K2 Engineering test Candidates

• by andrew418

  Dear Planet Hunters,

  I am sure many of you remember the K2 engineering test, when K2 observed about 2000 stars for 9 days to test whether K2 worked, and found its first planet. K2 is going to re-observe parts of that field in Campaign 12, and there is a deadline for proposals to observe stars in Campaign 12 coming up in about 3 weeks.

  I would like to call upon your collective wisdom and knowledge about interesting targets from the engineering test field to create a list of targets that K2 should make sure to observe again in Campaign 12. We have already proposed for HIP 116454 (AKA K2-2) to be re-observed in short-cadence mode, but if there are any other planet candidates or otherwise interesting objects, please let me know. I'm happy to include anyone who contributes targets on the proposal.

  You can look at the K2 engineering test light curves here: https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~avanderb/allk2engobs.html

  Feel free to post ideas for targets here on this thread, or email me at avanderburg@cfa.harvard.edu . Thank you very much! If we're able to add new targets (or request that existing targets be observed in short-cadence), we can learn more about these planets.

  Best,
  Andrew Vanderburg

  Posted July 27, 2016 4:34 PM

• by andrew418

  I just checked this target with a convincing single-transit, and it unfortunately just barely misses the Campaign 12 field of view.

  https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~avanderb/k2/ep60023754.html

  Posted July 27, 2016 4:35 PM

• by Artman40

  By the way, how many engineering field target and field 12 target overlaps will be observed?

  Posted July 27, 2016 6:08 PM

• by Dolorous_Edd

  How about

  Good looking dips: EPIC's

  60021220 - EB ; with dips up to 50%

  60018343? - single drop at 1866.60 ~1.2% drop so maybe EB instead ( also mentioned here https://talk.planethunters.org/#/boards/BPH0000007/discussions/DPH00008gd)

  60023653 - 2 transits at 1863.29 and 1866.23 ; EB

  60020058 - 4 transits; period = 1.591 ; 2 % drop maybe EB

  60019950 - 2 transits ; period = 3.832; maybe EB

  60020829 - good looking dip at 1866.38

  60020898 - good looking dip at 1865.16

  60043810 - maybe dip at 1864.28

  60024244 - single dip; EB at 1866.98 ( also mentioned here https://talk.planethunters.org/#/boards/BPH0000007/discussions/DPH00008gd)

  60024087 - dip at 1864.433

  60023342 - good looking dip at 1867.31

  60019152 - some dips but dunno maybe EB or MPC ; same as 60019155

  60019639 - at 1863.26

  60021539 - maybe dip at 1864.34

  60020287 - good looking dip at 1865.43

  60023873 - maybe dip at 1867.06

  60024030 - maybe dip at 1866.26

  60024517 - maybe dip at 1864.35

  Dips category "Maybe":

  60021072 - maybe dip at 1865.72

  60020780 - 1866.04

  60018627 - dip at 1865.80

  60019104 - maybe dip at 1867.45

  60019114 - maybe dip at 1865.98

  60019121 - maybe dip at 1864.70

  60019414 - maybe dip at 1866.22

  60019802 - maybe at 1866.19

  60019863 - maybe at 1864.69

  60020021 - dip at 1866.17

  60020081 - dip at ~1865.69

  60020323 - maybe dip at 1866

  60020505 - 1864.64 even if real maybe EB

  60020496 - maybe at 1866.241

  60020946 - transit at 1863.07, but difficult to assess depth; maybe processing issue

  60021005 - maybe dip at 1866.22

  60021337 - maybe dip at 1866.00

  Likely FP:

  60024428 - maybe dip at 1868.06; EB?

  60024297 - maybe dip 1866.73

  60023534 - dip at 1866.10

  60020300 - maybe EB

  60020262 - dip at 1862.80 and 1868.78

  60019450

  60018660 - maybe dip at 1865.69

  60018813 - maybe dip at 1866.200

  60018953 - maybe dips at 1863.69 and 1864.71

  60019157

  60019454 - maybe EB

  60019956 - some dips, maybe contamination

  Edit 30.07*

  60017969 - trinary?

  60018220 - RR lyr?

  60018226 - RR lyr?

  60018227 - rr lyr?

  60018240 - EB?

  60018243 - EB?

  60018645 - rr lyr same as 60018644

  60018647 - rr lyr

  60018649 - rr lyr

  60018650 - rr lyr

  60018656 - rr lyr

  60018663 - rr lyr

  60018669 - rr lyr

  60018670 - rr lyr

  60018673 - rr lyr

  60018676 - rr lyr

  60018679 - rr lyr

  60018708 - rr lyr

  60018709 - rr lyr

  60018722 - rr lyr

  60018732 - rr lyr

  60018737 - rr lyr

  60018742 - rr lyr

  60018743 - rr lyr

  60018750 - rr lyr

  60018752 - rr lyr

  60018755 - rr lyr

  60018763 - rr lyr

  60018771 - rr lyr

  60018773 - rr lyr

  60018778 - rr lyr

  60018779 - rr lyr

  60018780 - rr lyr

  Posted July 27, 2016 6:19 PM

• by ajamyajax in response to Dolorous_Edd's comment.

  Ivan, nice list. Let me know when you are done and I'll run it through the K2fov program to identify which are in the C12 field of view.

  Posted July 27, 2016 8:32 PM

• by ajamyajax

  Hey guys, I just realized I could run ALL the engineering candidates through the K2fov program (1951 count). So here is a list of those that seem to be in the C12 field of view and on silicon, as they describe it. Hope it helps.

  EPIC, RA, Dec, KepMag, K2fov flag (2 means In the C12 field of view and on silicon)

