K2-399 b is not a planet. The Saturn that wandered through the Neptune desert is actually a hierarchical eclipsing binary

TL;DR

This study re-evaluates the planetary status of K2-399 b, revealing it is actually a hierarchical eclipsing binary system rather than a planet, highlighting the importance of comprehensive data analysis in validation processes.

Contribution

The paper demonstrates that K2-399 b is not a planet but a hierarchical eclipsing binary, emphasizing the need for thorough follow-up observations and careful validation in exoplanet detection.

Findings

K2-399 b is a hierarchical eclipsing binary, not a planet.

Data analysis with radial velocities and multi-band photometry refuted the planetary hypothesis.

Highlights the importance of comprehensive validation and follow-up in exoplanet confirmation.

Abstract

The transit technique has been very efficient in detecting planet candidate signals over the past decades. The so-called statistical validation approach has become a popular way of verifying a candidate's planetary nature. However, the incomplete consideration of false positive scenarios and data quality can lead to the misinterpretation of the results. In this work we revise the planetary status of K2-399\,b, a validated planet with an estimated false positive probability of 0.078% located in the middle of the so-called Neptunian desert, and hence a potential key target for atmospheric prospects. We use radial velocity data from the CARMENES, HARPS and TRES spectrographs, as well as ground-based multi-band transit photometry LCOGT MuSCAT3 and broad band photometry to test the planetary scenario. Our analysis of the available data does not support the existence of this (otherwise key) planet, and instead points to a scenario composed of an early G-dwarf orbited in a $846.62^{+0.22}_{-0.28}$~days period by a pair of eclipsing M-dwarfs (hence a hierarchical eclipsing binary) likely in the mid-type domain. We thus demote K2-399 b as a planet. We conclude that the validation process, while very useful to prioritise follow-up efforts, must always be conducted with careful attention to data quality while ensuring that all possible scenarios have been properly tested to get reliable results. We also encourage developers of validation algorithms to ensure the accuracy of a priori probabilities for different stellar scenarios that can lead to this kind of false validation. We further encourage the use of follow-up observations when possible (such as radial velocity and/or multi-band light curves) to confirm the planetary nature of detected transiting signals rather than only relying on validation tools.