E. Everett, Steven Giacalone, Ismael Mireles, Felipe Murgas, Norio Narita, Avi Shporer, Ivan A. Strakhov, Stephanie Striegel, Martin Vaňko, Noah Vowell, Gavin Wang, Carl Ziegler, Michael Bellaver, Paul Benni, Serge Bergeron, Henri M. J. Boffin, César Briceño, Catherine A. Clark, Kevin I. Collins, Jerome P. de Leon, Courtney D. Dressing, Phil Evans, Emma Esparza-Borges, Jeremy Fedewa, Akihiko Fukui, Tianjun Gan, Ivan S. Gerasimov, Joel D. Hartman, Holden Gill, Michaël Gillon, Keith Horne, Ferran Grau Horta, Steve B. Howell, Keisuke Isogai, Emmanuël Jehin, Jon M. Jenkins, Raine Karjalainen, John F. Kielkopf, Kathryn V. Lester, Colin Littlefield, Michael B. Lund, Andrew W. Mann, Mason McCormack, Edward J. Michaels, Shane Painter, Enric Palle, Hannu Parviainen, David-Michael Peterson, Francisco J. Pozuelos, Zachary Raup, Phillip Reed, Howard M. Relles, George R. Ricker, Arjun B. Savel, Richard P. Schwarz, S. Seager, Ramotholo Sefako, Gregor Srdoc, Chris Stockdale, Hannah Sullivan, Mathilde Timmermans, Joshua N. Winn
Figure caption: Same as Figure 6, but for TOI-4153.
Paper: Migration and Evolution of giant ExoPlanets (MEEP). I. Nine Newly Confirmed Hot Jupiters from the TESS Mission
Authors: Jack Schulte, Joseph E. Rodriguez, Allyson Bieryla, Samuel N. Quinn, Karen A. Collins, Samuel W. Yee, Andrew C. Nine, Melinda Soares-Furtado, David W. Latham, Jason D. Eastman, Khalid Barkaoui, David R. Ciardi, Diana Dragomir, Mark E. Everett, Steven Giacalone, Ismael Mireles, Felipe Murgas, Norio Narita, Avi Shporer, Ivan A. Strakhov, Stephanie Striegel, Martin Vaňko, Noah Vowell, Gavin Wang, Carl Ziegler, Michael Bellaver, Paul Benni, Serge Bergeron, Henri M. J. Boffin, César Briceño, Catherine A. Clark, Kevin I. Collins, Jerome P. de Leon, Courtney D. Dressing, Phil Evans, Emma Esparza-Borges, Jeremy Fedewa, Akihiko Fukui, Tianjun Gan, Ivan S. Gerasimov, Joel D. Hartman, Holden Gill, Michaël Gillon, Keith Horne, Ferran Grau Horta, Steve B. Howell, Keisuke Isogai, Emmanuël Jehin, Jon M. Jenkins, Raine Karjalainen, John F. Kielkopf, Kathryn V. Lester, Colin Littlefield, Michael B. Lund, Andrew W. Mann, Mason McCormack, Edward J. Michaels, Shane Painter, Enric Palle, Hannu Parviainen, David-Michael Peterson, Francisco J. Pozuelos, Zachary Raup, Phillip Reed, Howard M. Relles, George R. Ricker, Arjun B. Savel, Richard P. Schwarz, S. Seager, Ramotholo Sefako, Gregor Srdoc, Chris Stockdale, Hannah Sullivan, Mathilde Timmermans, Joshua N. Winn
Figure caption: Same as Figure 6, but for TOI-2107.
Paper: Migration and Evolution of giant ExoPlanets (MEEP). I. Nine Newly Confirmed Hot Jupiters from the TESS Mission
Authors: Jack Schulte, Joseph E. Rodriguez, Allyson Bieryla, Samuel N. Quinn, Karen A. Collins, Samuel W. Yee, Andrew C. Nine, Melinda Soares-Furtado, David W. Latham, Jason D. Eastman, Khalid Barkaoui, David R. Ciardi, Diana Dragomir, Mark E. Everett, Steven Giacalone, Ismael Mireles, Felipe Murgas, Norio Narita, Avi Shporer, Ivan A. Strakhov, Stephanie Striegel, Martin Vaňko, Noah Vowell, Gavin Wang, Carl Ziegler, Michael Bellaver, Paul Benni, Serge Bergeron, Henri M. J. Boffin, César Briceño, Catherine A. Clark, Kevin I. Collins, Jerome P. de Leon, Courtney D. Dressing, Phil Evans, Emma Esparza-Borges, Jeremy Fedewa, Akihiko Fukui, Tianjun Gan, Ivan S. Gerasimov, Joel D. Hartman, Holden Gill, Michaël Gillon, Keith Horne, Ferran Grau Horta, Steve B. Howell, Keisuke Isogai, Emmanuël Jehin, Jon M. Jenkins, Raine Karjalainen, John F. Kielkopf, Kathryn V. Lester, Colin Littlefield, Michael B. Lund, Andrew W. Mann, Mason McCormack, Edward J. Michaels, Shane Painter, Enric Palle, Hannu Parviainen, David-Michael Peterson, Francisco J. Pozuelos, Zachary Raup, Phillip Reed, Howard M. Relles, George R. Ricker, Arjun B. Savel, Richard P. Schwarz, S. Seager, Ramotholo Sefako, Gregor Srdoc, Chris Stockdale, Hannah Sullivan, Mathilde Timmermans, Joshua N. Winn
Figure caption: Same as Figure 6, but for TOI-3321.
Paper: No Evidence for a Metallicity-dependent Enhancement of Distant Giant Companions to Close-in Small Planets in the California Legacy Survey
Authors: Judah Van Zandt, Erik A. Petigura
Figure caption: Measurements of field (blue) and conditional (orange) occurrence of distant giants in metal-rich subsets of the M. L. Bryan & E. J. Lee (2024) and L. J. Rosenthal et al. (2021) samples. BL24 found that distant giants are about twice as prevalent in the presence of close-in small planets as the field rate they measured from the R21 sample (far left). We measured both the conditional and field rates using the R21 sample and four different sets of definitions for close-in small planets and distant giants. The “Default” definition matches BL24: the inner planets satisfy ﹩1\leqslant M\sin i\leqslant 20\,{M}_{\oplus }﹩ and the distant giants satisfy ﹩0.5\leqslant M\sin i\leqslant 20\,{M}_{{\rm{J}}}﹩ and 1 ≤ a ≤ 10 au. The “Small DG” definition used a 90 M ⊕ floor for distant giants. The “Big CS, Small DG” definition used a 30 M ⊕ ceiling for inner planets and a 90 M ⊕ floor for distant giants. Finally, our “Small CS, Small DG” definition used a 10 M ⊕ ceiling for inner planets and a 90 M ⊕ floor for distant giants. We annotate each distribution with the planet sample used to calculate it and include the CS and DG definitions on the x-axis. Horizontal dotted lines denote distribution quartiles. We use black solid lines to indicate the 95% confidence interval of a 2x enhancement over each field occurrence rate and label the upper line with the percentage of each conditional occurrence distribution that falls within it. BL24's conditional occurrence distribution is fully consistent with a 2x enhancement, whereas only 6% of our Default distribution overlaps this interval. Expanding our definitions of inner planets and distant giants increases the conditional rate because a significant fraction of the giant planets in the R21 sample have masses below 0.5 M J.
Paper: No Evidence for a Metallicity-dependent Enhancement of Distant Giant Companions to Close-in Small Planets in the California Legacy Survey
Authors: Judah Van Zandt, Erik A. Petigura
Figure caption: The companions in the sample M. L. Bryan & E. J. Lee (2024) (yellow) and the FGK subsample of L. J. Rosenthal et al. (2021) (blue). BL24 has companions between ∼1 M ⊕ and 20 M J, and R21 includes companions from a few M ⊕ up to 80 M J. The legend gives the number of companions in each sample in parentheses. We show BL24's definitions of close-in small (CS) and distant giant (DG) planets with black dashed boxes. We use blue diamonds to highlight HD 75732, the only system in the metal-rich R21 sample with planets satisfying both of these definitions. We use filled black circles to show six planets in the BL24 sample without measured masses. We estimate their masses using the mass–radius relationship of L. M. Weiss & G. W. Marcy (2014). The distributions of giant plants are similar among the two samples. They also have comparable inner planet distributions, though BL24 contains many more such planets due to its selection function. This latter similarity makes it unlikely that a dependence of giant occurrence on inner planet properties, if such a dependence exists, affected our comparison.
Paper: JWST COMPASS: The 3–5 μm Transmission Spectrum of the Super-Earth L 98-59 c
Authors: Nicholas Scarsdale, Nicholas Wogan, Hannah R. Wakeford, Nicole L. Wallack, Natasha E. Batalha, Lili Alderson, Artyom Aguichine, Angie Wolfgang, Johanna Teske, Sarah E. Moran, Mercedes López-Morales, James Kirk, Tyler Gordon, Peter Gao, Natalie M. Batalha, Munazza K. Alam, Jea Adams Redai
Figure caption: The feature detection significance for visit 1, visit 2, and the combined spectrum from our Eureka! reduction. All panels show the JWST data (black dots) along with the 1σ (dark blue) and 3σ (light blue) posterior distributions from simple Bayesian modeling. Panels (a), (b), and (c) show fits with a Gaussian model representing an arbitrary molecular feature. Panels (d), (e), and (f) consider a Gaussian model but also allow for a vertical offset between the NRS1 (λ < 3.78 μm) and NRS2 (λ > 3.78 μm) detectors. Panels (g), (h), and (i) fix the mean of the Gaussian curve to the 4.4 μm CO2 feature, again allowing for an offset between NRS1 and NRS2. Each panel reports a “feature detection Bayes factor,” which we derive by comparing the Gaussian results to featureless Bayesian models (see the main text for details). Overall, this analysis does not strongly detect a feature in any data set.
Paper: JWST COMPASS: The 3–5 μm Transmission Spectrum of the Super-Earth L 98-59 c
Authors: Nicholas Scarsdale, Nicholas Wogan, Hannah R. Wakeford, Nicole L. Wallack, Natasha E. Batalha, Lili Alderson, Artyom Aguichine, Angie Wolfgang, Johanna Teske, Sarah E. Moran, Mercedes López-Morales, James Kirk, Tyler Gordon, Peter Gao, Natalie M. Batalha, Munazza K. Alam, Jea Adams Redai
Figure caption: The white-light light-curve Allan deviation plots for each detector and visit from the Eureka! (top) and ExoTiC-JEDI (bottom) reductions. Idealized (i.e., purely Gaussian) noise would fall along the black line in each plot; each detector instead has some amount of red noise, probably due to instrumental systematics that are unaccounted for by our model.
Paper: JWST COMPASS: The 3–5 μm Transmission Spectrum of the Super-Earth L 98-59 c
Authors: Nicholas Scarsdale, Nicholas Wogan, Hannah R. Wakeford, Nicole L. Wallack, Natasha E. Batalha, Lili Alderson, Artyom Aguichine, Angie Wolfgang, Johanna Teske, Sarah E. Moran, Mercedes López-Morales, James Kirk, Tyler Gordon, Peter Gao, Natalie M. Batalha, Munazza K. Alam, Jea Adams Redai
Figure caption: Left column: the L 98-59 c white-light light curves from each reduction, visit, and detector. Our best-fit models, including systematics, are overplotted on the data in black. Right column: the residuals from the models.
Paper: JWST COMPASS: The 3–5 μm Transmission Spectrum of the Super-Earth L 98-59 c
Authors: Nicholas Scarsdale, Nicholas Wogan, Hannah R. Wakeford, Nicole L. Wallack, Natasha E. Batalha, Lili Alderson, Artyom Aguichine, Angie Wolfgang, Johanna Teske, Sarah E. Moran, Mercedes López-Morales, James Kirk, Tyler Gordon, Peter Gao, Natalie M. Batalha, Munazza K. Alam, Jea Adams Redai
Figure caption: Top: similar to Figure 4, but we plot instead the combined spectra from each reduction. For Eureka!, we have combined the spectra by performing a joint transit fit to the two visits simultaneously; for ExoTiC-JEDI, we have created an error-weighted average of the spectra from each of the two visits. Bottom: the difference between the reductions. In this case, several nonedge points become inconsistent at the 1σ level, but, as we show in Table 4, these small differences do not significantly affect our interpretation of the results.
Paper: JWST COMPASS: The 3–5 μm Transmission Spectrum of the Super-Earth L 98-59 c
Authors: Nicholas Scarsdale, Nicholas Wogan, Hannah R. Wakeford, Nicole L. Wallack, Natasha E. Batalha, Lili Alderson, Artyom Aguichine, Angie Wolfgang, Johanna Teske, Sarah E. Moran, Mercedes López-Morales, James Kirk, Tyler Gordon, Peter Gao, Natalie M. Batalha, Munazza K. Alam, Jea Adams Redai
Figure caption: Top: the raw (no offsets applied) transmission spectrum for the Eureka! (left) and ExoTiC-JEDI (right) reductions of L 98-59 c. For each reduction, we show the two visits together. Bottom: the difference between the reductions expressed relative to the pointwise error. The visits are broadly consistent with each other for both reductions, though a handful of points fall outside of 2σ consistency. The median difference between visits is 4 ppm and 13 ppm for Eureka! and ExoTiC-JEDI, respectively.
Paper: JWST COMPASS: The 3–5 μm Transmission Spectrum of the Super-Earth L 98-59 c
Authors: Nicholas Scarsdale, Nicholas Wogan, Hannah R. Wakeford, Nicole L. Wallack, Natasha E. Batalha, Lili Alderson, Artyom Aguichine, Angie Wolfgang, Johanna Teske, Sarah E. Moran, Mercedes López-Morales, James Kirk, Tyler Gordon, Peter Gao, Natalie M. Batalha, Munazza K. Alam, Jea Adams Redai
Figure caption: The posteriors from the white-light light-curve fitting to the Eureka! reductions of the transits of L 98-59 c, alongside the best-fit values from ExoTiC-JEDI. Note that the behavior of the inclination and a/R * are discrepant between NRS1 and NRS2, as well as between visits, which is probably unphysical.
Paper: JWST COMPASS: The 3–5 μm Transmission Spectrum of the Super-Earth L 98-59 c
Authors: Nicholas Scarsdale, Nicholas Wogan, Hannah R. Wakeford, Nicole L. Wallack, Natasha E. Batalha, Lili Alderson, Artyom Aguichine, Angie Wolfgang, Johanna Teske, Sarah E. Moran, Mercedes López-Morales, James Kirk, Tyler Gordon, Peter Gao, Natalie M. Batalha, Munazza K. Alam, Jea Adams Redai
Figure caption: Observed transit depth error by wavelength bin for our two reductions are shown compared to pandexo predictions. Eureka! exceeds the pandexo prediction by a median factor of 1.3 (range 1.1–1.6), and ExoTiC-JEDI by a median factor of 1.3 (range 1.1–2.8).
Paper: JWST COMPASS: The 3–5 μm Transmission Spectrum of the Super-Earth L 98-59 c
Authors: Nicholas Scarsdale, Nicholas Wogan, Hannah R. Wakeford, Nicole L. Wallack, Natasha E. Batalha, Lili Alderson, Artyom Aguichine, Angie Wolfgang, Johanna Teske, Sarah E. Moran, Mercedes López-Morales, James Kirk, Tyler Gordon, Peter Gao, Natalie M. Batalha, Munazza K. Alam, Jea Adams Redai
Figure caption: The compatibility of the combined Eureka! spectrum with a wide range of atmospheric compositions and opaque pressure levels. Colored contours show the σ-confidence to which each model can be ruled out by the data. Model spectra permit an offset between the NRS1 and NRS2 detectors as to best fit the data. Panel (a) considers a grid of atmospheres with compositions between 1× and 1000× solar. Panel (b) explores H2–CO2 atmospheres, while panel (c) concerns H2–H2O atmospheres. For an opaque pressure level of 1 bar, the data confidently (>3σ) rules out atmospheres with mean molecular weights ≲10 g mol−1 in all cases. Smaller mean molecular weights are allowed by the data for lower opaque pressure levels (e.g., 10−4 bar).
Paper: JWST COMPASS: The 3–5 μm Transmission Spectrum of the Super-Earth L 98-59 c
Authors: Nicholas Scarsdale, Nicholas Wogan, Hannah R. Wakeford, Nicole L. Wallack, Natasha E. Batalha, Lili Alderson, Artyom Aguichine, Angie Wolfgang, Johanna Teske, Sarah E. Moran, Mercedes López-Morales, James Kirk, Tyler Gordon, Peter Gao, Natalie M. Batalha, Munazza K. Alam, Jea Adams Redai
Figure caption: The combined Eureka! spectrum (black dots) compared with models. Zero transit depth is defined by the median of the Eureka! data. The ﹩{\chi }_{r}^{2}﹩ and σ values in the legend are from fits that permit an offset between the NRS1 and NRS2 detectors. The data strongly rule out (8.2σ) a hydrogen-dominated atmosphere with 100× solar composition, and also disfavors (2.8σ) a clear CH4 atmosphere. The data are consistent with high-mean-molecular-weight atmospheres such as those with a 1000× solar, CO2-rich, or H2O-rich composition.
