adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Analytic Light Curve for Mutual Transits of Two Bodies Across a Limb-darkened Star
Authors: Tyler A. Gordon, Eric Agol
Figure caption:  LUNA and gefera light curves and error in parts-per-million, labeled by the radii of the planet and moon in units of the stellar radius. Left: radii for the moon and planet are taken from the maximum likelihood solution for Kepler-1708 b i given in Kipping et al. (2022). In this case the difference between the LUNA solution and the gefera solution is only about 4 ppm at most. Center: the same transit with a much larger planet and moon. Here the maximum difference between the two solutions is 500 ppm. Right: the same transit again with a “planet” and “moon” approaching the radius of the star. These parameters may be reasonable for an eclipsing triple-star system. In this case the small-planet approximation breaks down with the error approaching 1%.
Paper: Analytic Light Curve for Mutual Transits of Two Bodies Across a Limb-darkened Star
Authors: Tyler A. Gordon, Eric Agol
Figure caption: Benchmarks for gefera and photodynam. The right panel includes the gradient calculation whereas the left panel does not. Since photodynam does not include gradients these benchmarks are the same for both panels. Dashed lines indicate that a “simple” transit was simulated in which the star and planet do not overlap at any point during the transit. Solid lines indicate a “complex” model where the moon and planet overlap during their egress. For gefera we include benchmarks both with and without the inclusion of the dynamics module, whereas for photodynam we include benchmarks only for the photometry module.
Paper: Analytic Light Curve for Mutual Transits of Two Bodies Across a Limb-darkened Star
Authors: Tyler A. Gordon, Eric Agol
Figure caption:  LUNA and gefera derivatives and the difference between them. The orbital parameters are identical to those used in Figure 10 and the radii of the planet and moon are 0.2R * and 0.15R * respectively, matching the center panel of Figure 10. The error in the derivative is larger than for the light curve itself, crossing the one percent threshold at the point where the moon contacts the inner edge of the stellar limb.
Paper: Analytic Light Curve for Mutual Transits of Two Bodies Across a Limb-darkened Star
Authors: Tyler A. Gordon, Eric Agol
Figure caption: Best fit to the Kepler observations of the Kepler-51 system. The fit was found using the truncated Newtonian algorithm provided by scipy with derivatives.
Paper: Analytic Light Curve for Mutual Transits of Two Bodies Across a Limb-darkened Star
Authors: Tyler A. Gordon, Eric Agol
Figure caption: Kepler-51 photometric time series observed by Kepler (purple points) with 100 randomly drawn samples from the posterior distribution (black lines).
Paper: Analytic Light Curve for Mutual Transits of Two Bodies Across a Limb-darkened Star
Authors: Tyler A. Gordon, Eric Agol
Figure caption: A series of snapshots showing a transit with the best-fit parameters from Figure 13.
Paper: Analytic Light Curve for Mutual Transits of Two Bodies Across a Limb-darkened Star
Authors: Tyler A. Gordon, Eric Agol
Figure caption: System configuration at the points where the derivative diverges in Figure 11. The left panel shows the first point of divergence and the right the second.
Paper: Analytic Light Curve for Mutual Transits of Two Bodies Across a Limb-darkened Star
Authors: Tyler A. Gordon, Eric Agol
Figure caption: Three overlapping circles meeting the condition that more than half of the area of circle 3 is to the left of the chord connecting I 12 and I 13.
Paper: Shear Measurement with Poorly Resolved Images
Authors: Jun Zhang, Cong Liu, Pedro Alonso Vaquero, Hekun Li, Haoran Wang, Zhi Shen, Fuyu Dong
Figure caption: The results of the FD test for galaxy images in the g, r, and z band, respectively. In each plot, the black solid line is the “y = x” reference, and the red dashed line is the best fit of the data points. The multiplicative and additive biases are shown in the upper-left corner of each plot. The superflat fields are used in the pipeline. The results for the g 1 and g 2 components are shown in the left and right panels, respectively.
Paper: Shear Measurement with Poorly Resolved Images
Authors: Jun Zhang, Cong Liu, Pedro Alonso Vaquero, Hekun Li, Haoran Wang, Zhi Shen, Fuyu Dong
Figure caption: Similar to Figure 14, except that the shear catalogs are made without using the superflat fields. The results for the g 1 and g 2 components are shown in the left and right panels, respectively.
