Papers › Kepler-1708 b-i is likely undetectable with HST
Kepler-1708 b-i is likely undetectable with HST
Ben Cassese, David Kipping
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
The exomoon candidate Kepler-1708 b-i was recently reported using two transits of Kepler data. Supported by a 1% false-positive probability, the candidate is promising but requires follow-up observations to confirm/reject its validity. In this paper, we consider the detectability of the exomoon candidate's transit, most specifically in the next window (March 2023) using the WFC3 instrument aboard the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). Using realistic noise estimates, accounting for the visit-long trends, and propagating the model posteriors derived using the Kepler data, we perform 75 injection-recovery trials with Bayesian model selection. Defining a successful detection as one which meets thresholds of the Bayes factor, AIC, and error of the retrieved parameters, only 7 of our 75 injections were recovered when considering HST data alone. This implies a true-positive probability (TPP) of 10±3%. Despite HST's superior aperture to Kepler, both instrumental systematics and the compactness of the candidate exomoon's orbit typically obfuscate a strong detection. Although the noise properties of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) have not yet been characterized in flight, we estimate the signal would be easily recovered using NIRSpec operating in its Bright Object Time Series mode.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections