Paper detail

On Correlated-noise Analyses Applied To Exoplanet Light Curves

Time-correlated noise is a significant source of uncertainty when modeling exoplanet light-curve data. A correct assessment of correlated noise is fundamental to determine the true statistical significance of our findings. Here we review three of the most widely used correlated-noise estimators in the exoplanet field, the time-averaging, residual-permutation, and wavelet-likelihood methods. We argue that the residual-permutation method is unsound in estimating the uncertainty of parameter estimates. We thus recommend to refrain from this method altogether. We characterize the behavior of the time averaging's rms-vs.-bin-size curves at bin sizes similar to the total observation duration, which may lead to underestimated uncertainties. For the wavelet-likelihood method, we note errors in the published equations and provide a list of corrections. We further assess the performance of these techniques by injecting and retrieving eclipse signals into synthetic and real Spitzer light curves, analyzing the results in terms of the relative-accuracy and coverage-fraction statistics. Both the time-averaging and wavelet-likelihood methods significantly improve the estimate of the eclipse depth over a white-noise analysis (a Markov-chain Monte Carlo exploration assuming uncorrelated noise). However, the corrections are not perfect, when retrieving the eclipse depth from Spitzer datasets, these methods covered the true (injected) depth within the 68\% credible region in only $\sim$45--65\% of the trials. Lastly, we present our open-source model-fitting tool, Multi-Core Markov-Chain Monte Carlo ({MC$^3$}). This package uses Bayesian statistics to estimate the best-fitting values and the credible regions for the parameters for a (user-provided) model. {MC$^3$} is a Python/C code, available at https://github.com/pcubillos/MCcubed.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.