The New Generation Planetary Population Synthesis (NGPPS)

Context. Planetary population synthesis is a tool that is used to better understand the key processes of planet formation at the statistical level. Aims. We seek to quantify the fidelity with which modern population syntheses reproduce observations in view of their use as predictive tools. Methods. We compared synthetic populations from the Generation 3 Bern Model of Planet Formation and Evolution (core accretion, solar-type host stars) and the HARPS/Coralie radial velocity sample. We biased the synthetic planet population according to the completeness of the observed data. We then performed quantitative statistical comparisons and systematically identified agreements and differences. Results. Our nominal population reproduces many of the main features of the HARPS planets, such as two main groups of planets in the mass-distance diagram (close-in sub-Neptunes and distant giants), a bimodal mass function with a less populated ‘desert’, an observed mean multiplicity of about 1.6, and several key correlations regarding the stellar metallicity dependency, the period ratio distribution, and the eccentricity distribution. Considering that the model was not optimised beforehand to reproduce any particular survey, this indicates that some of the important physical processes governing planetary formation could be captured. The remaining discrepancies that can be quantified thanks to the population synthesis approach point to areas that are not fully captured in the model. For instance, we find that the synthetic population has (1) in absolute terms too many planets by ≈70%, (2) a ‘desert’ that is too deep by ≈60%, (3) a relative excess of giant planets by ≈40%, (4) planet eccentricities that are on average too low by a factor of about two (median of 0.07 versus 0.15), and (5) a metallicity effect that is too weak. Finally, the synthetic planets are overall too close to the star compared to the HARPS sample. The differences allowed us to find model parameters that better reproduce the observed planet masses, for which we computed additional synthetic populations. We find that decreasing the planet formation efficiency by increasing the planetesimal size re-balances the number of sub-Neptunes versus giant planets. Changing the efficiency of gas-driven migration also affects the sub-Neptune to giant planet ratio, with lower migration rates resulting in more giant planets and fewer sub-Neptunes. Conclusions. However, only modifying the model parameters seems to be insufficient for the model to fully reproduce both the observed mass and distance distributions at the same time. Instead, physical processes appear to be missing. Planets may originate on wider orbits than our model predicts. Mechanisms leading to higher eccentricities and slower disc-limited gas accretion also seem necessary. We also advocate that theoretical models should make a quantitative, rather than merely a qualitative, comparison between the many current and future large surveys and theoretical results to better understand the origins of planetary systems.

Publication Details

Journal
Springer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology)
Published
2025-09-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202452485/pdf
Primary Topic
Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The New Generation Planetary Population Synthesis (NGPPS)

Springer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology)
Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
article

The New Generation Planetary Population Synthesis (NGPPS)

article en

Abstract

Context. Planetary population synthesis is a tool that is used to better understand the key processes of planet formation at the statistical level. Aims. We seek to quantify the fidelity with which modern population syntheses reproduce observations in view of their use as predictive tools. Methods. We compared synthetic populations from the Generation 3 Bern Model of Planet Formation and Evolution (core accretion, solar-type host stars) and the HARPS/Coralie radial velocity sample. We biased the synthetic planet population according to the completeness of the observed data. We then performed quantitative statistical comparisons and systematically identified agreements and differences. Results. Our nominal population reproduces many of the main features of the HARPS planets, such as two main groups of planets in the mass-distance diagram (close-in sub-Neptunes and distant giants), a bimodal mass function with a less populated ‘desert’, an observed mean multiplicity of about 1.6, and several key correlations regarding the stellar metallicity dependency, the period ratio distribution, and the eccentricity distribution. Considering that the model was not optimised beforehand to reproduce any particular survey, this indicates that some of the important physical processes governing planetary formation could be captured. The remaining discrepancies that can be quantified thanks to the population synthesis approach point to areas that are not fully captured in the model. For instance, we find that the synthetic population has (1) in absolute terms too many planets by ≈70%, (2) a ‘desert’ that is too deep by ≈60%, (3) a relative excess of giant planets by ≈40%, (4) planet eccentricities that are on average too low by a factor of about two (median of 0.07 versus 0.15), and (5) a metallicity effect that is too weak. Finally, the synthetic planets are overall too close to the star compared to the HARPS sample. The differences allowed us to find model parameters that better reproduce the observed planet masses, for which we computed additional synthetic populations. We find that decreasing the planet formation efficiency by increasing the planetesimal size re-balances the number of sub-Neptunes versus giant planets. Changing the efficiency of gas-driven migration also affects the sub-Neptune to giant planet ratio, with lower migration rates resulting in more giant planets and fewer sub-Neptunes. Conclusions. However, only modifying the model parameters seems to be insufficient for the model to fully reproduce both the observed mass and distance distributions at the same time. Instead, physical processes appear to be missing. Planets may originate on wider orbits than our model predicts. Mechanisms leading to higher eccentricities and slower disc-limited gas accretion also seem necessary. We also advocate that theoretical models should make a quantitative, rather than merely a qualitative, comparison between the many current and future large surveys and theoretical results to better understand the origins of planetary systems.

Springer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology)
Openalex Percentile: Top 67%
Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
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.