  60017806 353.616152 -1.580064 11.5 2
  
  60021410 353.955353 0.445516 9.51 2
  
  60021409 353.516192 0.181646 10.13 2
  
  60021412 355.895477 -7.923332 9.61 2
  
  60023097 350.846048 -2.946854 10.18 2
  
  60023153 351.308077 -2.873243 10.57 2
  
  60023165 351.406669 -2.83146 11.29 2
  
  60023173 351.445019 -2.801214 10.43 2
  
  60023193 351.609544 -3.971506 12.36 2
  
  60023200 351.6684 -3.86414 11.12 2
  
  60023224 351.900043 1.322956 10.47 2
  
  60023231 351.9684 -2.126308 11.56 2
  
  60023237 352.062881 -2.097033 11.37 2
  
  60023238 352.069042 -2.423287 11.86 2
  
  60023252 352.164646 -4.427818 11.61 2
  
  60023266 352.256478 -4.280919 10.93 2
  
  60023274 352.317695 -0.152013 11.5 2
  
  60023282 352.380345 -1.921761 11.45 2
  
  60023284 352.387946 -0.298115 10.91 2
  
  60023290 352.436507 -1.950526 11.15 2
  
  60023297 352.458101 -0.591769 11.11 2
  
  60023312 352.573593 -0.13011 10.71 2
  
  60023319 352.610871 -1.856252 10.54 2
  
  60023328 352.685807 -1.86099 11.13 2
  
  60023343 352.774257 0.130458 11.69 2
  
  60023349 352.818328 -5.371656 11.26 2
  
  60023353 352.829998 -0.197237 10.49 2
  
  60023361 352.890394 -0.205785 12.68 2
  
  60023362 352.909854 0.003872 10.87 2
  
  60023380 353.058301 -1.285226 11.01 2
  
  60023381 353.062461 -3.4896 11.36 2
  
  60023394 353.138273 -3.192685 11.2 2
  
  60023403 353.179487 0.571493 11.1 2
  
  60023408 353.224751 -1.263308 10.02 2
  
  60023420 353.302941 -3.21024 10.03 2
  
  60023422 353.329157 -6.032153 10.25 2
  
  60023424 353.333003 -3.623965 11.82 2
  
  60023427 353.405247 -1.573103 11.87 2
  
  60023431 353.421237 -1.514438 9.86 2
  
  60023433 353.42721 1.021281 10.91 2
  
  60023437 353.492965 -2.835741 10.24 2
  
  60023446 353.551066 -6.152545 11.29 2
  
  60023448 353.55271 -3.047722 11.61 2
  
  60023452 353.586519 0.916586 11.55 2
  
  60023456 353.604773 -5.833043 10.8 2
  
  60023460 353.652183 -3.406048 10.37 2
  
  60023466 353.678927 0.77046 11.11 2
  
  60023467 353.682354 0.130255 10.58 2
  
  60023469 353.689798 -3.333179 11.95 2
  
  60023470 353.694502 0.866694 10.82 2
  
  60023474 353.727843 -2.20924 11.32 2
  
  60023479 353.770051 -4.368661 11.01 2
  
  60023484 353.798184 -4.468316 10.3 2
  
  60023487 353.8378 0.31654 10.08 2
  
  60023489 353.848511 -2.434253 10.21 2
  
  60023498 353.896168 -4.154175 11.19 2
  
  60023505 353.962992 0.364767 9.96 2
  
  60023506 353.966198 -4.182687 9.96 2
  
  60023509 354.028165 1.271299 10.1 2
  
  60023526 354.152335 -2.404138 12.95 2
  
  60023534 354.20565 -2.105777 12.27 2
  
  60023539 354.275066 -2.485041 11.49 2
  
  60023550 354.36602 0.563011 10.77 2
  
  60023551 354.371318 1.64715 10.43 2
  
  60023559 354.419939 -4.204023 12.18 2
  
  60023571 354.516556 -2.689666 10.64 2
  
  60023576 354.531379 -3.016421 10.92 2
  
  60023588 354.633212 1.857653 10.31 2
  
  60023591 354.659698 -2.563734 10.42 2
  
  60023603 354.767576 -7.613885 12.03 2
  
  60023614 354.874611 -7.515687 10.12 2
  
  60023615 354.87639 -3.630888 10.98 2
  
  60023617 354.892961 0.042382 10.3 2
  
  60023634 354.968916 -8.537869 10.97 2
  
  60023638 354.989806 -3.402175 10.96 2
  
  60023642 355.000605 -8.709981 10.53 2
  
  60023645 355.007858 -3.631782 10.27 2
  
  60023660 355.054006 -8.690675 10.97 2
  
  60023686 355.242054 -8.673797 11.48 2
  
  60023688 355.264658 -8.501609 10.7 2
  
  60023690 355.280581 1.518433 11.84 2
  
  60023704 355.396482 -9.30048 10.86 2
  
  60023712 355.460628 -9.387109 11.26 2
  
  60023714 355.469682 -8.709074 11.14 2
  
  60023720 355.506655 0.344487 10.3 2
  
  60023723 355.517263 -3.740601 10.39 2
  
  60023727 355.53784 -9.047618 12.09 2
  
  60023749 355.674264 -9.095963 10.52 2
  
  60023763 355.782347 -8.612816 10.8 2
  
  60023767 355.793553 -8.549061 9.71 2
  
  60023789 355.940562 -7.847252 11.03 2
  
  60023790 355.944686 -9.01223 10.44 2
  
  60023792 355.96143 0.266044 11.92 2
  
  60023804 356.061215 0.504142 10.5 2
  
  60023812 356.127705 -8.152273 10.11 2
  
  60023815 356.134708 -8.055291 12.06 2
  
  60023853 356.389587 -8.34084 10.32 2
  
  60023868 356.570084 -8.412244 10.96 2
  
  60023877 356.667875 -8.630717 9.77 2
  
  60023879 356.691773 -3.413819 9.63 2
  
  60023888 356.745793 -7.571093 11.48 2
  
  60023890 356.754117 -7.894546 11.04 2
  
  60023892 356.756688 -7.449443 11.67 2
  
  60023896 356.766766 -3.422842 11.89 2
  
  60023900 356.801556 -7.72095 11.14 2
  
  60023913 356.921605 -4.325494 9.78 2
  
  60023923 356.999357 -7.599351 10.24 2
  
  60023933 357.045344 -4.50145 11.43 2
  
  60023934 357.05109 -7.790482 10.65 2
  
  60023938 357.060085 -6.800045 11.78 2
  
  60023945 357.114735 -3.167523 11.61 2
  
  60023951 357.152846 -6.749256 11.7 2
  
  60023962 357.217997 -3.515581 11.05 2
  
  60023973 357.313659 -3.765413 10.06 2
  
  60024002 357.530731 -5.087061 11.65 2
  
  60024004 357.540371 -7.457612 11.17 2
  
  60024012 357.602191 -5.339245 10.96 2
  
  60024022 357.642364 -5.361305 10.76 2
  
  60024027 357.67055 -6.944623 11.78 2
  
  60024068 357.959818 -3.111271 10.93 2
  
  60024073 358.009218 -6.938228 10.77 2
  
  60024075 358.023763 -7.22231 11.02 2
  
  60024079 358.036159 -4.810979 10.78 2
  
  60024110 358.170917 -7.232944 12.49 2
  
  60024117 358.228927 -3.476821 10.15 2
  
  60024127 358.283339 -3.492182 10.91 2
  
  60024162 358.49248 -3.255189 9.88 2
  
  60024168 358.517832 -3.042174 10.97 2
  
  60024180 358.594031 -8.50913 10.4 2
  
  60024207 358.743462 -3.185298 10.48 2
  
  60024209 358.748059 -7.944081 12.34 2
  
  60024224 358.822197 -4.199138 10.2 2
  
  60024226 358.832302 -7.948087 11.14 2
  
  60024244 358.906979 -4.369421 12.22 2
  
  60024298 359.145865 -4.170408 11.11 2
  
  60024319 359.267927 -4.23144 11.5 2
  
  60018813 354.77309 -0.56859 14.0 2
  
  60018875 359.18104 -4.06515 14.1 2
  
  60018881 357.9683 -2.91286 14.1 2
  
  60018905 353.22391 -6.26302 14.1 2
  
  60018910 353.88062 -4.62239 14.1 2
  
  60018913 353.50754 -1.22269 14.1 2
  
  60018944 352.21419 1.03158 14.2 2
  
  60018956 354.75828 1.5498 14.2 2
  
  60018959 354.80096 1.23432 14.2 2
  
  60018995 356.69539 -4.19027 14.2 2
  
  60018997 357.28763 -3.97564 14.2 2
  
  60019000 358.4782 -3.41843 14.2 2
  
  60019002 358.17383 -3.1712 14.2 2
  
  60019030 352.07859 -3.64799 14.2 2
  
  60019101 352.07313 -0.0602 14.3 2
  
  60019117 358.33732 -4.64892 14.3 2
  
  60019118 356.84203 -4.23038 14.3 2
  
  60019122 358.486 -3.28809 14.3 2
  
  60019123 358.48615 -2.78422 14.3 2
  
  60019147 355.35065 -8.82421 14.3 2
  
  60019150 355.62647 -8.45766 14.3 2
  
  60019158 352.04107 -4.46148 14.3 2
  
  60019159 353.50259 -6.30422 14.3 2
  
  60019163 352.68068 -3.14082 14.3 2
  
  60019165 353.17691 -3.25094 14.3 2
  
  60019233 352.36036 0.17622 14.4 2
  
  60019240 354.54205 -0.74728 14.4 2
  
  60019271 354.88393 -8.46854 14.4 2
  
  60019276 350.76232 -2.93635 14.4 2
  
  60019281 353.49833 -6.39828 14.4 2
  
  60019283 358.76799 -7.80253 14.4 2
  
  60019284 353.03423 -5.09056 14.4 2
  
  60019286 357.85589 -7.46197 14.4 2
  
  60019289 352.25253 -2.42494 14.4 2
  
  60019291 352.58497 -2.98452 14.4 2
  
  60019346 352.10238 1.14789 14.5 2
  
  60019353 353.69574 1.40808 14.5 2
  
  60019401 354.0623 -0.54525 14.5 2
  
  60019402 354.13498 -0.50985 14.5 2
  
  60019406 356.98567 -4.23301 14.5 2
  
  60019445 355.22268 -8.2055 14.5 2
  
  60019457 356.97133 -7.83155 14.5 2
  
  60019460 358.6119 -7.85007 14.5 2
  
  60019461 353.90328 -6.09331 14.5 2
  
  60019465 353.08331 -3.91018 14.5 2
  
  60019470 353.45951 -2.96589 14.5 2
  
  60019525 352.44403 0.2213 14.6 2
  
  60019528 353.00547 0.87885 14.6 2
  
  60019577 352.85021 -0.44677 14.6 2
  
  60019586 354.32944 -0.38594 14.6 2
  
  60019591 359.4032 -4.42018 14.6 2
  
  60019635 351.307 -3.06834 14.6 2
  
  60019636 357.1568 -8.24608 14.6 2
  
  60019637 352.76556 -5.69528 14.6 2
  
  60019638 353.82185 -6.71009 14.6 2
  
  60019639 353.21447 -6.16713 14.6 2
  
  60019641 356.93428 -8.05007 14.6 2
  
  60019646 356.74755 -7.285 14.6 2
  
  60019649 352.71649 -2.89003 14.6 2
  
  60019650 352.80943 -3.13352 14.6 2
  
  60019651 352.99174 -3.1586 14.6 2
  
  60019652 352.65891 -1.99527 14.6 2
  
  60019721 353.78179 0.78316 14.7 2
  
  60019727 353.80261 0.33439 14.7 2
  
  60019740 355.75288 0.6559 14.7 2
  
  60019775 352.24059 -0.14458 14.7 2
  
  60019792 358.51385 -4.92128 14.7 2
  
  60019795 358.40242 -4.7511 14.7 2
  
  60019796 358.40248 -4.74874 14.7 2
  
  60019799 356.84581 -4.06489 14.7 2
  
  60019803 356.92073 -3.56531 14.7 2
  
  60019857 351.258 -3.08409 14.7 2
  
  60019858 358.77704 -8.40882 14.7 2
  
  60019872 354.11475 -4.58369 14.7 2
  
  60019930 351.91365 1.2653 14.8 2
  
  60019948 353.88513 1.28573 14.8 2
  
  60019950 354.9707 1.98333 14.8 2
  
  60019993 353.62625 -0.91597 14.8 2
  
  60019997 357.81398 -5.57621 14.8 2
  
  60020007 358.39779 -4.76099 14.8 2
  
  60020017 358.61577 -3.21205 14.8 2
  
  60020021 357.97772 -2.48931 14.8 2
  
  60020057 355.84707 -8.80826 14.8 2
  
  60020062 354.65792 -7.72582 14.8 2
  
  60020065 351.16081 -3.09353 14.8 2
  
  60020067 353.86839 -6.85629 14.8 2
  
  60020068 353.33827 -6.1901 14.8 2
  
  60020071 356.17134 -7.61728 14.8 2
  
  60020086 353.9153 -4.25802 14.8 2
  
  60020089 353.36529 -1.48377 14.8 2
  
  60020092 353.8181 -2.30091 14.8 2
  
  60020152 352.24284 0.28069 14.9 2
  
  60020161 353.67949 0.76908 14.9 2
  
  60020164 353.70029 0.53665 14.9 2
  
  60020165 354.00724 1.19618 14.9 2
  
  60020174 355.33521 0.31935 14.9 2
  
  60020218 352.57856 0.05278 14.9 2
  
  60020231 355.05716 -3.9364 14.9 2
  
  60020237 354.72328 -0.37328 14.9 2
  
  60020238 358.88337 -4.2871 14.9 2
  
  60020241 358.88811 -4.08526 14.9 2
  
  60020247 357.06168 -3.23339 14.9 2
  
  60020248 357.15832 -3.15399 14.9 2
  
  60020287 355.74692 -9.00496 14.9 2
  
  60020297 356.50163 -8.6052 14.9 2
  
  60020298 354.69813 -7.80665 14.9 2
  
  60020300 351.11111 -2.6611 14.9 2
  
  60020301 354.9087 -7.43847 14.9 2
  
  60020304 353.66741 -6.37098 14.9 2
  
  60020306 353.89622 -6.22507 14.9 2
  
  60020318 352.50614 -3.15441 14.9 2
  
  60020324 353.9001 -4.82925 14.9 2
  
  60020327 353.32715 -3.71762 14.9 2
  
  60020330 353.46988 -3.27746 14.9 2
  
  60020331 353.51076 -3.21912 14.9 2
  
  60020334 353.52932 -3.0492 14.9 2
  
  60020365 351.50452 0.92219 15.0 2
  
  60020378 353.43532 1.25214 15.0 2
  
  60020381 353.87943 0.38488 15.0 2
  
  60020428 354.53573 -0.22557 15.0 2
  
  60020462 355.957 -7.972 15.0 2
  
  60020473 353.12031 -3.11305 15.0 2
  
  60020478 354.32459 -2.00245 15.0 2
  
  60020480 354.70127 -2.64164 15.0 2
  
  60018236 352.825 -0.511667 11.44 2
  
  60018238 354.875 -3.631667 9.83 2
  
  60018257 355.463498 -8.356861 9.58 2
  
  60018263 353.413162 -1.050064 9.61 2
  
  60018272 354.903928 1.502268 9.64 2
  
  60018277 354.731254 -0.198078 9.66 2
  
  60018292 352.162157 -4.456712 9.76 2
  
  60018329 359.047526 -3.976344 9.98 2
  
  60018330 355.492725 1.354381 9.98 2
  
  60018352 354.90943 -3.825002 10.08 2
  
  60018358 353.583351 0.201379 10.09 2
  
  60018372 354.858509 -3.476109 10.15 2
  
  60018382 357.538597 -4.406451 10.18 2
  
  60018394 354.033199 -6.232208 10.22 2
  
  60018400 357.943945 -5.510886 10.23 2
  
  60018403 353.666168 -1.505824 10.24 2
  
  60018418 353.166499 -5.169472 10.31 2
  
  60018432 358.088993 -5.265628 10.36 2
  
  60018446 354.31696 -2.926123 10.45 2
  
  60018454 352.216778 -4.090156 10.46 2
  
  60018558 352.734354 -0.502311 10.8 2
  
  60018573 354.335854 -7.466033 10.83 2
  
  60018588 357.876566 -6.604316 10.87 2
  
  60018601 359.30653 -3.801155 10.9 2
  
  60018610 357.340885 -6.585084 10.93 2
  
  60018630 354.663038 -2.464256 10.98 2
  
  60020501 355.769708 -8.962972 9.71 2
  
  60020519 352.288917 -2.167472 10.85 2
  
  60020537 352.733667 -5.322278 10.79 2
  
  60020552 352.037875 1.165944 10.73 2
  
  60020562 354.915292 -7.52675 10.73 2
  
  60020563 353.657875 -0.137083 10.09 2
  
  60020567 355.12475 -3.59175 10.36 2
  
  60020570 352.830042 -0.197222 10.5 2
  
  60020575 356.463542 -8.054556 10.74 2
  
  60020590 356.985833 -7.995583 11.74 2
  
  60020630 354.92975 -7.548778 11.91 2
  
  60020635 354.892958 0.042417 11.36 2
  
  60020637 357.635542 -4.35025 11.27 2
  
  60020662 352.113333 -4.56725 12.23 2
  
  60020677 355.469583 -8.709056 12.07 2
  
  60020688 358.72925 -3.29575 12.31 2
  
  60020710 358.059083 -2.846694 12.12 2
  
  60020716 355.22975 -3.655194 12.24 2
  
  60020780 352.958235 -0.307 10.79 2
  
  60020781 354.899334 -7.366737 10.7 2
  
  60020792 355.054155 -8.690714 11.56 2
  
  60020809 358.425474 -4.761268 12.74 2
  
  60020831 353.076981 -0.586503 13.99 2
  
  60020832 354.286343 0.677978 13.48 2
  
  60020843 354.41514 -0.62559 13.48 2
  
  60020866 353.757547 -6.34587 13.85 2
  
  60020901 356.788203 -3.805115 13.96 2
  
  60020905 357.027322 -3.455112 13.18 2
  
  60020984 353.721502 -4.477937 14.98 2
  
  60020986 353.280252 -3.094776 14.59 2
  
  60021005 354.179678 -0.436498 14.55 2
  
  60021009 356.242019 -7.431002 14.35 2
  
  60021066 353.553667 -4.661331 14.32 2
  
  60021096 357.436753 -7.308337 14.9 2
  
  60021120 352.424145 -5.2916 15.53 2
  
  60021128 351.683115 -4.244023 15.95 2
  
  60021133 358.202243 -3.157188 15.06 2
  
  60021142 353.16503 -2.68237 15.8 2
  
  60021221 352.96678 -0.134859 15.42 2
  
  60021240 353.95212 0.894477 15.61 2
  
  60021243 353.2737 0.76154 15.18 2
  
  60021256 353.6083 -1.205026 15.91 2
  
  60021260 354.49484 -0.801444 15.81 2
  
  60021268 354.74491 -0.227061 14.65 2
  
  60021278 352.68724 0.144821 15.07 2
  
  60021281 355.76668 0.177065 15.85 2
  
  60021288 354.5643 -0.554548 15.15 2
  
  60021381 356.65808 -8.65313 15.31 2
  
  60041977 352.076042 -4.338422 12.86 2
  
  60042452 351.660828 0.95016 12.89 2
  
  60042608 352.520083 -5.216182 12.9 2
  
  60043014 353.767567 -4.759727 12.92 2
  
  60043688 353.234064 -5.354096 12.96 2
  
  60043810 351.932377 -4.65187 12.97 2
  
  60044078 354.556747 -7.99468 12.99 2
  
  60044092 355.882057 -8.701624 12.99 2
  
  60044113 352.039529 -2.223458 12.99 2
  
  60017828 353.644583 -1.326667 13.06 2
  
  60017836 354.711423 -7.688873 13.26 2
  
  60017839 351.786667 -4.41 13.86 2
  
  60017849 355.895477 -7.923332 10.17 2
  
  60017850 352.884491 -3.373459 9.53 2
  
  60017880 353.513885 0.179413 10.22 2
  
  60017942 354.83187 -0.04258 18.79 2
  
  60017968 352.304362 -0.185061 19.36 2
  
  60017970 351.671617 0.795622 15.74 2
  
  60017987 354.775 -0.29847 19.34 2
  
  60017993 352.56025 -3.228789 10.45 2
  
  60018002 356.01238 0.34464 12.56 2
  
  60018004 358.369379 -8.072083 10.93 2
  
  60018007 351.728354 1.282144 15.04 2
  
  60018014 356.151292 0.303467 19.08 2
  
  60018054 356.03496 0.34231 12.34 2
  
  60018059 358.365729 -8.077569 16.15 2
  
  60018066 354.86825 -0.34444 19.16 2
  
  60017814 356.826447 -8.086691 10.4 2
  
  60017816 352.914004 -2.701678 13.0 2
  
  60017822 352.818348 -5.371712 11.3 2
  
  60017898 353.97454 -4.70394 15.9 2
  
  60017901 356.57104 -8.26244 15.4 2
  
  60017914 358.497758 -8.558653 18.25 2
  
  60017939 358.283875 -8.487925 16.92 2
  
  60018081 353.64429 -1.32694 13.06 2
  
  60018113 353.513885 0.179413 10.14 2
  
  60018115 356.019721 0.381883 10.63 2
  
  60018117 352.937233 -2.744343 13.3 2
  
  60018185 351.294542 -2.679669 12.55 2
  
  60018190 352.3881 -2.231158 11.51 2
  
  60018204 354.025008 -2.203369 12.77 2
  
  60018219 356.82645 -7.913309 10.41 2
  
  60018644 354.15513 -2.21173 12.2 2
  
  60018645 354.155921 -2.212439 12.44 2
  
  60018652 354.993958 0.809417 13.74 2
  
  60018655 354.99402 0.80946 13.89 2
  
  60018662 355.530583 0.547972 14.22 2
  
  60018669 351.6148 -2.97015 14.49 2
  
  60018676 353.11519 -5.39302 14.63 2
  
  60018678 352.16375 1.0285 14.86 2
  
  60018708 356.483 -7.4726 15.81 2
  
  60018743 352.99328 -4.92403 16.48 2
  
  60018779 351.77498 -2.31793 17.41 2
  

  Posted July 27, 2016 10:39 PM

• by andrew418

  This is great, thanks so much!

  About 350 out of 2000 targets could be reobserved in C12.

  I also have uploaded new/improved light curves for the engineering test which are often better than the original ones I made almost two years ago now. You can find them here: https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~avanderb/allk2c-1obs.html

  I have started a list of the transits that look to me to be real, and also are going to be observe -- there are a lot of really nice ones that miss the detector!

  60020287 -- this one looks nice! could be a long-ish period planet around an M-dwarf.

  60019950 -- maybe an EB, but it's an M-dwarf host, so the size is planetary (roughly 9 R_e), and the transits look flat-bottomed. We can put it at a lower priority and see whether the director thinks it's worth short cadence.

  Possibly 60023534, but this is pretty low significance.

  I'll take another look at these and the others. We will have to be very certain if we want to ask for short-cadence observations: observing one additional one short-cadence target means 30 other targets that might have planets around them are not observed!

  Posted July 28, 2016 12:07 AM

• by Artman40

  By the way, these target proposals have to go through Director's Discretionary Target program, right? It's going to be hard to justify the reasons why these targets didn't go through normal Guest Observer program.

  Posted July 28, 2016 4:10 AM

• by andrew418

  Yes, this will be a DDT proposal, but I think our justification can just be "We didn't have the idea to do this until after the GO deadline passed."

  Posted July 28, 2016 4:05 PM

• by Artman40

  By the way, in Kepler's Science Center there are a lot of proposals and targets. How to tell which proposals were part of a DDT program?

  Posted July 28, 2016 4:28 PM

• by andrew418

  The DDT proposals are listed on http://keplerscience.arc.nasa.gov/k2-approved-programs.html with program IDs in the 900s:

  So GO10901 is a DDT proposal, while GO10077 is a normal GO proposal.

  Posted July 28, 2016 4:56 PM

• by Shellface

  Ah, I had been wondering how much attention the Engineering overlap would get. This is good to see.

  I'm not sure why the EPIC numbers for the engineering test targets differ in format to the rest (start with 6 rather than 2), but it is important to note that the 6- numbers are not present in the EPIC, but instead they have corresponding 2- numbers. Use co-ordinate searches to compare the two.

  The WASP team is likely to request it anyway, but I would encourage that WASP-28 (ID 246375295 / 60017806) gets short-cadence observations. Aside from the usual reasons this would allow strong constraints on TTVs, and the planet is also a decent target for eclipse detection (it lies at around the temperature where hot jupiters transition from low-albedo to intermediate albedo)

  I can also do some quick vetting - not to the usual level of detail, but enough to identify the most planet-like signals. Below are objects from Edd's list that fall in C12 FOV (diagram) (bold = planet candidates):

  ID 60023653 (EPIC 246329316): It appears this will fall on one of the dead detectors, but I agree that this is probably an EB. Even from the short dataset it can be seen that the primary appears to be tidally locked. The primary seems to be late-G.

  ID 60020058 (EPIC 246024927): This is 14" away from the V = 8 star HD 222891, and the Kepler pixel map is blended with that star. HD 222891 has been identified as an EB with the same period in literature, so this is an EB blend.

  ID 60019950 (EPIC 246496509): This is an ~M0 dwarf, so the 2% depth correspond to a radius of about 9 Rearth - perhaps this is a rare M-dwarf HJ?. The transit durations are a good match with the expected duration for its spectral type and there are no nearby stars in the SDSS, so this is likely an on-target planet (or BD). The star is faint, so it may not be worth an SC slot.

  ID 60020829 (EPIC 246416997): This will likely not be in the FOV, but it is close. The star is identified as a giant, but I do doubt that - for its faintness, it has considerable proper motions. It appears to have a spectral type around M0, so if the single dip is real it corresponds to a ~2 Rearth object. The dip is ~3 hours long, so for a planetary companion the period is probably 1-2 weeks. At V = 14 this is unfortunately too faint for non-Kepler period identification.

  ID 60020898 (EPIC 246159333): This will likely fall on one of the dead detectors. There does not appear to be anything at 1865.16 in the new reduction, so it was likely not real. There are two sharp dips at 1865.7 and 1867.5, but as nothing appears at ~1863.9 they are probably not real either.

  ID 60043810 (EPIC 246218278): Nothing much appears at 1864.28 in the new reduction, so this was likely not real. Nothing appears to be present in the Kepler aperture, so also the star doesn't real? (It appears in the EPIC just fine, though)

  ID 60024244 (EPIC 246233135): At best, this will just barely fall onto the corner of the field. I agree that this is undoubtedly an EB - the target SpT is ~G8, so the companion radius is perhaps 0.25 - 0.30 Rsol.

  ID 60023342 (EPIC 246460495): This may fall between detectors and go unobserved. The aperture contains two bright stars (+EPIC 246460595 at ~15"), so the transit must be blended to some degree. Still, at 0.15% depth it could possibly be planetary even around the fainter star. The brighter star is ~K0 and the fainter one is ~G3. The transit is ~5 hours long, so the period may be long relative to C12 observations. Pending further information it may be worth observing both stars, if they fall on silicon.

  ID 60019639 (EPIC 246145090): I don't really understand the aperture here, but again there doesn't appear to be anything in it.

  ID 60020287 (EPIC 246018746): This appears to be an ~M0 star, so the 0.8% depth corresponds to ~5 Rearth. The transit length is ~4 hours, so the orbital period may be 20 - 30 days. The star appears to be alone in the SDSS so this is a very good PC, but it is too faint (V = 15.4) to justify SC observations.

  ID 60023873 (EPIC 246465145): This may fall out of the FOV. There is a feature at 1867.06, but the entire lightcurve shows similar irregular variability so I do not think it is a transit. This is a bright (V = 10.2) ~K0 star. The variability does not seem normal for a K0 dwarf, with irregular variability at ~1 day, so I suspect this is a giant presenting sun-like oscillations.

  ID 60020780 (EPIC 246422126): This star is identified as a giant, which is likely correct considering it is bright for its spectral type (~K4), as well as the irregular lightcurve variability. The dip appears to be real and is probably a transit, but for giant radii the 0.3% depth correspond to a stellar companion.

  ID 60019121 (EPIC 246377346): There is a feature at 1864.70, but it is comparable to the photon noise of the lightcurve so it is probably not real.

  ID 60020021 (EPIC 246328856): The dip at 1866.2 contains only 1 point, so it is likely a glitch.

  ID 60020496 (EPIC 246296191): This star is identified as a giant, which I agree with. There is an apparent feature at 1866.25, but if one outlying point just prior is excluded then the feature disappears into the variability. The implied duration (~2 hours) is also impossible for a giant, so this is probably not real.

  ID 60021005 (EPIC 246418050): Nothing much appears in the new reduction.

  Nothing worth noting appears in the "likely FP" list, which is perhaps to be expected.

  Posted July 28, 2016 6:33 PM

• by Artman40

  Interesting. When excluding Campaign 9, DDT, it's currently only campaign 10 where significant number of DDT programs have been approved.

  Also, when is Campaign 11 target list decided?

  Posted July 28, 2016 7:02 PM

• by gba

  Hi -- this is Geert from the K2 office.

  I just wanted to clarify that the only reason you don't see a significant number of DDT programs in the earlier Campaigns is because we only launched the program fairly recently. We do encourage you to help us figure out which of the targets observed during the engineering test would be worth repeating in C12; a DDT proposal of this nature would be given very serious consideration.

  The C11 target list is less than a week away from being set in stone.

  Posted July 28, 2016 7:12 PM

• by Artman40

  Thank you for information! By the way, what's the current oversubscription rate for Kepler telescope by number of targets or by number of proposals?

  Posted July 28, 2016 10:01 PM

• by ajamyajax in response to gba's comment.

  Dear Geert and Andrew,

  Thank you both for asking us for ideas for the engineering targets in C12, kind of you. Because the ET data is very limited though, could we expand that scope to look at possibly interesting visual companions? We sometimes wrestle with a nearby companion to an EPIC that could have similar proper motions, might be bound, a source of contamination and so forth. Also, what about relatively nearby stars that might have some overlap in TESS or other future missions? Or would their high proper motions make synchronized observations more difficult? Just thinking that the-closer-the-better might have a few time continuum advantages for a number of sciences. Even those that are unknown at this time, possibly. Thanks again for your time and consideration.

  Posted July 29, 2016 2:27 PM

• by andrew418

  Hi all,

  Thanks all for this great work! Stand by, because there may be more light curves coming from stars that were not in the center of the postage stamps, but got observed anyway. No promises yet though. If we get them, we can look through them for more interesting candidates.

  Mark, those are great ideas, but my guess is that most of those objects have already been requested by proposers during the original call for proposals. (Although, if we're able to get light curves for the other objects in the postage stamps, we can check the visual companions for interesting features as well). In fact, I would guess that most of the stars observe by the engineering test have already been proposed to be included. The role I see for this DDT proposal is catching anything that slipped through the cracks beforehand, and using our knowledge about these stars to propose SC observations wherever we think the science may benefit.

  For what it's worth, I think 15th magnitude stars are definitely not too faint for short cadence to be important -- for 16th magnitude KOI 961 during the original Kepler mission, you can definitely see a major improvement due to the short cadence sampling.

  Andrew

  Posted July 29, 2016 4:59 PM

• by Shellface

  By the way

  By the way

  By the way

  By the way

  I got nothing.

  Stand by, because there may be more light curves coming from stars that were not in the center of the postage stamps, but got observed anyway.

  How large are these stamps? If they're >20" across there should be a fair lot to work with.

  For what it's worth, I think 15th magnitude stars are definitely not too faint for short cadence to be important -- for 16th magnitude KOI 961 during the original Kepler mission, you can definitely see a major improvement due to the short cadence sampling.

  There the transits are <1 hour in length, though…

  Still, if there really are enough slots to work with, I concede SC on faint stars is workable. For ~3000 ppm per-point precision in SC, EPIC 246496509 (1.8%) and EPIC 246018746 (0.8%) would probably considerably benefit from SC even with their transit durations.

  I also quickly put EPIC 246496509 through EXOFAST. A model of 1 + 1/2 transits isn't really presentable, but on the whole it looks good. - they likely have to be on an M-dwarf for their shape, and they are very probably on-target as a result.

  It would probably be worth doing some rudimentary follow-up immédiatement (particularly spectroscopy), if there are 3 weeks to consider SC observations. Wouldn't want to waste that on a false positive.

  Posted July 29, 2016 9:12 PM

• by ajamyajax in response to andrew418's comment.

  All right, Andrew. Thanks. And for my taxpayer dollars (and maybe we are the only two of three US citizens here funding this research), I would rather see as many LC files as you can muster, because I know you awesome professional astronomers can always collect wonderful RV data later). I mean 30 other targets dropped per SC seems like a lovely lost Jupiter or two maybe anyway.

  And if you could help Al with a set of new ET corrected files for his users, I'd be glad to look at all the K2fov candidates I listed to help too. Although Ivan is very good, and has probably found nearly everything of interest already. Up to you, of course.

  Have a great weekend everyone.

  Posted July 29, 2016 9:14 PM

• by Dolorous_Edd

  Likely redundant since " Hey! we have SDSS" but still

  EPIC 246496509 (60019950)

  UKIRT J-band ( left ) / zoomed DECaLS ( right )

  

  there are 2 visible objects one of which is ~7" to the NW SDSS J233952.85+015906.3 - no doubt, just high redshift elliptical galaxy; second is SDSS J233953.79+015855.0 also a galaxy

  

  ---

  EPIC 246018746 (60020287)

  CFHT R-band

  

  Posted July 29, 2016 9:51 PM

• by andrew418

  Hi all,

  Here is a zip file with the new ET reductions (using my current pipeline, instead of the version 1.0 pipeline that produced the original light curves). https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~avanderb/k2c-1.zip This may work with LCviewer, but Al may need to tweak things.

  The original light curves are here: https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~avanderb/k2/corcutlcs.tar.gz . I know that two years ago, Al converted these to a format compatible with LCviewer, so he may still have that around somewhere.

  To clarify about the possibility of new light curves: I currently don't have the tools necessary to identify the stars that aren't in the center of the aperture. Back then, the K2 team was just trying to get the data out as quickly as possible, so they didn't put in any information about the orientation or center of the apertures (which is why sometimes in the engineering test data you see my software try to produce a light curve when there is no star present). Since then, the K2 team has started putting that information in the files, so I never had to figure out a way to identify the rest of the stars in the postage stamps.

  There are others, though, who put in a lot of effort to identify stars elsewhere in the apertures. I've sent some emails to see if they can help out, and I think the answer will be "yes". If it doesn't end up happening though, I'll try to do something quick and dirty -- to just try to find any star I can and make a light curve, and then if we see something interesting in the light curve, we can go in and try to identify the star by hand. But it's possible the quick and dirty approach won't work well...

  During the engineering test, the postage stamps were huge! 200x200 arcseconds. So there are many other stars nearby. The field is pretty low-density though, so it's not as big a gain as it would be if we were in the original Kepler field, for example.

  Andrew

  Posted July 30, 2016 7:26 PM

• by Dolorous_Edd

  Good looking dips:

  60023551 - good dip at 1865.60; possible 2 dips at 1863.472 and 1867.32

  60023765 - maybe at 1864.76 and 1863.75

  60024469 at 1865.59

  60020780 - looks odd at 1866.03, maybe transit

  60021485 - something at 1865.91?

  60018272 - maybe 2 transits at 1865.9 and at 1862.9

  60019577 - maybe dip at 1866.2

  60019625 - maybe dip at 1867.8

  60019641 - maybe dip at 1865.9

  60019764 - dip at 1868.9

  60020424 - dip at 1866.3

  60020472 - maybe dip at 1863.4

  60021503 - long dip at 1863.5?

  60023547 - maybe dip at 1866.30

  60023765 - dip at 1864.76

  60024026 - maybe dip 1865.87

  60019121 - at 1864.71

  60019658 - at 1865.495 - also these dips seems to be periodic ; ~1.5d

  60020505 - maybe dip at 1864.6

  60021410 - HIP 116454 (AKA K2-2)

  60023933 - something at 1866?

  60020650 - at 1865.37

  60018097 - at 1867.45 and 1866.119 and 1865.39

  60020650 - multiple dips

  60020732 - dip at 1867.0

  60020737 - at 1865.2609

  60020770 - at 1865.91

  60020829 - at 1866.38

  60021383 - 1867.01

  60021563 - at 1868.42

  60021820 - some dips i.e. 2866

  60021933 - at 1864.3

  60023390 - at 1865.81

  60023403 - at 1865.98 and 1864.03

  60023948 - at 1868.80

  60023707 - at 1865.69

  60023712 - at 1865.98

  60023956 - at 1863.452

  60024221 at 1865.22

  60024322 at 1864.709 maybe long dip

  60024468 at 1863.278

  60024517 at 1864.3618

  ---

  Maybe transit

  Beware! a lot of junk for now

  60021346 - at 1865.98

  60020981 - 1868.20 looks odd

  60018224 - EB, dip at ~1865.65?

  60018252 - at 1865.39 (old ) and ~1864.9 (new)

  60018473 - dip at 1862.6

  60018619 - dip at ~1868.2

  60018811 - maybe dip at 1866

  60019031 - dip at 1867.6

  60019421 - maybe dip at 1867.7

  60019553 - maybe dip at 1863.3

  60019646 - maybe dip at 1866.9

  60020054 - good dip but nothing in apperture

  60020314 - maybe dip at 1863.2

  60020438 - maybe dip at 1868

  60020519 - maybe dip at 1863.5

  60021485 - maybe dip at 1865.9

  60021491 - 2 transits 1868.6; EB

  60021502 - 1865.7

  60021539 - maybe dip at 1865.9

  60021895 - maybe dip at 1868.1

  60021914 - maybe dip at 1868.9

  60022060 - maybe dip at 1867.5

  60023285 - EB

  60023474 - 1867.05

  60023513 - maybe dip at 1863.105

  60023518 - maybe dip at 1868.448

  60023615 - EB?

  60024098 - dip at 1864.34?

  60024123 - at 1865.628?

  60024127 - at 1866.00

  60024522 - EB

  60042608 - EB

  60043543 - maybe at 1867.63

  60018069 at 1865.97

  60018115 - at 1865.98

  60018257 - dip at 2866.5

  60018216 - at 1866.54?

  60019082 - at 1866.027

  60019117 - at 1866.78

  60019289 - 1866.80

  60019448 - 1864.4844

  60019637 - at 1866.85

  60019643 - at 1863.707

  60019651 - dip at 1866.20

  60019711 - at 1866.19

  60019779 - dip 1868.591

  60019811 - maybe dip at 1868.13

  60019870 - maybe dip at 1868.12

  60020073 - dip at 1865.99

  60020217 - 1865.67

  60020302 - at 1865.38

  60020385 - 2 dips ; i.e. 1864.68

  60020428 - dip at 1864.0553?

  60020501 - dip at 1865.638 and 1862.829

  60020966 - at 1864.157

  60021466 - at 1863.69 or 1865.26

  60021483 - at 1862.808

  60021533 - at 1865.485

  60021538 - at 1865.30

  60021598 - 1865.914

  60021681 - 1865.74

  60023740 at 1866.02

  60023756 at 1865.88

  60024207 - at 1866.844

  60024298 at 1867.21

  60024523 - eb

  60023295 - 1862.67

  60023686 - at 1863.033

  60024028 - 1865.077

  Posted July 30, 2016 7:49 PM

• by ajamyajax

  Re 60021412 and 60017849 from my C12 K2fov list: speculative, but a possible two super-Earth MPC. Also these two targets appear to be the same star. Edit: possible glitches overlap also.

  Edit/2: I might need to fix my RA/Dec list coordinates also, will do that later (update: no fix needed for this, see below)
  

  s1=1863.852 p1=1.839 d1=0.07 (1.68 hours +/-)
  
  s2=1863.35 p2=5.456 d2=0.10 (2.4 hours +/-)
  

  EPIC, 2MASS, J mag, H mag, K mag, J - H, H - K, (J-H spectral type, stellar mass est) (H-K spectral type, stellar mass est)
  
  60021412 , 2MASS J23433487-0755238 , 8.867 , 8.502 , 8.353 , 0.365 , 0.149 , ('G9V', 0.91) , ('K5V',0.75)
  
  60017849 , 2MASS J23433487-0755238 , 8.867 , 8.502 , 8.353 , 0.365 , 0.149 , ('G9V', 0.91) , ('K5V', 0.75)
  

  au min-max 0.025 0.025
  
  stellar diameter in solar units min-max 0.605 0.68
  
  stellar mass in solar units min-max 0.61 0.62
  
  period in days min-max 1.834 1.849
  
  duration in hours min-max 1.586 1.776
  

  au min-max 0.05 0.055
  
  stellar diameter in solar units min-max 0.595 0.705
  
  stellar mass in solar units min-max 0.56 0.745
  
  period in days min-max 5.457 5.458
  
  duration in hours min-max 2.311 2.49
  

  From NEA, K2 Targets within search area:
  
  EPIC Number RA [decimal degrees] Dec [decimal degrees] Distance [arc sec] Kepler-band [mag] Campaign Number
  
  60017849 355.8955 -7.9233 0.0 10.170 E
  
  60021412 355.8955 -7.9233 0.0 9.613 E
  

  epic_number,tm_name,ra,dec,k2_teff,k2_rad,k2_mass,k2_kepmag,k2_pmra,k2_pmdec,k2_dist
  
  60021412,2MASS J23433487-0755238,355.895477,-7.923332,,,,9.613,,,
  
  60017849,2MASS J23433487-0755238,355.895477,-7.923332,,,,10.170,,,
  

  Possibly listed as HD 222766 -- High proper-motion Star on Simbad, Proper motions mas/yr: 607.28 -164.86, Spectral type: G5/6V, 23 43 34.91603 -07 55 24.0049
  

  

  Update: the Exoplanet Archive has these two ID's with the same coordinates as shown above (which I used), while the coordinates in Andrew's list are slightly different as show below. They all point to the same star however.

  EPIC 60021412, Kp = 9.613, RA = 355.8955, Dec = -7.92332, List = GKM_dwarf 355.8955, -7.92332
  
  EPIC 60017849, Kp = 10.17, RA = 355.89398, Dec = -7.9229342, List = SC_target 355.89398, -7.9229342
  

  Posted July 30, 2016 11:57 PM

• by Dolorous_Edd

  ~1865,6 and ~1867.4 are glitches

  Posted July 31, 2016 12:00 AM

• by ajamyajax in response to Dolorous_Edd's comment.

  Good to know, thanks Ivan.

  Posted July 31, 2016 12:02 AM

• by alschmitt in response to andrew418's comment.

  Hi Andrew,

  Thank you for the updated ET lightcurves! I've converted these to work with LcViewer and released to users. The original set of lightcurves has been replaced with the new one. If anyone needs to access the old one, they can contact me. I generally don't keep obsolete versions around since they use up valuable Google Drive space.

  Al

  Posted July 31, 2016 12:49 PM

• by JKD

  EPIC 60017873, Signal ~1866.09 BKJD, Period =?, Duration ~2,94 hrs, Depth ~0.04%

  Posted July 31, 2016 8:15 PM

• by JKD

  EPIC 60018343 already mentioned on page 1 by DE and linked to another site

  IMO its a PC with Signal at 1866.609 BKJD, Period =?, Duration ~5.88 hrs, Depth N 1.1%

  Posted July 31, 2016 8:27 PM

• by zoo3hans

  ID 60017821 Maybe this is an EB with P=0.44038 days

  ID 60017827 Slight chance for a periodic signal with P=1.795 days, depth about 0.001, duration 1.5 days

  ID 60017946 EB with P=0.4209 days

  ID 60017970 EB with P=0.767 days

  ID 60018229 EB with P=2.1025 days

  ID 60018241 EB with P=0.554 days

  ID 60018343 PC with single transit at 1866.62 as mentioned by JKD, DE, Robert and maybe others.

  ID 60018435 EB with P=1.7883 days

  ID 60019252 Maybe EB with P=0.446 days

  ID 60019799 Maybe PC or EB with P=2.085 days, depth 0.0028, duration about 2.5 hours

  ID 60019806 Maybe single transit at 1864.04, depth 0.0014, duration 4.5 hours

  ID 60019809 Maybe long transit from 1863.15 to 1864.71, depth 0.001, duration about 1.56 days

  ID 60019950 As mentioned by Shellface: maybe a good PC with P=3.8 days

  ID 60020287 As mentioned by Shellface: maybe a good PC, at 1865.44, depth 0.008, duration about 4.5 hours

  ID 60020298 EB with P=2.375 days

  ID 60020612 Maybe EB with P=1.5066 days (or just a pulsating variable)

  ID 60021220 As mentioned by Ivan: EB with P=0.6925 days

  ID 60023342 Single transit at 1867.32, depth 0.0012, duration 5.5 hours

  ID 60023653 Mentioned by Shellface: Maybe EB or PC, P=2.93 days, depth 0.0035, duration about 4.5 hours

  ID 60023765 As mentioned by Ivan: Maybe transit at 1864.76, depth 0.0002, duration 4 hours

  ID 60024040 EB with P=1.917 days

  ID 60024522 / 60024523 As mentioned by Ivan: EB. P=0.8714 days

  Posted July 31, 2016 8:39 PM

• by zoo3hans in response to JKD's comment.

  I agree with a possible signal at 1866.1 with ID 60017873 (glitch seems to be around 1866.2)

  Posted July 31, 2016 8:51 PM

• by Dolorous_Edd

  60017873 is SС target is there a SC data?

  Also I am a bit suspicius there are plenty of LC's with dips around 2866

  Posted July 31, 2016 9:33 PM

• by ajamyajax

  Re 60020780 from Ivan's list and my C12 K2fov list: possible single transit that does looks a bit stellar, but also seems to have planetary depth when using a 0.80 R_sol estimate as shown. Maybe high impact could explain the basic V-shape if it is planetary. Just a rough period estimate here also. And of course this could just be stellar variability.
  

  s1=1866.027 p1~=155.572 d1=0.354167 (8.5 hours +/-)
  

  EPIC, 2MASS, J mag, H mag, K mag, J - H, H - K, (J-H spectral type, stellar mass est) (H-K spectral type, stellar mass est)
  
  60020780 , 2MASS J23314997-0018252 , 8.860 , 8.315 , 8.189 , 0.545 , 0.126 , ('K4V', 0.78) , ('K4V',0.78)
  

  Semi-Major Axis a (A.U.) = 0.521
  
  Stellar diameter ratio = 0.8
  
  Stellar mass ratio = 0.78
  
  Period ~= 155.572 days
  
  Duration ~= 8.5005 hours
  

  From NEA, K2 Targets within search area:
  
  EPIC Number RA [decimal degrees] Dec [decimal degrees] Distance [arc sec] Kepler-band [mag] Campaign Number
  
  60020780 352.9582 -0.307 0.0 10.791 E
  

  epic_number,tm_name,ra,dec,k2_teff,k2_rad,k2_mass,k2_kepmag,k2_pmra,k2_pmdec,k2_dist
  
  60020780,2MASS J23314997-0018252,352.958235,-0.307000,,,,10.791,,,
  

  Listed as TYC 5251-311-1 -- Star on Simbad, Proper motions mas/yr: 6.7 12.9, 23 31 49.969 -00 18 25.16
  
  Also listed as BD-01 4448 -- Star on Simbad with similar and nearby coordinates for some reason. I presume this was from another study.
  

  
  

  Posted August 1, 2016 3:22 PM

• by JKD

  EPIC 60020380 pot PC with a single dip (ignoring the isolated 2 dot peak)
  Signal at 1864.90 BKJD, Period =?, Duration 5.39 hrs, Depth =0.6%

  EPIC 60021410, Signal at 1865.12 BKJD, Period =?, Duration =3.42 hrs, Depth =0.12% (already mentioned by PHs)

  EPIC 60021503, update - good PC Signal at 1863.46 BKJD, Period =?, Duration ~8.82 hrs, Depth ~0.26% (already mentioned by DE on page 3)

  EPIC 60021715, Signal at 1865.99 BKJD, Period =?; Duration ~1.96 hrs, Depth ~0.35%

  Posted August 2, 2016 5:53 AM

• by ajamyajax

  Re 60019950 from Ivan's list and SF's mention and in the C12 fov: the two transit event depths seem a bit more even with Andrew's newer K2C-1 corrections, so perhaps a good chance at a HJ here as mentioned. This fit with a 0.75 R_sol estimate. And the duration really is +/- with the sparse ET data available.
  

  s1=1863.697 p1=3.801 d1=0.10 (2.4 hours +/-)
  

  EPIC, 2MASS, J mag, H mag, K mag, J - H, H - K, (J-H spectral type, stellar mass est) (H-K spectral type, stellar mass est)
  
  60019950 , 2MASS J23395296+0158599 , 13.034 , 12.418 , 12.256 , 0.616 , 0.162 , ('K6V', 0.7) , ('K6V',0.7)
  

  Semi-Major Axis a (A.U.) = 0.042
  
  Stellar diameter ratio = 0.75
  
  Stellar mass ratio = 0.697
  
  Period ~= 3.806 days
  
  Duration ~= 2.4019 hours
  

  From NEA, K2 Targets within search area:
  
  EPIC Number RA [decimal degrees] Dec [decimal degrees] Distance [arc sec] Kepler-band [mag] Campaign Number
  
  60019950 354.9707 1.9833 0.0 14.800 E
  

  epic_number,tm_name,ra,dec,k2_teff,k2_rad,k2_mass,k2_kepmag,k2_pmra,k2_pmdec,k2_dist
  
  60019950,2MASS J23395296+0158599,354.970700,1.983330,,,,14.800,,,
  

  Listed on Simbad as KIC 60019950 -- Eclipsing Binary Candidate (EB?), 23 39 52.968 +01 58 59.99

  "A Technique for Extracting Highly Precise Photometry for the Two-Wheeled Kepler Mission"
  
  Andrew Vanderburg, John Asher Johnson
  
  http://arxiv.org/abs/1408.3853
  

  "Kepler Eclipsing Binary Stars. V. Identification of 31 Eclipsing Binaries in the K2 Engineering Data-set"
  
  Kyle E. Conroy, Andrej Prša, Keivan G. Stassun, Steven Bloemen, Mahmoud Parvizi, Billy Quarles, Tabetha Boyajian, Thomas Barclay, Avi Shporer, David W. Latham, Michael Abdul-Masih
  
  http://arxiv.org/abs/1407.3780
  

  

  Posted August 2, 2016 2:28 PM

• by andrew418

  Hi all,

  Thanks for this great work! I have created a target list spreadsheet and put it on google-documents here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_R6gCcLfQxIJ5c-jeNuDjd8hEE2lzofu-BOJMhChglQ/edit?usp=sharing

  I have attempted to cross-match all of the old EPIC IDs with the new EPIC IDs for the targets in the field of view (maybe 10 or so didn't match). Can you help me with two things?

  1. Check that the cross matches look accurate? I've spot-checked, but it would be good for more eyes to take a look.

  2. Sort the list so that our highest-priority targets are at the top, and our lowest priority targets are at the bottom? Right now, I have our two M-dwarf candidates we're requesting short cadence for at the top, then K2-2 and WASP-28 (although I know for fact that both of these have had both long and short-cadence observations proposed during the GO cycle), and then I have sorted by magnitude. I'd recommend putting things like possible transits, eclipsing binaries near the top -- maybe even stars with interesting flares or activity.

  If an interesting target got left off the list, and indeed falls in the C12 field, please feel free to add it in.

  Thanks again!
  Andrew

  Posted August 2, 2016 8:30 PM

• by andrew418

  Oh, and please feel free to add any notes about these objects in the "Comments" column!

  Posted August 2, 2016 8:37 PM

• by ajamyajax in response to andrew418's comment.

  Well if it would help I can write a program to cross reference the old EPIC IDs with the new EPIC IDs, but where did you get those new IDs? I need a link to a list. Also I'm still going through the new ET candidates, and maybe the others are also. When done can post some comments for you but that will probably take a few more days. Also, the sorting aspect seems like a judgment call you will need to make as the end user, so to speak.

  Posted August 3, 2016 4:00 PM

• by ajamyajax

  Re 60023173 from my C12 K2fov list: one speculative rocky planet orbiting a 1.04 R_sol star. Also one fairly high proper motion value here.
  

  s1=1862.80 p1=1.058 d1=0.08 (1.92 hours +/-)
  

  EPIC, 2MASS, J mag, H mag, K mag, J - H, H - K, (J-H spectral type, stellar mass est) (H-K spectral type, stellar mass est)
  
  60023173 , 2MASS J23254679-0248044 , 9.927 , 9.653 , 9.596 , 0.274 , 0.057 , ('G2V', 1.0) , ('F6V',1.25)
  

  au min-max 0.02 0.02
  
  stellar diameter in solar units min-max 0.96 1.08
  
  stellar mass in solar units min-max 0.94 0.97
  
  period in days min-max 1.049 1.066
  
  duration in hours min-max 1.82 2.019
  

  From NEA, K2 Targets within search area:
  
  EPIC Number RA [decimal degrees] Dec [decimal degrees] Distance [arc sec] Kepler-band [mag] Campaign Number
  
  60023173 351.445 -2.8012 0.0 10.426 E
  

  epic_number,tm_name,ra,dec,k2_teff,k2_rad,k2_mass,k2_kepmag,k2_pmra,k2_pmdec,k2_dist
  
  60023173,2MASS J23254679-0248044,351.445019,-2.801214,,,,10.426,,,
  

  Listed as TYC 5247-652-1 -- Star on Simbad, Proper motions mas/yr: 37.5 -1.5, 23 25 46.805 -02 48 04.37

  

  Posted August 3, 2016 11:54 PM

• by andrew418

  Hi Mark,

  I cross matched the EPIC using the csv upload form on this page: https://archive.stsci.edu/k2/epic/search.php

  You're right, the prioritization is pretty subjective. I was thinking if there were any speculative planets that we definitely shouldn't miss observing with long-cadence. I'll eventually go through all of the new reported possible transits and see which ones should be moved higher, but I'll probably wait until closer before the deadline.

  What does the phase-folded light curve look like for 60023173 ?
  Thanks!
  Andrew

  Posted August 4, 2016 1:18 AM

• by ajamyajax

  Hi Andrew,

  The fits for this 60023173 ephemeris are less-than-spectacular, even with the few blended-in transit events seen above removed. My numpy polyfit is in black, while untinkered with AstroPy fits are in red and blue. If this transit is real, they should look better with more data in C12 of course. But it might not be real. We'll see then, I hope.

  And appreciate the upload form idea. I could still use ET and C12 EPIC lists for a different cross-reference source though. Will look for that tomorrow unless a PH'er knows. Thanks, Mark

  
  

  Posted August 4, 2016 2:57 AM

• by JKD

  EPIC 60021895 - Signal at 1868.06, Period =?, Duration ~1.96 hrs, Depth <0.1% (already mentioned by DE on page 3)

  EPIC 60021989 - Signal at 1866.12 BKJD, Period =?, Duration ~2.45 hrs, Depth ~0.03%

  EPIC 60022060 - Signal at 1867.31 BKJD, Period =?, Duration ~2.45 hrs, Depth ~0.05 %

  Posted August 4, 2016 6:33 AM

• by JKD

  EPIC 60021989 - Signal at 1866.12 BKJD, Period =?, Duration ~2.45 hrs, Depth ~0.03%

  EPIC 60022060 - Signal at 1867.31 BKJD, Period =?, Duration ~2.45 hrs, Depth ~0.05 %

  EPIC 60023224 - Signal at 1862.73 BKJD, Period =?, Duration ~5.39 hrs,, Depth ~0.07%

  EPIC 60023342 - Signal at 1867.27 BKJD, Period =?, Duration ~3.43 hrs, Depth ~0.07%

  (already mentioned by DE on Page 1, SF on page 2, Zoo3Hans on page 3)

  EPIC 60023398 - Signal at 1865.30 BKJD, Period =?, Duration ~2.94 hrs, Depth ~0.01%

  Posted August 4, 2016 8:34 PM

• by JKD

  EPIC 60023398 - Signal at 1865.20 BKJD, Period =?, Duration ~2.94 hrs, Depth ~0.1%

  Posted August 5, 2016 6:23 AM

• by ajamyajax

  Re 60023224 from JKD's list and in the C12 fov as 246472354: could be a glitch, but a possible mini gas giant planet candidate also. 0.98 R_sol estimate for this fit with 1.02 M_sol in the colors/mass estimate range shown.
  

  s1=1862.74 p1~=30.308 d1=0.23 (5.52 hours +/-)
  

  EPIC, 2MASS, J mag, H mag, K mag, J - H, H - K, (J-H spectral type, stellar mass est) (H-K spectral type, stellar mass est)
  
  60023224 , 2MASS J23273601+0119227 , 9.460 , 9.138 , 9.070 , 0.322 , 0.068 , ('G5V', 0.98) , ('G0V',1.09)
  

  Semi-Major Axis a (A.U.) = 0.192
  
  Stellar diameter ratio = 0.98
  
  Stellar mass ratio = 1.02
  
  Period ~= 30.308 days
  
  Duration ~= 5.5202 hours
  

  From NEA, K2 Targets within search area:
  
  EPIC Number RA [decimal degrees] Dec [decimal degrees] Distance [arc sec] Kepler-band [mag] Campaign Number
  
  60023224 351.9 1.323 0.0 10.474 E
  

  epic_number,tm_name,ra,dec,k2_teff,k2_rad,k2_mass,k2_kepmag,k2_pmra,k2_pmdec,k2_dist
  
  60023224,2MASS J23273601+0119227,351.900043,1.322956,,,,10.474,,,
  

  
  

  Posted August 5, 2016 5:12 PM

• by Shellface

  After some snooping, I have noticed that overlaps in the later campaigns seem to be quite common:

  • C10 with a very small strip of C1
  • C11 with C9 and a small amount of C2
  • C12 with engineering
  • C13 with roughly 1/2 of an active detector of C4
  • 1 active detector of C15 with C2
  • C17 (planned) and most of C10
  • C18 (planned) and a small amount of C0?

  Some cursory searching indicates a moderate number of overlaps by already known planets/planet candidates, so there are several SC opportunities.

  ---

  ID 60023224 (EPIC 246472354): This star has a spectral type of ~G5, and it is quite bright (V = 10.7). However, the dip correlates uncannily well with the underlying variability in the raw data, particularly the slope around minima and the long egress feature. The dip looks more like systematics than a transit.

  (Generally, many dips appear to be best explained by systematics from comparison with the raw lightcurve)

  ---

  I made some quick estimations based on the usual yield by PH per field, and for 365 target stars one would expect ~2 - 4 planet candidates (depending on various assumptions that mostly cancel each other out). Two have been identified here and one was discovered from the same photometry before (K2-2), so a count of three is quite reasonable. Therefore, it may be that there actually are no more detectable planet candidates in the data. That said, there is still plenty of reason to identify otherwise interesting C12 targets.

  Posted August 7, 2016 2:37 AM

• by Artman40

  By the way, are all reobservations going through DDT program just like in Campaign 10?

  Posted August 7, 2016 2:03 PM

• by Dolorous_Edd

  How about EPIC 60023551 ?

  

  Posted August 7, 2016 2:28 PM

• by ajamyajax in response to Dolorous_Edd's comment.

  Re 60023551 from Ivan's list and in the C12 fov as 246484561 and my opinion: I think we could use more data because a possible repeat if a K-dwarf star probably not visible in ET/K2C-1 data. But I added it to Andrew's spreadsheet for you. And feel free to edit.
  

  s1=1865.61 p1=? d1=0.12 (2.88 hours +/-)
  

  EPIC, 2MASS, J mag, H mag, K mag, J - H, H - K, (J-H spectral type, stellar mass est) (H-K spectral type, stellar mass est)
  
  60023551 , 2MASS J23372912+0138498 , 9.232 , 8.735 , 8.624 , 0.497 , 0.111 , ('K3V', 0.81) , ('K4V',0.78)
  

  From NEA, K2 Targets within search area:
  
  EPIC Number RA [decimal degrees] Dec [decimal degrees] Distance [arc sec] Kepler-band [mag] Campaign Number
  
  60023551 354.3713 1.6471 0.0 10.425 E
  

  epic_number,tm_name,ra,dec,k2_teff,k2_rad,k2_mass,k2_kepmag,k2_pmra,k2_pmdec,k2_dist
  
  60023551,2MASS J23372912+0138498,354.371318,1.647150,,,,10.425,,,
  

  Listed as TYC 585-562-1 -- Star on Simbad, Proper motions mas/yr: 44.7 -23.1, 23 37 29.1133 +01 38 49.598

  Posted August 7, 2016 6:09 PM

• by ajamyajax

  Re 60018403 in the C12 fov as 246378979: speculative, but maybe three of four dips here are periodic and a possible planet candidate. The first event is around a glitch area, and the others are small enough to be anything of course.
  

  s1=1862.575 p1=2.081 d1=0.070833 (1.7 hours +/-)
  

  EPIC, 2MASS, J mag, H mag, K mag, J - H, H - K, (J-H spectral type, stellar mass est) (H-K spectral type, stellar mass est)
  
  60018403 , 2MASS J23343988-0130210 , 9.390 , 9.199 , 9.136 , 0.191 , 0.063 , ('F5V', 1.32) , ('G0V',1.09)
  

  From NEA, K2 Targets within search area:
  
  EPIC Number RA [decimal degrees] Dec [decimal degrees] Distance [arc sec] Kepler-band [mag] Campaign Number
  
  60018403 353.6662 -1.5058 0.0 10.240 E
  

  epic_number,tm_name,ra,dec,k2_teff,k2_rad,k2_mass,k2_kepmag,k2_pmra,k2_pmdec,k2_dist
  
  60018403,2MASS J23343988-0130210,353.666168,-1.505824,,,,10.240,,,
  

  Listed as BD-02 5990 -- Star on Simbad, Proper motions mas/yr: 19.54 -0.38, Spectral type: F2, 23 34 39.88374 -01 30 20.9697

  

  Posted August 7, 2016 6:15 PM

• by ajamyajax

  Re 60020306 in the C12 fov as 246142272: possible low mass binary that is considered an IR source per Simbad. So might be worth a closer look for something interesting like a white dwarf and a depleated donor star or something like that. Also note this target has high proper motion values.
  

  s1=1864.855 p1=2.53 d1=1.0 (24.0 hours +/-)
  
  s2=1863.60 p2=2.53 d2=0.5 (12.0 hours +/-)
  

  EPIC, 2MASS, J mag, H mag, K mag, J - H, H - K, (J-H spectral type, stellar mass est) (H-K spectral type, stellar mass est)
  
  60020306 , 2MASS J23353509-0613302 , 11.932 , 11.285 , 11.029 , 0.647 , 0.256 , ('M7V', 0.098) , ('M4V',0.24)
  

  From NEA, K2 Targets within search area:
  
  EPIC Number RA [decimal degrees] Dec [decimal degrees] Distance [arc sec] Kepler-band [mag] Campaign Number
  
  60020306 353.8962 -6.2251 0.0 14.900 E
  

  epic_number,tm_name,ra,dec,k2_teff,k2_rad,k2_mass,k2_kepmag,k2_pmra,k2_pmdec,k2_dist
  
  60020306,2MASS J23353509-0613302,353.896220,-6.225070,,,,14.900,,,
  

  Listed as 2MASS J23353509-0613302 -- Infra-Red source on Simbad, Proper motions mas/yr: -60 -178, Spectral type: M4.0, 23 35 35.093 -06 13 30.26

  

  Posted August 7, 2016 6:16 PM

• by ajamyajax

  Re 60018007 in the C12 fov as 246470777: this target looks periodic at the flux cycle minima but appears to be contaminated by a nearby star identified as 'kap Psc.' It is an interesting and a different source though, and could make for a good C12 target as 246469764 -- from what I think is a preliminary C12 list.
  

  s1=1862.63 p1=1.415 d1=0.15 (3.6 hours +/-)
  

  EPIC, 2MASS, J mag, H mag, K mag, J - H, H - K, (J-H spectral type, stellar mass est) (H-K spectral type, stellar mass est)
  
  60018007 , 2MASS J23265479+0116556 , 13.425 , 12.943 , 12.865 , 0.482 , 0.078 , ('K2V', 0.85) , ('G5V',0.98)
  

  From NEA, K2 Targets within search area:
  
  EPIC Number RA [decimal degrees] Dec [decimal degrees] Distance [arc sec] Kepler-band [mag] Campaign Number
  
  60018007 351.7284 1.2821 0.0 15.040 E
  

  epic_number,tm_name,ra,dec,k2_teff,k2_rad,k2_mass,k2_kepmag,k2_pmra,k2_pmdec,k2_dist
  
  60018007,2MASS J23265479+0116556,351.728354,1.282144,,,,15.040,,,
  

  Listed on VSX:

  Dist. ' Name AUID Coords (J2000) Const. Var. type Period (d) Mag. range
  
  1.61 Variable kap Psc 000-BCR-550 23 26 55.95 +01 15 20.2 Psc ACV 1.4150 4.87 - 4.95 V
  

  http://www.aavso.org/vsx/index.php?view=detail.top&oid=26551 (351.73313, 1.25561)

  From the working C12 list: 246469764,351.733149,1.255608,5.018

  "Type ACV: α2 Canum Venaticorum variables. These are main-sequence stars with spectral types B8p-A7p and displaying strong magnetic fields. Spectra show abnormally strong lines of Si, Sr, Cr, and rare earths whose intensities vary with rotation. They exhibit magnetic field and brightness changes (periods of 0.5-160 days or more). The amplitudes of the brightness changes are usually within 0.01-0.1 mag. in V."

  Listed as GSC 00578-00438 -- Star on Simbad, Proper motions mas/yr: 5.6 -6.2, 23 26 54.805 +01 16 55.72
  
  And 96.89 arcsecs away per Simbad is * kap Psc -- Variable Star of alpha2 CVn type, Proper motions mas/yr: 86.68 -94.29, Spectral type: A2V, 23 26 55.95586 +01 15 20.1900

  

  Posted August 7, 2016 6:19 PM

• by ajamyajax

  Hi Andrew,

  As mentioned earlier I cross-matched your posted ET/C12 list with a working C12 list/file that I got from the helpful archive folks, and those on your list all look ok. As you know there were some 25 k2fov program finds (ET Ra/Decs in the C12 field) that didn't make it to your list though. I think I resolved most of them with an angular distance search, but a half-dozen or so might have been extended targets that did not target a star or something like that. So the closest near kepmag star to the RA/Dec was chosen instead for those with no C12 EPIC match that my program could find. Anyway FWIW but hope this helps. And done here then also, good luck. Mark

  et-id,c12-file-epic,archive-ra,archive-dec,kepmag,c12-file-ra,c12-file-dec,c12-file-kepmag,nearest match?
  
  60021409,246437411,353.516192,+0.181646,10.13,353.51389,+0.17941,10.484,Yes
  
  60023534,246348395,354.20565,-2.105777,12.27,354.20565,-2.105777,11.773,Yes
  
  60023879,246282538,356.691773,-3.413819,9.63,356.691773,-3.413819,10.099,Yes
  
  60019636,246050424,357.1568,-8.24608,14.6,357.15677,-8.246131,14.763,Yes
  
  60019930,246470107,351.91365,1.2653,14.8,351.91363,1.265305,14.742,Yes
  
  60020161,246455779,353.67949,+0.76908,14.9,353.679448,+0.769119,14.636,Yes
  
  60018238,246271889,354.875,-3.631667,9.83,354.87639,-3.630888,12.728,Yes
  
  60018573,246084993,354.335854,-7.466033,10.83,354.335754,-7.465948,10.711,Yes
  
  60020570,246425619,352.830042,-0.197222,10.5,352.829998,-0.197237,10.419,Yes
  
  60020635,246432925,354.892958,+0.042417,11.36,354.892961,+0.042382,11.124,Yes
  
  60020677,246030441,355.469583,-8.709056,12.07,355.469682,-8.709074,11.691,Yes
  
  60020792,246031188,355.054155,-8.690714,11.56,355.054006,-8.690675,11.35,Yes
  
  60017828,246387816,353.644583,-1.326667,13.06,353.644285,-1.326924,12.922,Yes
  
  60017849,246064476,355.895477,-7.923332,10.17,355.895483,-7.923335,9.922,Yes
  
  60017880,246437411,353.513885,+0.179413,10.22,353.51389,+0.17941,10.484,Yes
  
  60017968,246425296,352.304362,-0.185061,19.36,352.318144,-0.207363,18.4,No close target found
  
  60017822,246183140,352.818348,-5.371712,11.3,352.818328,-5.371656,11.27,Yes
  
  60018185,246318738,351.294542,-2.679669,12.55,351.281092,-2.687486,13.63,No close target found
  
  60018190,246342955,352.3881,-2.231158,11.51,352.399094,-2.210326,18.097,No close target found
  
  60018204,246341751,354.025008,-2.203369,12.77,354.039399,-2.233587,12.94,No close target found
  
  60018219,246065527,356.82645,-7.913309,10.41,356.828152,-7.899038,15.845,No close target found
  
  60018652,246457067,354.993958,+0.809417,13.74,355.026841,+0.813501,15.502,No close target found
  
  60018655,246457067,354.99402,+0.80946,13.89,355.026841,+0.813501,15.502,No close target found
  
  60018708,246084693,356.483,-7.4726,15.81,356.48302,-7.47259,15.818,Yes
  
  60018779,246337452,351.77498,-2.31793,17.41,351.774934,-2.31796,18.194,Yes
  

  Posted August 9, 2016 11:19 PM

• by Dolorous_Edd

  EPIC 60019658

  Likely just variability and this target is not in FOV for C12

  But still these "dips" have clear period ~1.436

  

  Posted August 10, 2016 11:27 AM

• by JKD

  EPIC 60023754 Signal at 1865.199 BKJD, Period =?, Duration 2.94 hrs, Depth ~0.1%already mentioned on page 1 by andrew418 and linked to https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~avanderb/k2/ep60023754.html

  EPIC 60024045 Signal at 1863.81 BKJD, Period =?, Duration ~1.96 hrs, Depth ~0.02%
  (looks promising compared to all other dips)

  EPIC 600242397 Signal at 1865.88 BKJD, Period =?, Duration ~4.41 hrs, Depth ~0.04%

  Posted August 10, 2016 7:52 PM

• by andrew418

  Thanks everyone for continuing to take a look into these targets! Mark, I will add those stragglers into the spreadsheet, many thanks.

  Thanks to the Oxford K2 group (Suzanne Aigrain and Ben Pope), we now have light curves for about 14,000 targets in the engineering test field of view. Many of these are very faint, and we obviously can't propose 16,000 new targets, but if any of them show interesting signals, please mention them here and we add them to the list.

  The light curves are in a zip file here: https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~avanderb/k2etoxford.zip I think I put them into LC viewer format this time, but if not, Al, can you convert them?

  The light curves are numbered 0-14000 or so, and the RA/Dec for each of the targets is given in this csv file: https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~avanderb/engcatoxford.csv

  Thanks so much and happy hunting!
  Andrew

  Posted August 11, 2016 7:44 PM

• by Dolorous_Edd

  Lets try

  in all of the LCs there are dips with 1.9 period that go to 0 and messing up the scale and make them almost useless

  ( at 1.87 ; 3.83 ; 5.79 ) at least in LC viewer for now

  Dips that look promising

  13594 at 5

  13196 at 6.8; depth ~0.0005

  12524 at 5.80

  12481 - excellent dip at 3.43; ~1% ( is 60020287? )

  10535 at 2.46

  12575 - same as 12572; 4 transits ; period 1.584; depth ~3%

  12572 - 4 transits ; period 1.584; depth ~3%

  10424 - dips with 1d period; EB perhaps

  11697 at 2.3

  11672 - dip at 4?

  11283 - 2 transits with 2.9 period, depth hard to judge ~3% EB perhaps

  11379 - 2 transits with 3.382 d period ; ~1,5% depth ; start at 3.250; ( has to be WASP 28 right? -_- )

  10401 - dip at 2.33?

  11997 - maybe dip at 6.28

  EBs

  12272 - maybe

  13770 - maybe

  13336 - maybe

  13191 - maybe

  13172 - maybe

  13104

  12685

  12271 - maybe

  11993

  11750

  11553

  11383 - maybe eb

  11377 - maybe eb

  10850 - maybe dips with 0.232d period

  12924 - single dip at 4.078 and 6.6

  12633

  10847 - maybe EB

  11014 - maybe EB

  11383 - eb perhaps

  11845 - EB

  10039

  RR lyrs:

  13926

  13478

  13338

  13236

  13210

  13139

  12939

  12224

  12221

  12220

  12219

  10544 - RR lyr

  10657 - regular variable , cepheid?

  10664 - RR lyr

  10795 - RR lyr

  10927 - bad correction?

  11224 - rr lyr

  11849 - periodic variable

  11955 - rr lyr maybe

  12020

  12082

  12259

  Not very good dips:

  13974 at 5.9

  13963 at 2.8

  13843 at 4 and 5.2

  13676 at 2

  13535 at 4.75

  13481 at 2.2

  13440 at 2.2

  13411 at 6.3

  13095 at 3.7

  13019 at 2.2

  13001 at 4.6

  12850 at 4 and 4.8

  12797 at 4.4

  12738 at 6.2

  12700 at 3.6

  12200 at 2.3

  13862 - at 3.894

  13820 - maybe dips at 1.585350 and 6.142040

  13594 - dip at 5.01

  13561 - dip at 6.7141

  13535 - 4.73

  13506 - at 4.05

  13358 - at 5.202 looks good

  13066 - maybe at 5.263

  12983 - at 5.120

  12760 - 6.254

  12720 - maybe dip at 4.282

  12688 - dip at 6.27 looks good more or less

  12592 - dips at ; 2.12 ; 6.65

  12491 at 5.8

  12466 at 6

  12413 at 5.95

  12378 at 3.7

  12360 at 2.2

  12330 at 2.2

  12290 at 7

  12230 at 5.75

  12173 at 4.25

  12037 - maybe dip at 4.721

  12012 at 5.3

  11992 - maybe dip at 5.52

  11938 - maybe dip at 2.6

  11805 - maybe dip at 2.22 ; but looks good more or less

  11729 at 6.38 and 3.05

  11772 - dip at 3.66

  11643 at 3.75

  11370 - dip at 6.1113

  11332 at 3.7

  11330 at 5.1

  11295 at 6.2

  11280 at 6.12

  11262 - maybe dip at 4.50

  11240 at 2.2

  11182 at 3.7

  11175 - at 2.2 and 6.4

  11168 - 2.26

  11166 - maybe dip at 6.56

  11149 - dip at 2.3

  11033 - maybe dip at 4.834

  11013 - maybe dip at 3.43

  11003 at 2.06 and 3.98

  10931 at 4.78

  10874 - maybe dip at 6.41

  10844 - at 2.944

  10824 - dip at 2.40

  10807 at 3.7

  10694 at 2.8

  10676 - dip at 3.945?

  10638 at 2.3

  10595 - maybe dip at 6.91

  10593 - maybe dip at 5.059

  10581 - dip at 3.117

  10502 - dip at 3.33?

  10492 - dip at 2.40?

  10466 - dips ; maybe glitches

  10457 - 3.6491 and 4.11?

  10434 - dip at 1.32993 and 6.49?

  10431 - dip at 2.177

  10391 at 3.4

  10358 - dip at 4.476?

  10348 - maybe dip at 3.465 and 6.755

  10337 - maybe dip at 3.690

  10335 - maybe 2 dips; 1,8d period; start at 2.06

  10325 - dip at 3.17

  10300 - maybe dip at 4.5277?

  10299 - maybe dip at 3.0361

  10294 - dips with 0.123d period?

  10282 - maybe 2 dips with 2.9 period ; start at 2.23

  10270 - at 3.10

  10250 at 3.475

  10236 at 3.9

  10147 - dip at 3.2?

  10068 - maybe at 5.42

  13862 - dip at 3.89

  10019 - maybe dip at 2.35

  Other

  13942 - some kind of variable?

  13145 somethin at 0.7

  12370 - powerfull flare?

  12218 - some kind of variable

  11201 - bad correction

  11123 - periodic variable

  11062 - raise at 3.29?

  10898 - flares?

  Posted August 11, 2016 8:00 PM

• by Dolorous_Edd

  Dips that look promising

  8508 at 2.39

  09733 at 3.9

  08622 - 2 transits; ~2% depth ; period 3.770

  8657 at 3.6

  8537 at 3.26

  08398 at 2.20

  08391 at 4.28

  07983 at 4.24

  07811 at 4.6

  07725 at 4.39

  07696 at 5.2

  07582 at 3.2

  07447 at 4.1906

  07121 at 6.09

  07073 at 3.44

  06558 - more or less good looking dip at 2.9

  06320 maybe 2 transits with period 3.668 ; start at 2.42

  06310 at 1.75

  06154 at 5.007

  05529 at 3.925 ?

  05491 - single dip at 3.29; ~1.5% depth

  4968 at 4.68

  04013 at 2 - looks good

  04660 at 3.8

  04223 at 3.45 looks good

  01981 - at 4.60 ; depth ~1.2%; duration 5.884800h same as 60018343?

  02674 at 6.81

  01574 at 4.875

  000134 at 5.93 looks good

  06510 maybe 2 transits at 2,4 and 5.4

  Maybe EBs

  08059 - maybe 0.915 d period

  09640

  09443

  08052

  07995 - contamination?

  07214

  07144

  07053

  06206

  05904 - 2 transits

  05815 at 5.007

  05686

  05616

  05041

  05004 - 2 transits

  04664 - 3 transits

  04457 - maybe eb with 0.6d period

  04332

  03606

  02734

  02685 at 3.5

  02610

  02550 - contaminate 02546 and 02541 ?

  02334 - EB

  01165 - EB contaminat 01156 ; 01155 ; 01159

  01015

  00325

  RR lyr's

  09580

  08477

  08365

  06066

  05613

  05139

  05007

  04916

  04906

  04237

  03836

  02956

  02001

  00915

  Not very good dips

  9712 at 2.32

  09602 at 4.89

  09515 - 3.45 looks good

  9784 at 1.23

  9586 at 3.7

  09325 at 3.7

  08985 at 3.7

  08953 at 4.85

  08838 at 3.95

  08751 at 5

  08222 at 4

  08108 at 2.4

  08043 at 4

  07934 at 3.9

  07911 at 3.9

  07850 at 5.65

  07582 at 3.25

  07454 at 3.95

  06986 at 4.2

  06952 at 4.8

  06480 at 4.313235

  06466 at 2.4

  06413 at 4

  05599 at 5.5

  05333 at 5.2

  05307 - maybe 2 dips at 0.55 and 5.99

  05526 at 6.38

  04911 at 2.25

  04808 at 3.6

  04779 at 1 and 6.6

  04584 - dip at 2.8

  04484 at 1.4 and 7

  04477 at 6

  04394 at 4

  04200 at 4

  04198 at 3.4

  04164 at 6.70

  04047 at 0.4

  04033 at 4

  04027 at 5.498

  04000 at 6.11

  03985 at 1,2 and 2.2

  03969 at 6.8061

  03922 at 2.25

  03917 at 4

  03897 at 2.2

  03877 at 0.6760

  03842 at 4

  03738 at 4.35

  03726 at 3.6

  03724 at 3.4448

  03720 at 3

  03628 at 2.54

  03558 at 4

  03499 at 2.63768 and 6.816

  03490 at 5

  03346 at 4

  03326 - dips at 2.3 and 4.5 and 6.5?

  03314 at 6.06

  03307 at 5.50

  03298 at 6.10

  03278 at 6.4

  03208 at 3.2

  03077 at 5.8

  03049 at 6

  03019 - at 3.649

  02950 at 6.468

  02944 at 3.4 and 6.9

  02875 at 3.097

  02845 at 7

  02783 at 6.1318

  02767 at 2.55

  02766 at 2.56 and 6.101

  02719 at 1.85 and 5.130

  02677 at 2.2

  02564 - at 3.25

  02529 at 5.50

  02468 at 6.673

  02464 at 2.8

  02425 at 2.4

  02412 at 4.95

  02405 at 5.56

  02404 at 0.553 and 2.60

  02277 at 5.54

  02255 at 1.85 and 6.693

  02238 at 1.95

  02236 at 4.14

  02236 - at 6.213

  02160 at 1.8

  02129 at 1.6

  02107 at 6.84

  02085 at 5.1

  02052 at 2.1

  02008 at 4

  01996 at 4.65

  01990 at 3.92

  01796 at 3.44

  01603 at 5.4

  01581 at 4.68

  01533 at 1.4729

  01460 at 6.2

  01441 at 3.73

  01401 at 2.61

  01385 at 0.78843

  01381 at 4

  01355 - maybe dips at 1.483 and 6.95939

  1208 at 2.95

  01158 at 6.3

  00954 at 4.18

  900 at 3.455

  00838 at 2.647

  00615 at 4.200

  00559 at 3.577

  00540 - at 2.28

  00399 - at 2.43

  00331 at 4

  00293 at 2.6

  00138 at 6.6

  00134 - at 5.93

  00113 - dip at 1.023

  00159 at 4.42

  00093 at 2.3

  00073 at 3.7

  00018 at 3.98

  Other

  08334 - periodic variable maybe just starspots

  04494 - flare

  04492 - flare

  04491 - flare

  00117 - flares?

  00564 - powerful flare?

  04494 - powerful flare?

  01846 - maybe bad correction

  03166 - bad correction ; dip at 4

  03998 - periodic variable (Don't know type)

  04236 - periodic variable (Don't know type)

  04301 periodic variable (Don't know type)

  06922 - periodic variable (Don't know type)

  08100 - periodic variable (Don't know type)

  08345 - periodic variable (Don't know type)

  01680 - periodic variable (Don't know type)

  02583 - periodic variable(Don't know type)

  03998 - periodic variable(Don't know type)

  07642 - periodic variable(Don't know type)

  03554 - LPV?

  04749 - dips

  05439 - flare

  07262 - GDOR

  08610 - GDOR

  Contamination

  02541 - at 1.24; period 1.788; depth ~8% ; EB perhaps

  02551 from 02541?

  02546 by 02541?

  01159 - same as 01156 and 01155

  01156 - same as 01155 ; dips

  01155 - 3 transits ; period 2.115; start 0.2d ; ~20 depth; EB most likely

  05908

  Posted August 12, 2016 12:56 AM

• by ajamyajax

  Yes, looks good. Thank you, Suzanne Aigrain and Ben Pope! I'll see if I can cross-match the RA/Decs with the working C12 file for a list of new C12 EPICs to post here also. p.s. and removed the nan's in the data fwiw.

  Index 10039 from the K2ET Oxford data:

  s1=2.981 p1=2.89 d1=0.12 (2.88 hours +/-)
  
  s2=1.536 p2=2.89 d2=0.10 (2.4 hours +/-)
  

  

  Posted August 12, 2016 3:25 PM

• by andrew418

  Hi all,

  My apologies about the dips to 0 -- I have removed those and uploaded the new files to https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~avanderb/k2etoxford.zip

  Andrew

  Posted August 12, 2016 4:49 PM

• by ajamyajax

  Andrew, are the new Dec/RAs correct? Or is there a conversion required? Thanks, Mark

  ...

  Examples, first three from the list:

  Index,Dec,RA
  
  0,-0.03794015571475029,0.07596847414970398
  
  1,-0.03777313604950905,0.07589880377054214
  
  2,-0.032009467482566833,0.07194950431585312
  

  Posted August 12, 2016 8:47 PM

• by alschmitt in response to andrew418's comment.

  Thanks for the data, Andrew!

  The LcViewer/LcTools user community can access your data simply by creating an empty lightcurve directory such as "C:\Lightcurves_K2_ET_Oxford" and then unzipping the data files into the directory. Set up a work group in the normal manner, selecting "K2_ET" as the project name.

  As Dolorous_Edd mentioned above, the lightcurves may have several data points with a flux value of 0 causing the lightcurves to be zoomed out excessively. To adjust, simply use the M2 key to center (pan) the lightcurve in the view and then use the Ctrl+M2 key to zoom in. It should only take a couple of seconds per lightcurve.

  Cheers,

  Al

  Posted August 12, 2016 8:59 PM

• by ajamyajax

  Re 60018343/1981 from Robert Gagliano's original and Ivan's current list: these do appear to be the same target as Ivan pointed out and seem to be a binary also. The longer time period original ET data (I got from the internet) has two transit events as shown below. The depths appear different so my guess is the true period is 4.72 * 2 which also seems to work in a duration/period/star size orbit estimate if the smaller object transits at the equator, for a 1.66 R_sol primary. Although both events could be the smaller object based on the overall depth, if the original data needed some re-processing. Also 60018343 does not appear to be a C12 target and in that FOV unfortunately.
  

  ET 60018343: s1=1866.609 p1=9.44 d1=0.229167 (5.5 hours +/-) <-- transit depth ~1.2%
  
  -or-
  
  Index 1981: s1=4.61 p1=9.44 d1=0.229167 (5.5 hours +/-) <-- transit depth ~1.17%
  

  EPIC, 2MASS, J mag, H mag, K mag, J - H, H - K, (J-H spectral type, stellar mass est) (H-K spectral type, stellar mass est)
  
  60018343 , 2MASS J00085797+0256420 , 9.354 , 9.199 , 9.158 , 0.155 , 0.041 , ('F3V', 1.43) , ('A7V',1.76)
  

  Semi-Major Axis a (A.U.) = 0.101
  
  Stellar diameter ratio = 1.66
  
  Stellar mass ratio = 1.56
  
  Period ~= 9.443 days
  
  Duration ~= 5.5018 hours
  

  From NEA, K2 Targets within search area:
  
  EPIC Number RA [decimal degrees] Dec [decimal degrees] Distance [arc sec] Kepler-band [mag] Campaign Number
  
  60018343 2.2416 2.945 0.0 10.050 E
  

  epic_number,tm_name,ra,dec,k2_teff,k2_rad,k2_mass,k2_kepmag,k2_pmra,k2_pmdec,k2_dist
  
  60018343,2MASS J00085797+0256420,2.241575,2.945010,,,,10.050,,,
  

  From VSX:
  

  Dist. ' Name AUID Coords (J2000) Const. Var. type Period (d) Mag. range
  
  0.00 Variable 2MASS J00085797+0256420 -- 00 08 57.97 +02 56 42.0 Psc EA 4.72277 10.12 (0.011) CR
  

  Listed as TYC 4-331-1 -- Eclipsing Binary Candidate on Simbad, Proper motions mas/yr: 14.2 1.7, 00 08 57.9781 +02 56 42.037

  
  
  
  

  Posted August 13, 2016 4:56 PM

• by ajamyajax in response to ajamyajax's comment.

  SF, I don't suppose you had any luck deciphering the Dec/RA coordinates that were posted for the new Index data? I can't wait to run a cross-check for C12 but can't put a star on any of those targets.

  Posted August 13, 2016 5:14 PM

• by andrew418

  Hi Mark,

  It looks like RA/Dec are both in radians -- to get into degrees, multiply by 180 / pi = 57.2957795131. Sorry about the confusion!

  Andrew

  Posted August 13, 2016 5:23 PM

• by Shellface

  Ah, I had just figured out they were in radians. Didn't know anybody used those for co-ordinates…

  In addition, the co-ordinates are tabulated in the reverse of the usual order (dec, RA rather than RA, dec), so watch out for that.

  Some of the already-known targets:

  11509 = 60021410 (K2-2)

  11379 = 60017806 (WASP-28)

  8622 = 60019950

  12481 = 60020287

  Posted August 13, 2016 5:27 PM

• by ajamyajax

  Thank you both! I will give that a whirl and post some results later then.

  Posted August 13, 2016 5:43 PM

• by ajamyajax

  Ok gang, here are some sample files for you to test of cross-matches with the new Index IDs, the old ET IDs, and the working C12 EPIC's. This C12 list started with a K2FOV program search for C12 which found 2460 Index RA/Dec matches.

  Those were matched (if possible) with the other RA/Decs using an angular distance routine from the PyAstronomy package (thanks). And all RA/Decs are also included here just in case you notice any problems, as are the Kepmags when available and the angular distance values (usually 0.0 for ET matches but not always for C12, see below).

  So the C12 file contains only the C12 FOV targets, but the other file has all the Index IDs with just those ET ID or EPIC matches.

  Also note the working C12 file used in this process has 642,126 entries(!).. So we can probably assume a number of these C12 EPIC matches will not actually be observed right?

  And there are some match discrepancies to be aware of. For example, I noticed that the RA/Dec for EPIC 246299629 points to a star while the RA/Dec used for 13850 is close, but not right on it. In another case, one dim star was Index targeted while another nearby dim star was C12 targeted. The distance values provided should help you identify those cases (look for any distances not 0.0 with the EPIC matches). In other words, the closest C12 match should be listed but that might not be the same exact Index target.

  And hope this helps!

  https://www.dropbox.com/s/wv5w272672bbyg2/Index_ET_C12_matches.zip?dl=0

  Posted August 15, 2016 4:15 PM

• by Dolorous_Edd

  Index 5491

  Looks like possible PC, too bad it is not in FOV for C12 apparently

  Host is SDSS J001240.35-064746.0

  

  

  Posted August 15, 2016 11:18 PM

• by Shellface

  It turns out that the C12 submission deadline is on the 18th, so it is imperative that the target list is finalised soon.

  According to aja's files the expanded set of in-field lightcurves numbers 2500, which is large compared to the capability of K2 (usually around 25,000 targets per field). Even for simple brightness limits there remain a large number of targets (e.g ~600 brighter than Kp = 15), so some informed limits on target selection are to be desired. I imagine a formulation for target selection something like the following:

  • All planet candidates
  • EBs to some certain extent
  • Other notable targets (RR Lyraes, etc.) at an ad-hoc basis
  • Stars suitable for planet detection brighter than some limiting magnitude

  I am not too clear on what would be a reasonable target list size, but perhaps it should be around 10 - 100, and probably not larger than a few hundred. I would encourage any available effort to be directed to the ~2500 lightcurves to identify suitable targets.

  With that in mind, I will attempt to (rather hurriedly) vet the targets:

  ---

  Edd's lists, first comment, in-field targets:

  1. Promising Dips
  • 13594: The dip seems to be reasonable, but is ~8% deep and thus very unlikely to be planetary. By the looks of it the star is extremely faint (it does not appear in 2MASS), and is thus not suitable for targeting.
  • 13196: The shape of the dip is broadly consistent with a transit, and the depth is good (0.04%). The star was a proper target, and the dip does not appear in the respective reduction (here). I am not certain how to interpret this, but I cannot exclude a transit. The star is otherwise suitable for observation at V = ~11.4, so it is probably a worthwhile target.
  • 12524: The dip appears during a period of high scatter, so I am reasonably confident it is noise. Still, the star appears to be a good target for observation.
  • 12481: This is indeed ID 60020287, which has already been noted as a PC.
  • 11672: This is ID 60020780, which I maintain is probably a giant EB.
  • 11379: This is indeed WASP-28.
  2. EBs (Edd's list, in-field)

  • 12272: This appears to be a contact binary, but the amplitude is rather low. A SIMBAD search identified El Aquarii at 1' as the culprit, as the variability has the same period and phase. This turns out to be star 12271 (see below).

  • 13336: This is a genuine contact binary which has been identified in literature.

  • 13191: (as above)

  • 13172: (as above)

  • 13104: This is also probably a contact binary, but it has a rather long period (~1.5 days). The star has only been identified in K2 data, so its nature is unclear. It may be an evolved contact binary.

  • 12271: This is EL Aqr, a bright W UMa contact binary.

  • 11383: This is a known contact binary.

  • 11377: As above. This is rather nearby to 11383, but the signals are different.

  • 12633: This is a detached binary. The primary is ~M3, and the secondary may be ~M5. M-dwarf binaries are objects of active study, so I suggest this is an important EB target.

  • 11383: Wait, this is on the same list twice…

  • 11845: This is a detached binary. The primary is late-K, and the secondary is probably mid-M.

  • (All of the targets on your list turned out to be EBs in some form, so I think you can decrease the "maybe"s!)

  3. RR Lyraes
  • RR Lyraes are rather unmistakable, so I do not feel the need to actively vet these. Instead, the following list is to exclude targets which do not fall into the C12 FOV.
  • 13926
  • 13478
  • 13236
  • 13210
  • 10657 (Though I agree this looks more like a Cepheid)
  • 11224
  • 11849
  • 12259
  4. "Not very good dips"
  • If I have time, I will return to these later. