CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 398Astro and Planetary ScienceStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies

SPECTRAL AND PHOTOMETRIC DIAGNOSTICS OF GIANT PLANET FORMATION SCENARIOS

Open access
Spiegel, David S., Burrows, Adam·2012·The Astrophysical Journal
DOI 10.1088/0004-637x/745/2/174
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Gas-giant planets that form via core accretion might have very different characteristics from those that form via disk instability. Disk-instability objects are typically thought to have higher entropies, larger radii, and (generally) higher effective temperatures than core-accretion objects. In this paper, we provide a large set of models exploring the observational consequences of high-entropy (hot) and low-entropy (cold) initial conditions, in the hope that this will ultimately help to distinguish between different physical mechanisms of planet formation. However, the exact entropies and radii of newly formed planets due to these two modes of formation cannot, at present, be precisely predicted. It is possible that the distribution of properties of core-accretion-formed planets and the distribution of properties of disk-instability-formed planets overlap. We, therefore, introduce a broad range of "warm-start" gas-giant planet models. Between the hottest and the coldest models that we consider, differences in radii, temperatures, luminosities, and spectra persist for only a few million to a few tens of millions of years for planets that are a few times Jupiter's mass or less. For planets that are ∼five times Jupiter's mass or more, significant differences between hottest-start and coldest-start models persist for on the order of 100 Myr. We find that out of the standard infrared bands ( J , H , K , L ', M , N ) the K and H bands are the most diagnostic of the initial conditions. A hottest-start model can be from ∼4.5 mag brighter (at Jupiter's mass) to ∼9 mag brighter (at 10 times Jupiter's mass) than a coldest-start model in the first few million years. In more massive objects, these large differences in luminosity and spectrum persist for much longer than in less massive objects. Finally, we consider the influence of atmospheric conditions on spectra, and find that the presence or absence of clouds, and the metallicity of an atmosphere, can affect an object's apparent brightness in different bands by up to several magnitudes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/0004-637x/745/2/174

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Disk migration naturally delivers the hot Jupiter close to its star before it cools on a ~10 Myr timescale.

    “Disk migration-which by definition occurs early in the planet's lifetimenaturally delivers the hot Jupiter close to its star before it cools on a ∼ 10 Myr timescale (e.g., Spiegel & Burrows 2012, Wu & Lithwick 2013).”

    From Origins of Hot Jupiters (2018) · cites this paper as Spiegel & Burrows 2012

    Section 3 (Evolutionary Cooling; page unavailable) describes rapid early cooling, while Section 5.1 says the K-band brightness difference between hot- and cold-start models at Jupiter's mass falls below one magnitude by about 10 Myr. Neither passage establishes that disk migration delivers a hot Jupiter close to its star before it cools; a search for migration found no supporting passage. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 70

