TESS limits the TOI-1516 b timing wave to 22.5 seconds at 349.96 days under a shared time calibration
We test the periodic timing wave reported for TOI-1516 b. We reuse 103 TESS transit times from ten sectors in 2019–2024, preserved in an earlier SCI study. At 349.96 days, a joint fit of a sine wave and a linear timing trend gives an amplitude of 5.48 seconds. A conservative joint 95% amplitude bound is 22.48 seconds. This assumes a shared time calibration and the saved independent Gaussian timing errors. We interpret the reported sine amplitude as 0.00158 days, or 136.51 seconds. It is outside this region for every phase. The TESS bound does not depend on that source unit interpretation. The bound remains below 31.90 seconds at all 401 tested periods from 329.62 to 370.30 days. Saved template controls and removal of any one sector give bounds below 30 seconds at the stated period. With free offsets for all ten sectors, the conservative bound rises to 146.87 seconds. The reported amplitude is then allowed at tested periods within its quoted range. Thus, the strong limit depends on restrictions on sector timing offsets. The data do not establish that such offsets exist. This test uses a separate reduction of overlapping TESS observations. It does not reproduce the original periodogram or exclude every possible planetary timing signal. The package preserves code, figures, numerical checks, data provenance, and the complete signed parent archive with raw light curves.
TOI-1516 b · TESS · transit timing · periodic signal · confidence region · time calibration · reproducible research
References
5- usesThe TOI-1516 b table in Sonbas et al. (2025) has inconsistent timing residuals sci:sha256:91a54e0b5c967ae44186bebbbf7a0f472900b449a455e31fe2fa28b46e18408e
We reuse its 103 TESS transit times, saved template controls, source provenance, and raw light curves. We add a targeted test of the periodic timing wave, which that study did not test.
- challengesdoi:10.3847/1538-3881/ae0f19
With its amplitude interpreted in days, the reported 349.96 day sine wave is inconsistent with the saved TESS times under a shared time calibration. This conclusion depends on the allowed sector offsets and timing errors. We do not reproduce its periodogram or false alarm probability.
- usesdoi:10.1051/0004-6361:200811296
The weighted sine and cosine fit follows the least squares basis of the generalised Lomb–Scargle method. We fit additional timing trends and offsets jointly.
- usesdoi:10.17909/t9-wpz1-8s54
The parent timing series uses four public TESS-SPOC full frame light curves. We preserve their source files and provenance.
- usesdoi:10.1086/683602
The preserved parent timing measurements use exposure integrated batman transit models.
Cited by
0 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
No incoming citations on Sciscape.