Paper detail

Continuous Habitable Zones: Using Bayesian Methods to Prioritize Characterization of Potentially Habitable Worlds

The number of potentially habitable planets continues to increase, but we lack the time and resources to characterize all of them. With $\sim$30 known potentially habitable planets and an ever-growing number of candidate and confirmed planets, a robust statistical framework for prioritizing characterization of these planets is desirable. Using the $\sim$2 Gy it took life on Earth to make a detectable impact on the atmosphere as a benchmark, we use a Bayesian statistical method to determine the probability that a given radius around a star has been continuously habitable for 2 Gy. We perform this analysis on 9 potentially habitable exoplanets with planetary radii $<$1.8 R$_\oplus$ and/or planetary masses $<$10 M$_\oplus$ around 9 low-mass host stars ($\sim$0.5-1.1 M$_\odot$) with measured stellar mass and metallicity, as well as Venus, Earth, and Mars. Ages for the host stars are generated by the analysis. The technique is also used to provide age estimates for 2768 low-mass stars (0.5-1.3 M$_\odot$) in the TESS Continuous Viewing Zones.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.