Paper: Shear Measurement with Poorly Resolved Images
Authors: Jun Zhang, Cong Liu, Pedro Alonso Vaquero, Hekun Li, Haoran Wang, Zhi Shen, Fuyu Dong
Figure caption: The distribution of the FD signal on the CCDs. The left and right plots show the patterns of g f  1 and g f  2 respectively. The components of g  f  are defined in the coordinates of R.A. and decl.
Paper: Shear Measurement with Poorly Resolved Images
Authors: Jun Zhang, Cong Liu, Pedro Alonso Vaquero, Hekun Li, Haoran Wang, Zhi Shen, Fuyu Dong
Figure caption: Comparison of the superflats in the three bands for CCD 2, 25, and 39.
Paper: Shear Measurement with Poorly Resolved Images
Authors: Jun Zhang, Cong Liu, Pedro Alonso Vaquero, Hekun Li, Haoran Wang, Zhi Shen, Fuyu Dong
Figure caption: The distribution of the average g 1 shear component for PSF polynomial fitting up to the first (left plot), second (middle plot), and third order (right). The data is from the z band.
Paper: Shear Measurement with Poorly Resolved Images
Authors: Jun Zhang, Cong Liu, Pedro Alonso Vaquero, Hekun Li, Haoran Wang, Zhi Shen, Fuyu Dong
Figure caption: Same as Figure 11, but for the g 2 component.
Paper: Shear Measurement with Poorly Resolved Images
Authors: Jun Zhang, Cong Liu, Pedro Alonso Vaquero, Hekun Li, Haoran Wang, Zhi Shen, Fuyu Dong
Figure caption: Defects revealed by the superflats of year 2018 on CCD 5, 14, and 45 in the z band.
Paper: Shear Measurement with Poorly Resolved Images
Authors: Jun Zhang, Cong Liu, Pedro Alonso Vaquero, Hekun Li, Haoran Wang, Zhi Shen, Fuyu Dong
Figure caption: Comparison of the superflats in four years (2015–2018) for CCD 16 of the z band.
Paper: Shear Measurement with Poorly Resolved Images
Authors: Jun Zhang, Cong Liu, Pedro Alonso Vaquero, Hekun Li, Haoran Wang, Zhi Shen, Fuyu Dong
Figure caption: Comparison of the superflats in the three bands for CCD 28 and 45.
Paper: SKYSURF: Constraints on Zodiacal Light and Extragalactic Background Light through Panchromatic HST All-sky Surface-brightness Measurements: II. First Limits on Diffuse Light at 1.25, 1.4, and 1.6 μm
Authors: Timothy Carleton, Rogier A. Windhorst, Rosalia O'Brien, Seth H. Cohen, Delondrae Carter, Rolf Jansen, Scott Tompkins, Richard G. Arendt, Sarah Caddy, Norman Grogin, Scott J. Kenyon, Anton Koekemoer, John MacKenty, Stefano Casertano, Luke J. M. Davies, Simon P. Driver, Eli Dwek, Alexander Kashlinsky, Nathan Miles, Nor Pirzkal, Aaron Robotham, Russell Ryan, Haley Abate, Hanga Andras-Letanovszky, Jessica Berkheimer, Zak Goisman, Daniel Henningsen, Darby Kramer, Ci'mone Rogers, Andi Swirbul
Figure caption: All SKYSURF F125W, F140W, and F160W sky-SB measurements vs. ecliptic latitude for HST data (left subpanels) and the Kelsall COBE/DIRBE models (right subpanels). The orange and blue sech functions and error wedges outline the darkest ∼1% of the sky-SB measurements (magnify the PDF figure as needed to see this). Bottom subpanels give enlargements of the top subpanels. As in Figure 1, the upper left plot is for F125W, the upper right plot is for F140W, and the lower left plot is for F160W. The short-dashed blue line represents the upper envelope for the Kelsall et al. (1998) model predictions, and the long-dashed orange line the correspondingly scaled upper envelope for the HST data that do not suffer excessive DGL or stray light, as described in Section 3.1 and Table 1.
