Skip to content
Frontier
Sign in

NotablePeer-reviewed

Discovery of a second-generation planet candidate accreting onto a white dwarf

ByJack T. Williams, Boris T. Gänsicke, Nicholas Chamberlain Stone, D. Koester, Benjamin D. R. Davies, Christopher Tong and 2 others

University of Warwick · Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias · University of Wisconsin–Madison · Hebrew University of Jerusalem and 4 more

Sign in to watchRead the paper in Nature Astronomy

What it is

In this study, we report the discovery of a white dwarf accreting material that is unlike any Solar System object. The atmosphere of HS 0209+0832 is strongly enriched in trans-iron elements including zinc, copper and niobium but depleted in the canonical rock-forming elements silicon and iron.

Every metric behind this entry is listed, with its source, under Sources and data below.

Filed underStellar, planetary, and galactic studies, Astro and Planetary Science, Astrophysical Phenomena and Observations

Scored 2026-10-07How scoring works

The Frontier Score, in full

How this entry's score is built, term by term. Open any pillar to see each sub-metric's raw value, how it maps to 0 to 100, and the record that holds it.
Evidence 85Impact 51Novelty 68
The three pillars as one shape: a result strong on every axis fills the triangle.
How the Frontier Score is calculated for this breakthrough
TermScoreWeightPoints
EvidenceHow established and verifiable the result is.85× 0.2521.3
ImpactHow much the result matters, judged field-relative and by current momentum.51× 0.2512.9
NoveltyHow genuinely new the result is, and how fast-moving.68× 0.5034.2
Weighted pillars68.4
Frontier recency0 months since publication× 1.00
IntegrityNot retracted× 1
Frontier Score68
Confidence: Early signal. Early signal: little citation history yet, so impact is an estimate and may shift as the work is taken up. Corroborated beyond citations (cited on Wikipedia).Early signal: little citation history yet, so impact is an estimate and may shift as the work is taken up. Corroborated beyond citations (cited on Wikipedia).

