The language of exoplanet ranking metrics needs to change
Elizabeth Tasker, Joshua Tan, Kevin Heng, Stephen Kane, David Spiegel,, Ramon Brasser, Andrew Casey, Steven Desch, Caroline Dorn, Christine Houser,, John Hernlund, Marine Lasbleis, Matthieu Laneuville, Anne-Sophie Libert, Lena, Noack, Cayman Unterborn, June Wicks
TL;DR
This paper highlights the need to revise exoplanet ranking metrics to better assess habitability, emphasizing the current inability to compare Earth-like qualities due to inadequate metrics.
Contribution
It proposes that current exoplanet ranking metrics are insufficient and advocates for developing improved metrics to accurately evaluate habitability.
Findings
Many Earth-sized worlds have been discovered.
Current metrics cannot determine surface Earth-likeness.
Inadequate metrics risk damaging the field.
Abstract
We have found many Earth-sized worlds but we have no way of determining if their surfaces are Earth-like. This makes it impossible to quantitatively compare habitability, and pretending we can risks damaging the field.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.