An Independent Analysis of the Six Recently Claimed Exomoon Candidates
David Kipping

TL;DR
This study independently evaluates six claimed exomoon candidates using rigorous statistical and photodynamical methods, finding no convincing evidence for exomoons but establishing upper mass limits for potential moons.
Contribution
It provides a comprehensive independent analysis of recent exomoon claims, applying multiple tests and modeling to validate or refute the candidates.
Findings
None of the six KOIs show significant exomoon evidence.
KOI-2728.01 passes two tests but fails validation, suggesting no confirmed exomoon.
Upper mass limits for potential exomoons are established, with KOI-3220.01 constraining moon mass to less than 0.4% of planetary mass.
Abstract
It has been recently claimed that KOIs-268.01, 303.01, 1888.01, 1925.01, 2728.01 & 3320.01 are exomoon candidates, based on an analysis of their transit timing. Here, we perform an independent investigation, which is framed in terms of three questions: 1) Are there significant excess TTVs? 2) Is there a significant periodic TTV? 3) Is there evidence for a non-zero moon mass? We applied rigorous statistical methods to these questions alongside a re-analysis of the Kepler photometry and find that none of the KOIs satisfy these three tests. Specifically, KOIs-268.01 & 3220.01 pass none of the tests and KOIs-303.01, 1888.01 & 1925.01 pass a single test each. Only KOI-2728.01 satisfies two, but fails the cross-validation test for predictions. Further, detailed photodynamical modeling reveals that KOI-2728.01 favours a negative radius moon (as does KOI-268.01). We also note that we find a…
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.