  1. Baraffe, I., Chabrier, G., Allard, F., & Hauschildt, P. H. 2002, A&A, 382, 563 · DOI
  2. Beuzit, J.-L., Feldt, M., Dohlen, K., et al. 2008, Proc. SPIE, 7014, 701418-12 · DOI
  3. Boss, A. P. 2000, ApJ, 536, L101 · DOI
  4. Boss, A. P. 2007, ApJ, 661, L73 · DOI
  5. Boss, A. P. 2010, ApJ, 725, L145 · DOI
  6. Bowler, B. P., Liu, M. C., Dupuy, T. J., & Cushing, M. C. 2010, ApJ, 723, 850 · DOI
  7. Bromley, B. C., & Kenyon, S. J. 2011, ApJ, 731, 101 · DOI
  8. Burrows, A., Guillot, T., Hubbard, W. B., et al. 2000, ApJ, 534, L97 · DOI
  9. Burrows, A., Heng, K., & Nampaisarn, T. 2011, ApJ, 736, 47 · DOI
  10. Burrows, A., Hubbard, W. B., Lunine, J. I., & Liebert, J. 2001, Rev. Mod. Phys., 73, 719 · DOI
  11. Burrows, A., Hubeny, I., Budaj, J., & Hubbard, W. B. 2007, ApJ, 661, 502 · DOI
  12. Burrows, A., Marley, M., Hubbard, W. B., et al. 1997, ApJ, 491, 856 · DOI
  13. Burrows, A., Sudarsky, D., & Hubeny, I. 2006, ApJ, 650, 1140 · DOI
  14. Chabrier, G., & Baraffe, I. 2000, ARA&A, 38, 337 · DOI
  15. Chabrier, G., Baraffe, I., Allard, F., & Hauschildt, P. H. 2005, arXiv: astro-ph/0509798 · arXiv
  16. Crepp, J. R., & Johnson, J. A. 2011, ApJ, 733, 126 · DOI
  17. Currie, T., Burrows, A., Itoh, Y., et al. 2011, ApJ, 729, 128 · DOI
  18. Dodson-Robinson, S. E., Veras, D., Ford, E. B., & Beichman, C. A. 2009, ApJ, 707, 79 · DOI
  19. Fabrycky, D. C., & Murray-Clay, R. A. 2010, ApJ, 710, 1408 · DOI
  20. Fischer, D. A., & Valenti, J. 2005, ApJ, 622, 1102 · DOI
  21. Fortney, J. J., Marley, M. S., Hubickyj, O., Bodenheimer, P., & Lissauer, J. J. 2005, Astron. Nachr., 326, 925 · DOI
  22. Fortney, J. J., Marley, M. S., Saumon, D., & Lodders, K. 2008, ApJ, 683, 1104 · DOI
  23. Guillot, T., Santos, N. C., Pont, F., et al. 2006, A&A, 453, L21 · DOI
  24. Harris, A. W. 1978, in Lunar and Planetary Institute Technical Report, Vol. 9, Lunar and Planetary Institute Science Conference Abstracts, 459
  25. Hinkley, S., Oppenheimer, B. R., Brenner, D., et al. 2008, Proc. SPIE, 7015, 701519-10 · DOI
  26. Hinkley, S., Oppenheimer, B. R., Zimmerman, N., et al. 2011, PASP, 123, 74 · DOI
  27. Hubeny, I., Burrows, A., & Sudarsky, D. 2003, ApJ, 594, 1011 · DOI
  28. Hubickyj, O., Bodenheimer, P., & Lissauer, J. J. 2005, Icarus, 179, 415 · DOI
  29. Ibgui, L., Burrows, A., & Spiegel, D. S. 2010, ApJ, 713, 751 · DOI
  30. Ikoma, M., Emori, H., & Nakazawa, K. 2001, ApJ, 553, 999 · DOI
  31. Ikoma, M., Nakazawa, K., & Emori, H. 2000, ApJ, 537, 1013 · DOI
  32. Janson, M., Bergfors, C., Goto, M., Brandner, W., & Lafrenière, D. 2010, ApJ, 710, L35 · DOI
  33. Janson, M., Bonavita, M., Klahr, H., et al. 2011a, ApJ, 736, 89 · DOI
  34. Janson, M., Carson, J., Thalmann, C., et al. 2011b, ApJ, 728, 85 · DOI
  35. Joergens, V. 2008, A&A, 492, 545 · DOI
  36. Johnson, J. A., Aller, K. M., Howard, A. W., & Crepp, J. R. 2010, PASP, 122, 905 · DOI · Paper page
  37. Konopacky, Q. M., Ghez, A. M., Barman, T. S., et al. 2010, ApJ, 711, 1087 · DOI
  38. Kratter, K. M., Murray-Clay, R. A., & Youdin, A. N. 2010, ApJ, 710, 1375 · DOI
  39. Kuiper, G. P. 1951, Proc. Natl Acad. Sci., 37, 1 · DOI
  40. Lagrange, A., Bonnefoy, M., Chauvin, G., et al. 2010, Science, 329, 57 · DOI
  41. Leconte, J., Baraffe, I., Chabrier, G., Barman, T., & Levrard, B. 2009, A&A, 506, 385 · DOI
  42. Lissauer, J. J., Hubickyj, O., D'Angelo, G., & Bodenheimer, P. 2009, Icarus, 199, 338 · DOI
  43. Liu, M. C., Wahhaj, Z., Biller, B. A., et al. 2010, Proc. SPIE, 7736, 77361K-11
  44. Macintosh, B., Graham, J., Palmer, D., et al. 2006, Proc. SPIE, 6272, 62720N · DOI
  45. Madhusudhan, N., Burrows, A., & Currie, T. 2011, ApJ, 737, 34 · DOI
  46. Marley, M. S., Fortney, J. J., Hubickyj, O., Bodenheimer, P., & Lissauer, J. J. 2007, ApJ, 655, 541 · DOI
  47. Marois, C., Macintosh, B., Barman, T., et al. 2008, Science, 322, 1348 · DOI
  48. Marois, C., Zuckerman, B., Konopacky, Q. M., Macintosh, B., & Barman, T. 2010, Nature, 468, 1080 · DOI
  49. Mayer, L., Quinn, T., Wadsley, J., & Stadel, J. 2002, Science, 298, 1756 · DOI
  50. Mayer, L., Quinn, T., Wadsley, J., & Stadel, J. 2004, ApJ, 609, 1045 · DOI
  51. McBride, J., Graham, J. R., Macintosh, B., et al. 2011, PASP, 123, 692 · DOI
  52. McElwain, M. W., Metchev, S. A., Larkin, J. E., et al. 2007, ApJ, 656, 505 · DOI
  53. Mizuno, H. 1980, Prog. Theor. Phys., 64, 544 · DOI
  54. Mizuno, H., Nakazawa, K., & Hayashi, C. 1978, Prog. Theor. Phys., 60, 699 · DOI
  55. Mordasini, C., Alibert, Y., Klahr, H., & Benz, W. 2011, in Detection and Dynamics of Transiting Exoplanets, St. Michel l'Observatoire, France, ed. F. Bouchy, R. Díaz, & C. Moutou (EPJ Web of Conf., Vol. 11; Les Ulis: EDP), 4001
  56. Moro-Martín, A., Rieke, G. H., & Su, K. Y. L. 2010, ApJ, 721, L199 · DOI
  57. Movshovitz, N., Bodenheimer, P., Podolak, M., & Lissauer, J. J. 2010, Icarus, 209, 616 · DOI
  58. Moya, A., Amado, P. J., Barrado, D., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 405, L81 · DOI
  59. Neuhäuser, R., Mugrauer, M., Seifahrt, A., Schmidt, T. O. B., & Vogt, N. 2008, A&A, 484, 281 · DOI
  60. Pollack, J. B., Hubickyj, O., Bodenheimer, P., et al. 1996, Icarus, 124, 62 · DOI
  61. Quanz, S. P., Meyer, M. R., Kenworthy, M. A., et al. 2010, ApJ, 722, L49 · DOI
  62. Rafikov, R. R. 2007, ApJ, 662, 642 · DOI
  63. Rafikov, R. R. 2011, ApJ, 727, 86 · DOI
  64. Saumon, D., Chabrier, G., & van Horn, H. M. 1995, ApJS, 99, 713 · DOI
  65. Schneider, J., Dedieu, C., Le Sidaner, P., Savalle, R., & Zolotukhin, I. 2011, A&A, 532, A79 · DOI
  66. Spiegel, D. S., Burrows, A., & Milsom, J. A. 2011, ApJ, 727, 57 · DOI
  67. Stassun, K. G., Mathieu, R. D., & Valenti, J. A. 2006, Nature, 440, 311 · DOI
  68. Stassun, K. G., Mathieu, R. D., & Valenti, J. A. 2007, ApJ, 664, 1154 · DOI
  69. Tamura, M. 2009, in AIP Conf. Ser. 1158, Subaru Strategic Exploration of Exoplanets and Disks with HiCIAO/AO188 (SEEDS), ed. T. Usuda, M. Tamura, & M. Ishii (Melville, NY: AIP), 11
  70. Zuckerman, B., Rhee, J. H., Song, I., & Bessell, M. S. 2011, ApJ, 732, 61 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Spiegel, D. S., & Burrows, A.
Affiliations
Princeton University (US)
ORCID
Burrows, Adam
Venue
The Astrophysical Journal
Publisher
American Astronomical Society
Published
2012-01-16
Volume
745
Issue
2
Pages
174
ISSN
  • 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-4357
DOI
10.1088/0004-637x/745/2/174
OpenAlex
W2141693710
Cited by
398
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 44 · 2012: 21
FWCI
22.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Astrophysical Journal (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (0807444)
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NNX07AG80G)
  • Office of the Dean for Research, Princeton University
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astro and Planetary Science
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Keywords
giant planet formation, core accretion, disk instability, gas giant planets, planet radii, K-band, H-band, clouds, atmospheric metallicity, planetary atmospheres

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review