Benchmark Tests for Markov Chain Monte Carlo Fitting of Exoplanet Eclipse Observations
Justin C. Rogers, Mercedes Lopez-Morales, Daniel Apai, Elisabeth Adams

TL;DR
This paper evaluates the accuracy and biases of Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods in analyzing exoplanet eclipse light curves, highlighting challenges with systematics and proposing benchmark datasets for validation.
Contribution
It introduces a comprehensive suite of benchmark datasets for testing MCMC eclipse analysis methods and provides criteria for verifying eclipse detections.
Findings
Synthetic white-noise models recover eclipse signals within 10% accuracy for sufficiently deep signals.
Red-noise models exhibit greater biases and discrepancies in eclipse measurements.
Systematic biases and false signals can occur even with complex models in real data.
Abstract
Ground-based observations of exoplanet eclipses provide important clues to the planets' atmospheric physics, yet systematics in light curve analyses are not fully understood. It is unknown if measurements suggesting near-infrared flux densities brighter than models predict are real, or artifacts of the analysis processes. We created a large suite of model light curves, using both synthetic and real noise, and tested the common process of light curve modeling and parameter optimization with a Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithm. With synthetic white-noise models, we find that input eclipse signals are generally recovered within 10% accuracy for eclipse depths greater than the noise amplitude, and to smaller depths for higher sampling rates and longer baselines. Red-noise models see greater discrepancies between input and measured eclipse signals, often biased in one direction.…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
