Paper detail

How do Most Planets Form? -- Constraints on Disk Instability from Direct Imaging

Core accretion and disk instability have traditionally been regarded as the two competing possible paths of planet formation. In recent years, evidence have accumulated in favor of core accretion as the dominant mode, at least for close-in planets. However, it might be hypothesized that a significant population of wide planets formed by disk instabilities could exist at large separations, forming an invisible majority. In previous work, we addressed this issue through a direct imaging survey of B2--A0-type stars, and concluded that <30% of such stars form and retain planets and brown dwarfs through disk instability, leaving core accretion as the likely dominant mechanism. In this paper, we extend this analysis to FGKM-type stars by applying a similar analysis to the Gemini Deep Planet Survey (GDPS) sample. The results strengthen the conclusion that substellar companions formed and retained around their parent stars by disk instabilities are rare. Specifically, we find that the frequency of such companions is <8% for FGKM-type stars under our most conservative assumptions, for an outer disk radius of 300 AU, at 99% confidence. Furthermore, we find that the frequency is always <10% at 99% confidence independently of outer disk radius, for any radius from 5 to 500 AU. We also simulate migration at a wide range of rates, and find that the conclusions hold even if the companions move substantially after formation. Hence, core accretion remains the likely dominant formation mechanism for the total planet population, for every type of star from M-type through B-type.

preprint2011arXivOpen 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.