Paper detail

Signatures of the Core-Powered Mass-Loss Mechanism in the Exoplanet Population: Dependence on Stellar Properties and Observational Predictions

Recent studies have shown that atmospheric mass-loss powered by the cooling luminosity of a planet's core can explain the observed radius valley separating super-Earths and sub-Neptunes, even without photoevaporation. In this work, we investigate the dependence of this core-powered mass-loss mechanism on stellar mass ($M_\ast$), metallicity ($Z_\ast$) and age ($τ_\ast$). Without making any changes to the underlying planet population, we find that the core-powered mass-loss model yields a shift in the radius valley to larger planet sizes around more massive stars with a slope given by $\text{d log}R_p/\text{d log}M_\ast \simeq 0.35$, in agreement with observations. To first order, this slope is driven by the dependence of core-powered mass-loss on the bolometric luminosity of the host star and is given by $\text{d log}R_p/\text{d log}M_\ast \simeq (3α-2)/36 \simeq 0.33$, where $(L_\ast/L_\odot) = (M_\ast/M_\odot)^α$ is the stellar mass-luminosity relation and $α\simeq 4.6$ for the CKS dataset. We therefore find, in contrast to photoevaporation models, no evidence for a linear correlation between planet and stellar mass, but can't rule it out either. In addition, we show that the location of the radius valley is, to first order, independent of stellar age and metallicity. Since core-powered mass-loss proceeds over Gyr timescales, the abundance of super-Earths relative to sub-Neptunes increases with age but decreases with stellar metallicity. Finally, due the dependence of the envelope's cooling timescale on metallicity, we find that the radii of sub-Neptunes increase with metallicity and decrease with age with slopes given by $\text{d log}R_p/\text{d log}Z_\ast \simeq 0.1$ and $\text{d log}R_p/\text{d log}τ_\ast \simeq -0.1$, respectively. We conclude with a series of observational tests that can differentiate between core-powered mass-loss and photoevaporation models.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.