The paper investigates whether tidal distortions in close-in giant exoplanets can be measured with JWST and the future Ariel mission, and identifies the planets with the best prospects. Tidal distortion changes a planet’s projected area over its orbit. Its magnitude is described by the radial fluid Love number, \(h_{2f}\), related to the potential Love number \(k_{2f}\) by \(h_{2f}=1+k_{2f}\). Because it depends on a planet’s internal density distribution, measuring \(h_{2f}\) could help distinguish between interior models that mass and radius alone cannot resolve. To identify promising targets, the authors introduce a deformation metric, \(D\), which combines the expected tidal deformation, orbital inclination, and estimated photometric signal-to-noise ratio. The signal-to-noise estimate accounts for factors such as thermal contrast, planet size, orbital period, and the host star’s K-band brightness. Applying the metric to Ariel’s list of 814 candidate targets, they find that the strongest candidates are generally inflated, highly irradiated planets on short-period orbits. Leading targets include WASP-121 b, WASP-33 b, WASP-76 b, WASP-12 b, WASP-19 b, and HAT-P-32 b. Since some already have published Love-number measurements, the authors highlight WASP-33 b, WASP-76 b, and HAT-P-32 b as especially attractive targets without such measurements. The ranking is intended as a relative guide rather than an instrument-specific forecast, and it assumes the same fiducial \(h_{2f}=1.5\) for every planet. The paper then uses WASP-76 b as a benchmark for simulated observations. The authors generate full-orbit phase curves that include planetary thermal emission, transit and occultation, changes in the projected area of a tidally deformed planet, and stellar ellipsoidal variation and Doppler beaming. Using published system and atmospheric parameters, they inject \(h_{2f}=1.5\) and simulate observations with JWST/NIRSpec and Ariel using instrument-specific noise estimates. Bayesian retrievals compare the recovery of the injected value from full phase curves and transit-only data, and assess how combining Ariel visits improves the constraints. Full-orbit coverage is substantially more informative than transit observations alone. The changing planetary area is observable throughout the orbit, helping to break degeneracies involving orbital geometry and planetary radius. For JWST, a joint retrieval using the two NIRSpec G395H detectors recovers \(h_{2f}\) near 1.49, with an uncertainty of about 0.09, or roughly 6%. Transit-only JWST retrievals are less precise: uncertainties are about 0.56–0.64 for individual detectors and fall to about 0.40 when the detectors are combined. For Ariel, one joint phase-curve visit yields an \(h_{2f}\) uncertainty of about 0.18, or approximately 12%; individual-channel uncertainties range from about 0.27 to 0.45. The corresponding precision on \(k_{2f}\) is estimated at about 36%, close to the paper’s cited threshold for useful interior constraints. Ariel transit-only results remain weak, with a joint-retrieval uncertainty of about 0.67. Combining three Ariel visits improves the joint \(h_{2f}\) uncertainty to about 0.15. Ten visits further tighten the individual-channel constraints and reduce a small median offset. The authors conclude that a single continuous phase curve could provide a time-efficient way to obtain interior-relevant Love-number constraints for particularly favourable planets.
Summary:
1. Some giant planets are stretched by the pull of nearby stars.
2. Measuring this stretching can help scientists learn what is inside a planet.
3. The James Webb Space Telescope and the future Ariel mission may be able to measure it.
4. Watching a planet change throughout its whole orbit works better than watching only when it passes in front of its star.
5. Planets such as WASP-76 b may be good choices for these observations.
Definitions:
- Giant planet: A very large planet, much bigger than Earth.
- Tidal stretching: A planet changing shape because a nearby star pulls on it.
- Orbit: The path a planet follows around a star.
- Ariel: A future space mission planned to study planets outside our Solar System.
- WASP-76 b: A giant planet that scientists think could be useful for studying tidal stretching.
Can JWST and Ariel Reveal the Hidden Interiors of Giant Exoplanets?
A planet’s mass and radius tell us a great deal—but not everything—about what lies beneath its atmosphere. Two giant planets with similar measured masses and sizes may have different internal structures, such as different distributions of heavy elements. A new study explores whether tidal distortions could offer another way to tell them apart, and which planets are the best candidates for observations with the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) and the future Ariel mission.
The central idea is to measure how a close-in giant planet changes shape as it orbits its star. With carefully planned observations across an entire orbit, astronomers may be able to use that changing shape to constrain the planet’s internal density structure.
What a tidal distortion can tell us
A close-in planet feels a stronger gravitational pull on the side facing its star than on the far side. This difference stretches the planet slightly, producing a tidal distortion. As the planet moves around its orbit, the angle from which we see that distorted shape changes, altering its projected area.
The response of a planet to this tidal force is described in part by the radial fluid Love number, \(h_{2f}\). It is related to the potential Love number, \(k_{2f}\), by
\(h_{2f}=1+k_{2f}\).
These Love numbers depend on how mass is distributed inside a planet. A measurement could therefore help distinguish between interior models that might otherwise fit the same mass and radius. In principle, this gives astronomers a new route toward investigating the composition and structure of giant exoplanets.
The challenge is that the shape change is subtle. To detect it, a planet must be sufficiently distorted, and its changing projected area must produce a signal that can be separated from other variations in the observed light.
A metric for finding promising planets
To identify good targets, the researchers introduce a metric called \(D\). It combines three considerations: the expected size of the tidal deformation, the planet’s orbital inclination, and an estimate of the photometric signal-to-noise ratio.
That signal-to-noise estimate accounts for several factors that influence how clearly the planet’s changing brightness can be measured. These include the planet’s size and orbital period, its thermal contrast with the star, and the host star’s brightness in the K band.
The authors applied this metric to 814 candidate targets on Ariel’s target list. Their ranking suggests that the strongest candidates tend to be inflated, highly irradiated giant planets on short-period orbits. Those properties make the expected tidal effect larger or the planet easier to observe.
Leading candidates include WASP-121 b, WASP-33 b, WASP-76 b, WASP-12 b, WASP-19 b, and HAT-P-32 b. Some planets near the top of the ranking already have published Love-number measurements. Taking that into account, the researchers single out WASP-33 b, WASP-76 b, and HAT-P-32 b as particularly attractive targets without existing measurements.
The ranking is best understood as a guide to relative promise, not as a precise prediction of what a particular instrument will achieve. The authors also assume the same reference value, \(h_{2f}=1.5\), for every planet when calculating the metric. Real planets may have different values, and observations will depend on the instrument and observing strategy.
Testing the idea with WASP-76 b
After identifying promising targets, the study examines WASP-76 b as a benchmark for simulated observations. The researchers generated full-orbit phase curves using published information about the system and its atmosphere. They included several sources of changing light:
- Thermal emission from the planet
- Transit and occultation signals
- Brightness changes caused by the planet’s changing projected area as it is tidally distorted
- Stellar ellipsoidal variation and Doppler beaming
The team injected a reference Love number of \(h_{2f}=1.5\) into the simulated data. They then modelled observations with JWST’s NIRSpec instrument and with Ariel, using noise estimates tailored to each instrument.
Bayesian retrievals were used to test how well the injected value could be recovered. The researchers compared full-orbit phase-curve observations with transit-only observations, and also examined whether multiple Ariel visits could improve the results.
Why full-orbit observations matter
The simulations show that observing the full orbit is substantially more informative than observing the transit alone. The reason is that the planet’s projected area changes throughout its orbit, not only when it passes in front of its star.
Following the signal over the entire orbit also helps researchers separate the tidal effect from other properties of the system. In particular, it can reduce degeneracies involving orbital geometry and planetary radius: different combinations of those parameters may produce similar transit signals, but the full phase curve provides additional information.
This makes continuous phase-curve observations especially valuable. Rather than relying only on the brief interval when the planet crosses its star, researchers can use changes in the system’s light throughout the orbit to track the planet’s changing appearance.
JWST simulation results
For JWST, the study finds that a joint retrieval combining the two NIRSpec G395H detectors can recover the injected value with an uncertainty of about 0.09. The result is \(h_{2f}\) near 1.49, corresponding to a precision of roughly 6%.
Transit-only observations are less constraining. The uncertainty is about 0.56–0.64 when using the individual detectors, improving to about 0.40 when the detector results are combined. These simulated comparisons underscore how much information is added by observing the full orbit rather than the transit alone.
Ariel simulation results
For Ariel, one joint phase-curve visit produces an uncertainty of about 0.18 on \(h_{2f}\), or approximately 12%. The individual-channel uncertainties range from about 0.27 to 0.45.
The study estimates that the corresponding precision on \(k_{2f}\) is about 36%. The authors describe this as close to the threshold they cite for obtaining useful constraints on a planet’s interior.
As with JWST, Ariel’s simulated transit-only observations perform much less well. The joint-retrieval uncertainty is about 0.67, leaving the Love number poorly constrained compared with a full phase curve.
Repeated observations help. Combining three Ariel visits reduces the joint uncertainty on \(h_{2f}\) to about 0.15. Ten visits further tighten the constraints from individual channels and reduce a small offset in the median recovered value. These results suggest that repeated Ariel observations could be particularly useful when a single visit does not provide enough precision.
What the results mean for exoplanet science
The study presents tidal distortion as a potential new tool for studying giant exoplanet interiors. A Love-number measurement could add information that is not available from mass and radius alone, helping researchers test different models of a planet’s internal density distribution.