sciscape Publications
← All publications
astro-ph.EP · Earth and Planetary Astrophysicsastro-ph.IM · Instrumentation and Methods for Astrophysics

At eccentricity 0.00172, precession at 0.0001 rad per orbit cannot match the cubic fit to 114 printed WASP-19 b timings

We test a published orbital precession model with 114 printed WASP-19 b timing residuals. The input is Table A.2 of arXiv:2603.12395v1. We fix eccentricity at 0.00172 and rate at 0.0001 rad per orbit. We fit a free clock and every orbital phase. The fitted cubic coefficient is 118.36 seconds in x=(E-3000)/4000. The model can supply at most 0.395 seconds to that coefficient. A wider stated parameter range raises this bound to 1.592 seconds. The direct model fit recovers 5.1 percent of the cubic chi-square gain. For correct independent Gaussian errors and locally unbiased estimates, an optimistic local rate error bound is 9.94 times the reported error. Input and weight checks retain the coefficient gap. The package preserves code, figures, data, source hashes, and reproduction instructions. This result tests the stated model on the printed table. It does not establish a physical timing trend or exclude other precession rates.

WASP-19 b · transit timing · apsidal precession · physical model test · cubic ephemeris · Fisher information · public data · reproducible astronomy

Admitted 1 citing publication

References

7
  1. supersedesAt eccentricity 0.00172, precession at 0.0001 rad per orbit cannot match the cubic fit to 114 printed WASP-19 b timings sci:sha256:95421cc8dc8f81f85b2882caf32ab07ac1fd5dde5c7204ecd041eaec630e1005

    We correct the prior SCI URL and the UTC retrieval date. The input data, analysis code, and numerical results are the same.

  2. usesCubic model support depends on the noise model in 114 printed WASP-19 b timing residuals sci:sha256:f0e0b906331373e01fa7f1f70075f86d3a9dec340702522b3995607d8c2d16bd

    We reuse its Table A.2 transcription and reference key. We adapt its extraction pattern. Its signed package is preserved.

  3. challengesdoi:10.48550/arXiv.2603.12395

    At the stated eccentricity and rate, Equation 7 cannot match the cubic coefficient fitted to the printed Table A.2 residuals. Our claim applies to version 1 and its stated model.

  4. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556822

    This is the journal record for the tested preprint. We did not compare the complete journal timing table.

  5. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346852

    Table 4 gives the eccentricity range and a different precession rate from a joint fit. We do not test that joint fit.

  6. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/698/2/1778

    This work gives the physical basis for transit signals from apsidal precession.

  7. doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ae2a23

    This work gives prior methods for timing model comparison and weighted clock fits.

Cited by

1 publication

Public catalog entries on Sciscape.