Asteroseismic modelling of main-sequence solar-like stars and Kepler exoplanet host stars with the FICO procedure I. Catalogue of fundamental stellar properties

We present detailed asteroseismic modelling of 95 main-sequence solar-like stars and Kepler exoplanet host stars using the FICO procedure, a three-step method that combines forward and inverse techniques that enables precise inference of. The new analysis still awaits peer review, but it already lays out the central claim clearly.

It is relevant because exoplanet science has moved beyond the era of simple discovery into a period of comparative characterization. With more than five thousand confirmed planets known, the scientifically productive questions now concern atmospheric composition, internal structure, orbital history and the statistical properties of populations rather than the existence of individual worlds. A new detection or spectral measurement is most valuable when it adds a well-constrained data point to those comparative frameworks, not when it stands alone as an anecdote. We applied the FICO procedure to a catalogue of stars with high-quality asteroseismic and classical observations, and compared its results against literature values. We also compared its performance with direct frequency fitting using semi-empirical surface corrections.

The FICO procedure achieved statistical precisions of 2.3%, 0.82%, 6.9%, and 0.49% in mass, radius, age, and mean density, respectively on average, well within PLATO quality. Near-solar conditions, where both approaches perform similarly, and higher-mass stars, where surface-independent methods consistently outperform direct fitting methods.

While our results are consistent with literature values, we observed age biases (~11.5% on average for the Kepler LEGACY sample) that are comparable to the PLATO accuracy. The FICO procedure provides a robust framework for high-precision stellar characterisation in the PLATO era.

Its hybrid architecture effectively addresses surface effects, making it a promising tool for the accurate determination of exoplanet host-star properties. Our findings also highlight the importance of carefully selecting and validating the physical assumptions embedded in stellar models, particularly in the context of.

The broader interest lies in making the target less anecdotal and more comparable with the rest of the known planetary population. Population-level questions, such as the frequency of atmospheres around small rocky planets or the prevalence of water-rich worlds in the habitable zone, require well-characterized individual data points before statistical patterns become meaningful. Each new planet with a measured radius, mass and, ideally, atmospheric constraint is a brick in that larger structure, and the accumulation of bricks eventually allows theorists to test formation models against real distributions rather than projections.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. ArXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Because this is still a preprint, the result should be read with genuine interest and proportionate caution. Peer review is not a guarantee of correctness, but it is a process that forces authors to respond to technical criticism from specialists who have no stake in a particular outcome. Preprints that survive that process, often with substantive revisions, emerge with a stronger evidential base than the version that first appeared. Until that stage is complete, the responsible reading keeps uncertainty explicitly visible rather than treating the claims as established findings.

The next step is to improve independent constraints on the mass, radius, atmospheric composition and orbital dynamics of the target. Transmission spectroscopy with JWST, radial velocity campaigns with high-resolution ground-based spectrographs and phase-curve measurements from space photometry represent the observational toolkit that can move characterization from plausible to robust. That convergence of techniques is the standard the community now expects before a planetary atmosphere result is treated as confirmed. Until peer review and independent follow-up address those open questions, skepticism is not a failure of appreciation for the work; it is part of how science decides what to keep.

Source