Export citation and abstract BibTeX RIS
We are correcting a mistake made in Figure 12 in the published article. This was a minor error in the functional form of the heating efficiency taken from Thorngren & Fortney (2018). Here we present the corrected version of Figure 12. Please note that this changes one statement made in the first paragraph of Section 5.3 describing the radius evolution at late times in the post-main-sequence reinflation case, corresponding to the removal of the phrase "even though it slightly decreases at late times in the post-main-sequence evolution case as the heating rate becomes weak." This correction does not affect any other results in the paper, and has no impact on our main results and conclusions.
Figure 12. The heating required to explain the radii of the full sample of hot Jupiters can lead to both main-sequence and post-main-sequence reinflation. Shown is the radius evolution for the integrated heating rate inferred by Thorngren & Fortney (2018) from the sample of observed hot Jupiters. The radius evolution is shown on the left-hand y-axis, while the heating rate is shown on the right-hand y-axis. The top panel shows main-sequence evolution of hot Jupiters, with a numerical setup similar to our simulations in Section 3.2. The bottom panel shows the post-main-sequence evolution of warm Jupiters, with a setup similar to that in Section 3.3. Note that time is on a logarithmic scale in the top panel and on a linear scale on the bottom panel, which focuses on post-main-sequence evolution. The heating rate is taken from Equation (34) of Thorngren & Fortney (2018) and is Gaussian with a peak at an equilibrium temperature of ∼1600 K. We find that the dependence of the inferred heating power with incident flux for the full hot Jupiter sample is consistent with both main-sequence reinflation of hot Jupiters and post-main-sequence reinflation of warm Jupiters.
Download figure:
Standard image High-resolution image