Paper: SKYSURF: Constraints on Zodiacal Light and Extragalactic Background Light through Panchromatic HST All-sky Surface-brightness Measurements: II. First Limits on Diffuse Light at 1.25, 1.4, and 1.6 μm
Authors: Timothy Carleton, Rogier A. Windhorst, Rosalia O'Brien, Seth H. Cohen, Delondrae Carter, Rolf Jansen, Scott Tompkins, Richard G. Arendt, Sarah Caddy, Norman Grogin, Scott J. Kenyon, Anton Koekemoer, John MacKenty, Stefano Casertano, Luke J. M. Davies, Simon P. Driver, Eli Dwek, Alexander Kashlinsky, Nathan Miles, Nor Pirzkal, Aaron Robotham, Russell Ryan, Haley Abate, Hanga Andras-Letanovszky, Jessica Berkheimer, Zak Goisman, Daniel Henningsen, Darby Kramer, Ci'mone Rogers, Andi Swirbul
Figure caption: All SKYSURF F125W, F140W, and F160W sky-SB measurements vs. Galactic latitude for the HST data [left subpanels] and the Kelsall et al. (1998) COBE/DIRBE models [right subpanels]. The upper left plot is for F125W, the upper right plot is for F140W, and the lower left plot is for F160W. All bottom subpanels are enlargements of top subpanels. Because of the ∼60° tilt of the Galactic plane with respect to the ecliptic, the darkest sky-SB occurs for 20°≲∣ b II ∣ ≲ 60°, highlighted by the red columns in all bottom subpanels. Fields with ∣ b II ∣ ≲ 20° have significant DGL, and they are ignored in the final sky-SB analysis.
Paper: Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence with the ngVLA
Authors: C. Ng, L. Rizk, C. Mannion, E. F. Keane
Figure caption: Survey speed Figure of Merit (FoM) plots comparing ngVLA to the VLA A and D configurations, SKA-Mid, MeerKAT, and ALMA in each of its bands as a function of the antenna distances from the array center. The ALMA T sys is obtained from Figure 4.7 in the ALMA Cycle 7 Technical Handbook (Remijan et al. 2019), where we assume a precipitable water vapor (PWV) of 6 mm to match the ngVLA data. A eff has been obtained from ALMA Memo 602 and the antenna configuration from the online CASA simulatora (https://almascience.nrao.edu/tools/casa-simulator). For the ngVLA and the SKA, these parameters can be found in our sensitivity calculatorb (https://github.com/evanocathain/ngVLA/blob/main/Sensitivity/functions.py). We use 64 SETI beams for the VLA and MeerKAT as suggested by Ng (2021) and Czech et al. (2021). For the ngVLA and the SKA, we include a curve with the same number of SETI beams for comparison. We also include a curve for 10 and 100 beams for the ngVLA, as these are potential scenarios as mentioned in Section 2.4. Note that the y-axis range is different in each panel to optimize each specific value range.
Paper: Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence with the ngVLA
Authors: C. Ng, L. Rizk, C. Mannion, E. F. Keane
Figure caption: The sky coverage vs. observing frequency for previous, ongoing, and proposed SETI surveys. Each project is color-coded by one of four levels of sensitivity that show how far from Earth we can detect an Arecibo-like (1013 W) transmitter signal , where d * ≤ 25 pc is low sensitivity (light blue), d * ≤ 75 pc is mid sensitivity (yellow), d * ≤ 250 pc is high sensitivity (red), and anything above is very high sensitivity (purple). A SETI project with the ngVLA will span one of the largest sky coverages and observing bandwidths, while providing very high sensitivity capable of detecting an Arecibo-like transmitter beyond 250 pc from Earth.
Paper: Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence with the ngVLA
Authors: C. Ng, L. Rizk, C. Mannion, E. F. Keane
Figure caption: The sensitivity (y-axis) of ngVLA as compared to the SKA and MeerKAT, adapted from the top panel of Figure 2 in Keane (2018). Three different curves for the ngVLA performance are shown, corresponding to using only 114 dishes from the core, 214 dishes from the MA, and 263 dishes from the full array. Three curves for the SKA1 are shown, corresponding to sub-arrays of diameter 1 km, 20 km and the full array (Braun et al. 2019). The ngVLA demonstrates the best sensitivity at high observing frequencies in all three antenna configurations shown.
Paper: Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence with the ngVLA
Authors: C. Ng, L. Rizk, C. Mannion, E. F. Keane
Figure caption: The size of the ngVLA array with respect to the number of antenna dishes. The reference antenna is taken to be that of the central antenna among the core array. The distance is calculated by taking the absolute distance from the (x, y, z) antenna coordinates.
Paper: Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence with the ngVLA
Authors: C. Ng, L. Rizk, C. Mannion, E. F. Keane
Figure caption: Comparison of (left) estimated ngVLA and (right) historical VLA receiver fractional usage time. We have used similar colors for receivers at comparable observing frequencies.
Paper: Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence with the ngVLA
Authors: C. Ng, L. Rizk, C. Mannion, E. F. Keane
Figure caption: Observation time with the VLA in the year 2015. The yearly average of 17.38 hr per day is indicated by the dashed black line.
Paper: Correcting Stellar Flare Frequency Distributions Detected by TESS and Kepler
Authors: Dong-Yang Gao, 东洋 高, Hui-Gen Liu, 慧根 刘, Ming Yang, 明 杨, Ji-Lin Zhou, 济林 周
Figure caption:  α cum of stars of different subsets. The gray dots are the values from Günther et al. (2020). The black dots mark those obtained by the corrected cumulative FFD fitting from the TESS and Kepler missions; vertical dashed lines mark the different spectral type classifications. The orange square marks the average α cum of each spectral type subset in this work. The open black square marks the average α cum of Günther et al. (2020) in each spectral type subset. The y-axis error marks the standard deviation of α cum in this subset. The average α cum of spectral types that are cooler than M4 is marked by the open gray square in particular. The open cyan diamond indicates the values from Jackman et al. (2021). The solid red line marks the piecewise linear formulae (Equation (3)) fitting the distribution relationship of α cum with T eff from M2 to G1 stars. The Pearson correlation between α cum and T eff is R = 0.63 and R = −0.27 for stars from M2 to K1 and from K0 to G1, respectively. The coefficients of determination for fitting linear formulae are 0.39 and 0.10 in these two segments, respectively.
Paper: Correcting Stellar Flare Frequency Distributions Detected by TESS and Kepler
Authors: Dong-Yang Gao, 东洋 高, Hui-Gen Liu, 慧根 刘, Ming Yang, 明 杨, Ji-Lin Zhou, 济林 周
Figure caption: (a) Comparison of α cum values obtained by TESS and Kepler missions before and after correction. The regular and inverted green triangles indicate the α cum values obtained by fitting the cumulative FFDs from the TESS mission, before and after correction, respectively. Likewise, the blue ones come from the Kepler mission. (b) The difference between the α cum values from the two missions (Δα cum = α cum,Kepler − α cum,TESS), before and after correction. The open olive squares and solid red dots indicate differences of six stars, before and after correction, respectively. The red and olive horizontal lines indicate the average values of the difference before and after correction, which are −0.33 and 0.04, respectively. Note that because the number of flare events detected by the TESS light curve is small, we fit the cumulative FFD in the whole energy range for Sample-1 stars obtained from the TESS light curve, while the original α cum,Kepler come from the fitting of the original cumulative FFD with the energy range ﹩{P}_{\det }\geqslant 65 \% ﹩, and the corrected α cum,Kepler come from the fitting of the corrected cumulative FFD with the energy range ﹩{P}_{\det }\geqslant 15 \% ﹩.
Paper: Correcting Stellar Flare Frequency Distributions Detected by TESS and Kepler
Authors: Dong-Yang Gao, 东洋 高, Hui-Gen Liu, 慧根 刘, Ming Yang, 明 杨, Ji-Lin Zhou, 济林 周
Figure caption: Main panel: α cum of Sample-2 stars before and after correction with different energy range fitting. The gray dots come from the original cumulative FFDs with an energy range ﹩{P}_{\det }\geqslant 65 \% ﹩, labeled as A; their average, −0.79, is indicated by a gray horizontal dotted line. The blue squares come from the corrected cumulative FFDs fitted with an energy range ﹩{P}_{\det }\geqslant 15 \% ﹩, labeled as B; their average, −0.814, is indicated by a blue horizontal dashed line. The orange pentagrams come from the original cumulative FFDs fitted with the whole energy range, labeled as C; their average, −0.592, is indicated by an orange horizontal dashed line. Right panel: the histogram of α cum. The horizontal lines and colors are the same as in the main panel. Top panel: the difference in α cum obtained from different data sets. The black dots are (B – A), and the gray dots are (B – C). The averages of (B – A) and (B – C) are −0.024 and −0.222, and marked using black and gray horizontal dashed lines, respectively.
Paper: Correcting Stellar Flare Frequency Distributions Detected by TESS and Kepler
Authors: Dong-Yang Gao, 东洋 高, Hui-Gen Liu, 慧根 刘, Ming Yang, 明 杨, Ji-Lin Zhou, 济林 周
Figure caption: Comparison of the flare events and energy distribution with Günther et al. (2020)'s catalog for 20 TESS flaring stars in Sample-3. (a) The number of flares we detected vs. the number of flares from Günther et al. (2020) for each star. (b) The histogram distribution (solid black line) and the CDF (dashed black line) of the match ratio between the flares we detected and flares from Günther et al. (2020). The ratio for each star is the fraction of flare events we detected in Günther et al. (2020)'s catalog. (c) The histogram of flares in Günther et al. (2020; solid red line) and of those we detected (solid green line) after correction (see text for details). The dashed green and red lines are CDFs of all flares. Note that Günther et al. (2020) distinguish some flares with long duration as several overlapping flare events with lower energies, which we do not consider here.
Paper: Correcting Stellar Flare Frequency Distributions Detected by TESS and Kepler
Authors: Dong-Yang Gao, 东洋 高, Hui-Gen Liu, 慧根 刘, Ming Yang, 明 杨, Ji-Lin Zhou, 济林 周
Figure caption: The example of KIC 7131515. (a) The detected probability varying with flare energy. The red line is the smoothed curve of the scatter; the green and blue dashed horizontal lines indicate the value of ﹩{P}_{\det }=65 \% ﹩ and 15%, respectively. We choose the lower energy limit for fitting the original and corrected cumulative FFDs, based on the two critical values of ﹩{P}_{\det }﹩ (the green and blue vertical lines, the same for other panels). (b) The energy recovery ratio varying with flare energy. (c) The histogram of flares before (solid green line) and after (solid blue line) correction. The green and blue dashed lines are the CDF of flares before and after correction, respectively. (d) Cumulative FFDs before (solid green line) and after (solid blue line) correction. The dashed–dotted lines show the relationship fitted with Equation (2).
Paper: Correcting Stellar Flare Frequency Distributions Detected by TESS and Kepler
Authors: Dong-Yang Gao, 东洋 高, Hui-Gen Liu, 慧根 刘, Ming Yang, 明 杨, Ji-Lin Zhou, 济林 周
Figure caption: The cumulative FFD of TIC 27454242 (KIC 12314646) before and after correction. The open green square is the original cumulative FFD detected from TESS data by our pipeline, and the green dot is the cumulative FFD after correction for each flare event using the detection probability and energy recovery ratio. The dashed–dotted and solid green lines indicate the fitted lines before and after correction, respectively. Similarly, for flare events detected from Kepler data, we use blue to present FFDs before and after correction.
Paper: Correcting Stellar Flare Frequency Distributions Detected by TESS and Kepler
Authors: Dong-Yang Gao, 东洋 高, Hui-Gen Liu, 慧根 刘, Ming Yang, 明 杨, Ji-Lin Zhou, 济林 周
Figure caption: Detection probability and energy recovery ratio of a total of 792 flare events on the 84 TESS flaring stars in Sample-2. (a) The histogram (solid black line) and CDF (dashed gray line) of the detection probability of these flare events. (b) The histogram (solid black line) and CDF (dashed gray line) of the energy recovery ratio of these flare events.
Paper: Evidence of Long-term Period Variations in the Exoplanet Transit Database (ETD)
Authors: Simone R. Hagey, Billy Edwards, Aaron C. Boley
Figure caption: Similar to Figure 1, but for TrES-2 b (top) and HAT-P-32 b (bottom).
Paper: Evidence of Long-term Period Variations in the Exoplanet Transit Database (ETD)
Authors: Simone R. Hagey, Billy Edwards, Aaron C. Boley
Figure caption: Similar to Figure 1, but for TrES-3 b (top) and WASP-43 b (bottom).