Paper: JWST COMPASS: The 3–5 μm Transmission Spectrum of the Super-Earth L 98-59 c
Authors: Nicholas Scarsdale, Nicholas Wogan, Hannah R. Wakeford, Nicole L. Wallack, Natasha E. Batalha, Lili Alderson, Artyom Aguichine, Angie Wolfgang, Johanna Teske, Sarah E. Moran, Mercedes López-Morales, James Kirk, Tyler Gordon, Peter Gao, Natalie M. Batalha, Munazza K. Alam, Jea Adams Redai
Figure caption: A mass–radius diagram of small exoplanets, colored by bulk water mass fraction (left) and bulk H2/He mass fraction (right). We highlight L 98-59 c, the subject of this study, as well as its outer companion L 98-59 d, which is included in the COMPASS statistical sample, as diamond points. Other planets with mass and radius precision better than 20% and 5%, respectively, are shown as circles. Our composition models are drawn from L. Zeng et al. (2016) for the Earth-like, pure-mantle, and 50% liquid-water compositions; from A. Aguichine et al. (2021) for the 2%–20% steam compositions; and from E. D. Lopez & J. J. Fortney (2014) for the 0.01%–0.2% H2–He compositions (assuming a 5 Gyr age and T eq = 500 K). For each planet, we determine the bulk volatile content using the method described in the text.
Paper: JWST COMPASS: The 3–5 μm Transmission Spectrum of the Super-Earth L 98-59 c
Authors: Nicholas Scarsdale, Nicholas Wogan, Hannah R. Wakeford, Nicole L. Wallack, Natasha E. Batalha, Lili Alderson, Artyom Aguichine, Angie Wolfgang, Johanna Teske, Sarah E. Moran, Mercedes López-Morales, James Kirk, Tyler Gordon, Peter Gao, Natalie M. Batalha, Munazza K. Alam, Jea Adams Redai
Figure caption: Predicted dayside thermal emission from L 98-59 c. Panel (a) shows computed dayside P–T profiles for three possible atmospheric compositions: 100 bars of CO2 (blue), 0.01 bars of CO2 (orange), and 1 bar of steam (purple). Panel (b) gives the dayside planet-to-star flux ratio of each atmosphere compared to a bare rock with a 0.1 Bond albedo (black). Each scenario in (b) includes synthetic JWST/MIRI eclipse measurements at 15 μm with expected 30 ppm uncertainty. If L 98-59 c has a CO2 atmosphere exceeding ∼0.01 bars or a steam atmosphere ≳1 bar, then a 15 μm MIRI thermal emission observation will rule out a bare-rock scenario to ≳3σ confidence.
Paper: JWST COMPASS: The 3–5 μm Transmission Spectrum of the Super-Earth L 98-59 c
Authors: Nicholas Scarsdale, Nicholas Wogan, Hannah R. Wakeford, Nicole L. Wallack, Natasha E. Batalha, Lili Alderson, Artyom Aguichine, Angie Wolfgang, Johanna Teske, Sarah E. Moran, Mercedes López-Morales, James Kirk, Tyler Gordon, Peter Gao, Natalie M. Batalha, Munazza K. Alam, Jea Adams Redai
Figure caption: Left column: the L 98-59 c white-light light curves from Eureka! for each detector and visit. The best-fit models with a/R * and inclination fixed to the values from O. D. S. Demangeon et al. (2021), including systematics, are overplotted on the data. Right column: the residuals from the best-fit models. Unlike the fits where only inclination is fixed, the residuals display clear spike-like structure near ingress and egress, suggesting these values are not a good fit to our data.
Paper: JWST COMPASS: The 3–5 μm Transmission Spectrum of the Super-Earth L 98-59 c
Authors: Nicholas Scarsdale, Nicholas Wogan, Hannah R. Wakeford, Nicole L. Wallack, Natasha E. Batalha, Lili Alderson, Artyom Aguichine, Angie Wolfgang, Johanna Teske, Sarah E. Moran, Mercedes López-Morales, James Kirk, Tyler Gordon, Peter Gao, Natalie M. Batalha, Munazza K. Alam, Jea Adams Redai
Figure caption: The Eureka! spectrum resulting from the second visit of L 98-59 c depending on whether the inclination is fixed or free.