Every sub-metric, traced to its source

Evidence85
Evidence sub-metrics
Sub-metricRaw value0 to 100WeightPointsSource
Peer review & venueWhether the work has cleared peer review, and how selective its venue is. Peer review is necessary but not sufficient: before citations accrue, a fresh result in one of the five general flagships (Nature, Science, Cell, NEJM, the Lancet) is a stronger evidence signal than one in a selective specialist or society journal, which in turn outranks one in a legitimate but very high-volume mega-journal, and any of them outranks a preprint that has not been reviewed at all.Maps to 0 to 100: Peer-reviewed article graded by venue tier: flagship journal (Nature, Science, Cell, NEJM, the Lancet) 100; selective journal (the specialist journals of those families, JAMA, PNAS, Physical Review Letters and X) 90; high-volume mega-journal (Nature Communications, Science Advances) 78. Review 90, book 70, dataset 60, preprint 45, other 55.Peer-reviewed, selective journal900.3027.0OpenAlex type / primary_location / source
CorroborationIndependent corroboration that the result is real and being taken up, read as the BREADTH of agreement rather than the size of the citation pile. Counts how many of the five independent citation indices (OpenAlex, Crossref, Semantic Scholar, OpenCitations, Europe PMC) report the work at all, plus orthogonal, non-citation lines of corroboration: entry into the encyclopedia, registered clinical trials, released datasets or software, public funding on record, and technical-community discussion. Citation MAGNITUDE is deliberately judged under Impact, not here, so Evidence and Impact measure genuinely different things instead of both rewarding the same citation pile twice.Maps to 0 to 100: Starts at 28 and rises with each of the five independent citation indices that agree the work is cited (+9 each) and each orthogonal non-citation corroboration line (+6 each: Wikipedia, clinical trials, open datasets or software, public funding, community discussion). Capped at 100.3 of 5 citation indices agree, 1 independent non-citation line610.3018.3OpenAlex, Crossref, Semantic Scholar, OpenCitations, Europe PMC, DataCite, NIH RePORTER, Wikipedia, Hacker News count of agreeing indices + orthogonal reach
VerifiabilityHow openly the result can be read, reused, and reproduced. Rewards open access, a permissive reuse license (CC-BY/CC0), a green repository copy anyone can archive, openly minable full text, and released datasets or software a reader can actually run. Cross-checked across OpenAlex, Unpaywall, Europe PMC, and DataCite.Maps to 0 to 100: Closed 45; open access 80+; a permissive CC license 100; a repository copy, open full text, or a released dataset/software artifact each raise the floor.Open access (hybrid), CC-BY1000.2020.0OpenAlex, Unpaywall, Europe PMC, DataCite is_oa / license / has_repository_copy / open datasets
IntegrityRetraction and post-publication correction status. A retracted result is not evidence of anything and collapses the whole Frontier Score; a correction or expression of concern is a softer flag. Read across OpenAlex and Crossref (both update-to and updated-by notices).Maps to 0 to 100: Clean 100; a correction or expression of concern 75; retracted 0. Flagged if OpenAlex OR Crossref records the notice.No retraction or concern on record1000.2020.0OpenAlex, Crossref is_retracted / update-to / updated-by
Impact51
Impact sub-metrics
Sub-metricRaw value0 to 100WeightPointsSource
Field-normalized impactImpact relative to the world average for the same field, year, and type, so a small field and a large field are judged fairly. Triangulates three independent field-normalized measures: OpenAlex's Field-Weighted Citation Impact, its citation percentile within the exact field-and-year cohort, and the NIH iCite Relative Citation Ratio. 1.0x is average; the percentile is the share of same-field, same-year work it out-cites.Maps to 0 to 100: Each ratio (1.0 = field average) maps 1.0 to 50, 3.0 to 75, 9.0 to 90; the field+year percentile maps directly (top 1% -> ~99). The available measures are averaged. Falls back to a saturating citation count when none is available yet.4.5x FWCI, top 4% of field-year vs field890.4540.0OpenAlex, NIH iCite fwci / citation_normalized_percentile / relative_citation_ratio
Influential citationsCitations that genuinely build on the work rather than mention it in passing (Semantic Scholar's influential-citation measure). A sharper signal of real impact than a raw count.Maps to 0 to 100: Saturating: 15 influential citations maps to 50. Falls back to a fraction of consensus citations when unavailable.Not yet availablen/aredistributed0.0Semantic Scholar influentialCitationCount
Citation velocityCitations received in the trailing twelve months, judged as a rate rather than a lifetime total. Momentum is what a frontier index cares about: a result being taken up fast right now is landing, whether its lifetime pile is large or still small. Where an expected field citation rate is known, the momentum is also read relative to it, so a fast-moving result in a quiet field is not overlooked.Maps to 0 to 100: Saturating: 30 citations in the last twelve months maps to 50. When NIH iCite provides the field's expected rate, this is blended evenly with the ratio of observed to expected momentum.1 in last 12 months30.351.1OpenAlex, NIH iCite counts_by_year / field_citation_rate
Novelty68
Novelty sub-metrics
Sub-metricRaw value0 to 100WeightPointsSource
Conceptual noveltyHow genuinely new the contribution is, measured at publication from the work's OWN content, not its date: how atypical its combination of research areas is versus all prior work, and whether it builds on a broad, deep base rather than only the newest papers in a fast-moving area. This is what separates a real advance from a recent-but-commodity result, and it needs no forward citations, so it is stable for brand-new work. An honestly noisy proxy (even state-of-the-art novelty measures agree only moderately with expert judgment), so it carries bounded weight and never drives the ranking alone.Maps to 0 to 100: Blends two publication-time signals, each 0-100: an atypical-combination score (how unusual the pairing of the work's research topics is versus the prior literature, by pointwise mutual information) and a foundational-reach score (median age and depth of the work's references). The stronger signal weighs 0.62, the weaker 0.38. When neither is measurable (a work too thin in topics or references), the pillar renormalizes over its recency signals instead.Astro and Planetary Science x Astrophysical Phenomena and Observations (645 prior works made this pairing); builds on refs a median 10.0y deep480.4521.5OpenAlex topics + referenced_works (publication-time)
RecencyHow recently the work appeared. The frontier is now, so newer scores higher.Maps to 0 to 100: Exponential decay with a 12-month half-life from the publication date.This month1000.3029.9OpenAlex publication_date
Attention accelerationWhether attention is rising: citations in the latest full year versus the year before. Accelerating interest signals an active, opening frontier.Maps to 0 to 100: Latest/prior-year ratio: 1x maps to 50, 2x to 75, 4x to 100. Unknown is neutral.Not enough history500.105.0OpenAlex counts_by_year
Edge of reviewPreprints and brand-new work sit ahead of the peer-review process. That earns novelty here (while it is discounted under Evidence), because it is where the frontier forms first.Maps to 0 to 100: Preprint 95, article <6 months 80, article <18 months 65, else 45.Peer-reviewed record800.1512.0OpenAlex type / publication_date
ProvenanceAll sources

