Most High-density Exoplanets Are Unlikely to Be Remnant Giant Planet's Cores

Abstract Some exoplanets have much higher densities than expected from stellar abundances of planet-forming elements. There are two theories—metal-rich formation hypothesis and naked core hypothesis—that explain how formation and evolution can alter the compositions and structures of rocky planets to diverge from their primordial building blocks. Here we revisit the naked core hypothesis, which states that high-density planets are remnant cores of giant planets that remain in a fossil-compressed state, even after envelope loss. Using a planetary interior model and assuming energy-limited atmospheric escape, we show that a large fraction, if not all, of the iron–silicate core of a giant planet is molten during the planet's early evolution. Upon envelope loss, the molten part of the planets can rapidly rebound owing to low viscosity, resulting in a decrease in radius by at most 0.06%, if they had hydrogen/helium envelopes, or by at most 7%, if they had H 2 O envelopes, compared to self-compressed counterparts with the same core mass fraction. Based on our findings, we reject the hypothesis that all high-density exoplanets are naked cores with Kolmogorov–Smirnov p -value ≪0.05 for both envelope compositions. We find that some high-density exoplanets can still possibly be naked cores, but the probabilities are lower than ∼1/2 and ∼1/3 for the ice giant and gas giant scenario, respectively, in 95% of the cases. We conclude that most high-density exoplanets are unlikely to be remnant giant planet cores.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
The Astrophysical Journal Letters
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ad86c3
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.46

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Most High-density Exoplanets Are Unlikely to Be Remnant Giant Planet's Cores

Saverio Cambioni, Sara Seager, Zifan Lin
3 citations
The Astrophysical Journal Letters
Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
3.46
article

Most High-density Exoplanets Are Unlikely to Be Remnant Giant Planet's Cores

Saverio Cambioni, Sara Seager, Zifan Lin
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Abstract Some exoplanets have much higher densities than expected from stellar abundances of planet-forming elements. There are two theories—metal-rich formation hypothesis and naked core hypothesis—that explain how formation and evolution can alter the compositions and structures of rocky planets to diverge from their primordial building blocks. Here we revisit the naked core hypothesis, which states that high-density planets are remnant cores of giant planets that remain in a fossil-compressed state, even after envelope loss. Using a planetary interior model and assuming energy-limited atmospheric escape, we show that a large fraction, if not all, of the iron–silicate core of a giant planet is molten during the planet's early evolution. Upon envelope loss, the molten part of the planets can rapidly rebound owing to low viscosity, resulting in a decrease in radius by at most 0.06%, if they had hydrogen/helium envelopes, or by at most 7%, if they had H 2 O envelopes, compared to self-compressed counterparts with the same core mass fraction. Based on our findings, we reject the hypothesis that all high-density exoplanets are naked cores with Kolmogorov–Smirnov p -value ≪0.05 for both envelope compositions. We find that some high-density exoplanets can still possibly be naked cores, but the probabilities are lower than ∼1/2 and ∼1/3 for the ice giant and gas giant scenario, respectively, in 95% of the cases. We conclude that most high-density exoplanets are unlikely to be remnant giant planet cores.

The Astrophysical Journal LettersVol. 978(2)
National Science Foundation
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
3.46
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.