linguistic:voice_change, information:classification
IAU working definition of exoplanets

The 2006 IAU definition presents some challenges for exoplanets because the language is specific to the Solar System and the criteria of roundness and orbital zone clearance are not presently observable for exoplanets. In 2018, this definition was reassessed and updated as knowledge of exoplanets increased. The current official working definition of an exoplanet is as follows:

The IAU noted that this definition could be expected to evolve as knowledge improves. A 2022 review article discussing the history and rationale of this definition suggested that the words "in young star clusters" should be deleted in clause 3, as such objects have now been found elsewhere, and that the term "sub-brown dwarfs" should be replaced by the more current "free-floating planetary mass objects". The term " planetary mass object " has also been used to refer to ambiguous situations concerning exoplanets, such as objects with mass typical for a planet that are free-floating or orbit a brown dwarf instead of a star. Free-floating objects of planetary mass have sometimes been called planets anyway, specifically rogue planets.

The limit of 13 Jupiter masses is not universally accepted. Objects below this mass limit can sometimes burn deuterium, and the amount of deuterium that is burned depends on an object's composition. Furthermore, deuterium is quite scarce, so the stage of deuterium burning does not actually last very long; unlike hydrogen burning in a star, deuterium burning does not significantly affect the future evolution of an object. The relationship between mass and radius (or density) show no special feature at this limit, according to which brown dwarfs have the same physics and internal structure as lighter Jovian planets, and would more naturally be considered planets.

Thus, many catalogues of exoplanets include objects heavier than 13 Jupiter masses, sometimes going up to 60 Jupiter masses. (The limit for hydrogen burning and becoming a red dwarf star is about 80 Jupiter masses.) The situation of main-sequence stars has been used to argue for such an inclusive definition of "planet" as well, as they also differ greatly along the two orders of magnitude that they cover, in their structure, atmospheres, temperature, spectral features, and probably formation mechanisms; yet they are all considered as one class, being all hydrostatic-equilibrium objects undergoing nuclear burning.