MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392589705 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu24-801

No Venus-like atmosphere on TRAPPIST-1 c: confirmation from 3D climate modelling

2024· preprint· en· W4392589705 on OpenAlexaff
Diogo Quirino, Gabriella Gilli, Martin Turbet, Thomas J. Fauchez, T. Navarro, Pedro Machado

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVenusAtmosphere (unit)Atmosphere of VenusAstrobiologyAtmospheric sciencesEnvironmental sciencePhysicsMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent measurements of the dayside thermal emission of exoplanets TRAPPIST-1b [1] and TRAPPIST-1c [2] were made by the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) Mid-Infrared Instrument (MIRI) F1500W filter which covers the 15-µm carbon dioxide (CO2) absorption. These photometric secondary-eclipse observations determined the dayside brightness temperature and constrained the magnitude of heat redistribution. For TRAPPIST-1c, which has a Venus-like stellar irradiation, the estimated eclipse depth is 421±94 ppm, corresponding to a dayside brightness temperature of 380±31 K, superior to Venus's equilibrium temperature. Two scenarios stem from the inferred brightness temperature: a moderate heat redistribution or an airless, non-zero bond albedo surface. The observations rendered thick, CO2-enriched atmospheres unlikely for TRAPPIST-1c, excluding a cloudy (sulphuric acid aerosols) and a clear-sky Venus-like atmosphere at a confidence of 2.6σ and 3.0σ, respectively [2].New JWST observations (Cycle 2 GO Programme 3077) [3] will obtain thermal emission phase curve measurements for most of TRAPPIST-1c’s orbit (P = 58-hours), identifying the day-night temperature contrast. These will be sensitive to test the case of a moderate heat redistribution [4-8], eventually distinguishing it from spectral features from a rocky surface or those from an airless planet [9]. This research is crucial given that CO2–dominated atmospheres were predicted as a likely outcome of atmospheric evolution on rocky planets orbiting cooler and less massive stars (M-dwarf stars) than our Sun [10]. Owing to the CO2 high molecular weight and efficient cooling in the infrared, CO2-rich atmospheres have extremely cold thermospheres and less expanded upper atmospheres; both can improve resilience to atmospheric escape processes, offering partial protection against M-dwarf lifelong stellar activity [10]. Investigating the status of a possible atmosphere on TRAPPIST-1c is critical to understanding atmospheric evolution on M-dwarf planets.Here, we use a 3D global circulation model of the atmosphere, the Generic-PCM [8,11-13], to simulate a modern Venus-like atmosphere on TRAPPIST-1c: CO2-dominated, 92-bar surface pressure with radiatively-active global cover of sulphuric acid aerosols [13]. We also assumed a tidally-locked planet with zero obliquity and eccentricity. We use these simulations to generate high spectral resolution thermal phase curves for three JWST/MIRI filters: F1280W, F1500W and F1800W. We analyse the relationship between phase curve parameters (hot spot offset and amplitude), temperature and large-scale circulation. We find large eastward offsets and small amplitudes compatible with an efficient day-night heat redistribution driven by a superrotating equatorial jet. In addition, we predict a smaller hot spot offset for F1500W due to upper atmosphere CO2 absorption. These results highlight the possibility of studying at least two different atmospheric levels. The absence of a large hot spot offset on TRAPPIST-1c would rule out a dense, CO2-rich, absorbing atmosphere on the planet. These results can be expanded to the ever-growing population of rocky exoplanets with Venus-like stellar irradiations to be studied in the following decades [14].References: [1]Greene+2023.Nature.618; [2]Zieba+2023.Nature.620; [3]Gillon+2023.JWST Proposal 3077; [4]Selsis+2011.A&A.532; [5]Demory+2016.Nature.532; [6]Koll+2016.ApJ.825; [7]Kreidberg+2019.Nature.573; [8]Turbet+2016.A&A.596.A112; [9]Whittaker+2022.AJ.164; [10]Turbet+2020.Space Sci. Rev.216; [11]Forget & Leconte, 2014.Phil.Trans R.Soc.A372; [12]Wordsworth+2011.ApJL.733.L48; [13]Quirino+2023.MNRASL.523.L86; [14]Ostberg+2023.AJ.165.Funding: This work was supported by Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) through the research grant 2023.05220.BD.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207