My note. In the paper cited, problems with the size of the exoplanet imaged is discussed near the end of the paper. “• Atmospheric Model Fitting: Using a BT-SETTL atmospheric forward model we are able to fit all data, in addition to the majority of ground-based observations to within 2σ. This agreement provides precise constraints on the Teff = 1667+25 −24 K, log(g) = 4.07+0.19 −0.19 dex, R = 0.92+0.04 −0.04 RJup, and log(Lbol/L)=−4.23+0.02 −0.02. Compared to a fit excluding the JWST data, this corresponds to a factor of ∼3 improvement in the precision of the radius and bolometric luminosity. Despite the excellent model agreement, both the temperature and unphysically small radius are in disagreement with the values obtained from the evolutionary models, further emphasising a long standing tension for this class of objects.”
My note. HIP 65426 b is 7.1 Mjup and radius 0.92 Rjup. Apparently, measurements for giant exoplanets like this conflict with various stellar evolution models in use for the giant exoplanets. Using properties updated now
http://exoplanet.eu/catalog/hip_65426_b/, with e = 0, I calculate P = 2.1135E+05 days or 5.7865E+02 years. In 1 Gyr this exoplanet could complete 1.7282E+06 revolutions but the host star is listed some 15-20 Myr. Explaining the origin of giant exoplanets imaged in wide orbits is difficult.
At the exoplanet.eu site I find 87 giant planets listed in wide orbits ranging 50 to 9900 au from the parent star. They range in mass from 0.208 Mjup to 66 Mjup.