Paper: Evidence of Long-term Period Variations in the Exoplanet Transit Database (ETD)
Authors: Simone R. Hagey, Billy Edwards, Aaron C. Boley
Figure caption: Similar to Figure 1, but for TrES-5 b (top) and TrES-1 b (bottom).
Paper: A Jupiter Analog Orbiting The Nearby M Dwarf GJ 463
Authors: Michael Endl, Paul Robertson, William D. Cochran, Phillip J. MacQueen, Brendan P. Bowler, Kyle E. Franson, Rae Holcomb, Corey Beard, Howard Isaacson, Andrew W. Howard, Jack Lubin
Figure caption: TESS light curve of GJ 463 from Sectors 14–15 (a), 21–22 (b), 41 (c), and 48 (d). We have searched for the stellar rotation period using an autocorrelation function (ACF, e), and searched for planet transits using a box least squares periodogram (BLS). In both cases, we find no significant signals. Because of sector-to-sector systematics, our BLS analysis treats one sector at a time. In f, we show the periodogram of Sector 48 as an example.
Paper: A Jupiter Analog Orbiting The Nearby M Dwarf GJ 463
Authors: Michael Endl, Paul Robertson, William D. Cochran, Phillip J. MacQueen, Brendan P. Bowler, Kyle E. Franson, Rae Holcomb, Corey Beard, Howard Isaacson, Andrew W. Howard, Jack Lubin
Figure caption:  a: RVs of GJ 463 from HET/HRS (blue) and Keck/HIRES (red) with our model to the planet signal shown as a dashed black curve. 100 randomly-selected samples from the Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) chains are shown in gray. b: RV residuals to the 1-planet fit.
Paper: A Jupiter Analog Orbiting The Nearby M Dwarf GJ 463
Authors: Michael Endl, Paul Robertson, William D. Cochran, Phillip J. MacQueen, Brendan P. Bowler, Kyle E. Franson, Rae Holcomb, Corey Beard, Howard Isaacson, Andrew W. Howard, Jack Lubin
Figure caption: Generalized Lomb–Scargle periodograms of the combined HRS and HIRES RVs before (top) and after (middle) subtracting a 1-planet model to the data. The window function is shown in the bottom panel. Dashed lines show the approximate power level required for a P value of 1% (black), and the extent of our observational time baseline (orange).
Paper: A Jupiter Analog Orbiting The Nearby M Dwarf GJ 463
Authors: Michael Endl, Paul Robertson, William D. Cochran, Phillip J. MacQueen, Brendan P. Bowler, Kyle E. Franson, Rae Holcomb, Corey Beard, Howard Isaacson, Andrew W. Howard, Jack Lubin
Figure caption: Top: Hα index for the HRS (orange) and HIRES (burgundy) spectra. Bottom: generalized Lomb–Scargle periodogram of the combined Hα time series after fitting a zero-point offset between the HRS and HIRES data. We see no evidence of a long-period activity cycle such as might cause the observed RV signal.
Paper: Systematic KMTNet Planetary Anomaly Search. VI. Complete Sample of 2018 Sub-prime-field Planets
Authors: Youn Kil Jung, Weicheng Zang, Cheongho Han, Andrew Gould, Andrzej Udalski, Michael D. Albrow, Sun-Ju Chung, Kyu-Ha Hwang, Yoon-Hyun Ryu, In-Gu Shin, Yossi Shvartzvald, Hongjing Yang, Jennifer C. Yee, Sang-Mok Cha, Dong-Jin Kim, Seung-Lee Kim, Chung-Uk Lee, Dong-Joo Lee, Yongseok Lee, Byeong-Gon Park, Richard W. Pogge, Przemek Mróz, Michał K. Szymański, Jan Skowron, Radek Poleski, Igor Soszyński, Paweł Pietrukowicz, Szymon Kozłowski, Krzysztof Ulaczyk, Krzysztof A. Rybicki, Patryk Iwanek, Marcin Wrona
Figure caption: Data (color-coded by observatory) together with the predictions and residuals for the models of KMT-2018-BLG-0173 specified in Table 8. The short bump at t anom = 8256 has 3 possible explanations: source hitting minor-image caustic (left inset), source hitting major-image caustic (right inset) [both with ﹩\mathrm{log}q=-3.0﹩], or 1L2S model. The last cannot be decisively rejected based on current data (see Sections 3.8 and 4.7). Therefore, this event should not be cataloged as planetary.