English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We search for evidence of the cause of the exoplanet radius gap, i.e. thedearth of planets with radii near $1.8\ R_\oplus$. If the cause wasphotoevaporation, the radius gap should trend with proxies for the early-lifehigh-energy emission of planet-hosting stars. If, alternatively, the cause wascore-powered mass loss, no such trends should exist. Critically, spurioustrends between the radius gap and stellar properties arise from an underlyingcorrelation with instellation. After accounting for this underlyingcorrelation, we find no trends remain between the radius gap and stellar massor present-day stellar activity as measured by near-UV emission. We dismiss thenondetection of a radius gap trend with near-UV emission because present-daynear-UV emission is unlikely to trace early-life high-energy emission, but weprovide a catalog of GALEX near-UV and far-UV emission measurements for generaluse. We interpret the nondetection of a radius gap trend with stellar mass bysimulating photoevaporation with mass-dependent evolution of stellarhigh-energy emission. The simulation produces an undetectable trend between theradius gap and stellar mass under realistic sources of error. We conclude thatno evidence, from this analysis or others in the literature, currently existsthat clearly favors either photoevaporation or core powered mass loss as theprimary cause of the exoplanet radius gap. However, repeating this analysisonce the body of well-characterized $< 4\ R_\oplus$ planets has roughly doubledcould confirm or rule out photoevaporation.

Current Population Statistics Do Not Favor Photoevaporation over Core-Powered Mass Loss as the Dominant Cause of the Exoplanet Radius Gap