Sources and data

Every number behind this entry, grouped by the source that holds it: up to five citation indices cross-checked, field-normalized impact, then real-world reach (Wikipedia, community discussion, clinical trials, released data and public funding) where it exists. Each value links to its record.

OpenAlex

Primary record
Total citations
1
Field-weighted citation impact
4.5x field average
Citation percentile
Top 4% of its field-year
Citations, recent 12 months
1
Publication date
2026-10-05
Access
Open access (hybrid)

Crossref

Citations
0
Works it builds on
85
Funders on record
5

OpenCitations

Citations
0

Unpaywall

Reuse license
CC-BY

Wikipedia

Wikipedia articles citing it
1
OpenAlex recordRead it in Nature Astronomy
For the authors

Show this score where your work lives

A badge for your lab page, your CV or the paper's code repository. It links readers to this entry, and it always carries the entry's current score.
This paper's Frontier Score badge, as it appears where you place itLive preview
<a href="https://frontierresearch.co/breakthroughs/discovery-of-a-second-generation-planet-candidate-accret-w7220414369?utm_source=badge&amp;utm_medium=badge&amp;utm_campaign=author-kit"><img src="https://frontierresearch.co/api/badge/W7220414369.svg" alt="Frontier Score for this paper" height="20"></a>

For a lab or personal website, a CV page, or anywhere that takes HTML.

The number is live. The badge is drawn from the same signals as this page, so it never shows a score the entry does not. Every entry is re-checked weekly against the same public sources, and a result's standing eases as it ages, so the active edge of the field stays on top. How scoring works

Something wrong or out of date? Write to hello@frontierresearch.co and the entry will be corrected.

Space & AstronomyThe whole field

Space & Astronomy · Notable

Incorporation of atmospheric components in planetary magma oceans through bubble–metal compounds

Frontier Score 68

E 92I 40N 72Oct 1, 2026

Space & Astronomy · Notable

Meteoritic organic matter records primitive oxygen reservoirs of the solar system

Frontier Score 67

E 89I 39N 73Sep 21, 2026

Space & Astronomy · Notable

Growth of aromatic hydrocarbon dust particles in the extremely metal-poor galaxy Sextans A

Frontier Score 63

E 86I 40N 64Sep 29, 2026

Back to the Frontier Index, or browse every breakthrough by date.

The Frontier Brief

The week's Space & Astronomy, scored.

Every Monday, the new Space & Astronomy entries in the index, each with its score and a one-line read on why it matters, then the week's best from the rest of the frontier. What you get

Prefer a feed reader? Follow Space & Astronomy by RSS

One email a week: the new Space & Astronomy entries, scored, then the best elsewhere. Unsubscribe anytime.