WASP-107b’s Density Is Even Lower: A Case Study for the Physics of Planetary Gas Envelope Accretion and Orbital Migration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract With a mass in the Neptune regime and a radius of Jupiter, WASP-107b presents a challenge to planet formation theories. Meanwhile, the planet’s low surface gravity and the star’s brightness also make it one of the most favorable targets for atmospheric characterization. Here, we present the results of an extensive 4 yr Keck/HIRES radial-velocity (RV) follow-up program of the WASP-107 system and provide a detailed study of the physics governing the accretion of the gas envelope of WASP-107b. We reveal that WASP-107b’s mass is only 1.8 Neptune masses (M b = 30.5 ± 1.7 M ⊕). The resulting extraordinarily low density suggests that WASP-107b has a H/He envelope mass fraction of >85% unless it is substantially inflated. The corresponding core mass of <4.6 M ⊕ at 3σ is significantly lower than what is traditionally assumed to be necessary to trigger massive gas envelope accretion. We demonstrate that this large gas-to-core mass ratio most plausibly results from the onset of accretion at ≳1 au onto a low-opacity, dust-free atmosphere and subsequent migration to the present-day a b = 0.0566 ± 0.0017 au. Beyond WASP-107b, we also detect a second, more massive planet ( ) on a wide eccentric orbit (e c = 0.28 ± 0.07) that may have influenced the orbital migration and spin–orbit misalignment of WASP-107b. Overall, our new RV observations and envelope accretion modeling provide crucial insights into the intriguing nature of WASP-107b and the system’s formation history. Looking ahead, WASP-107b will be a keystone planet to understand the physics of gas envelope accretion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".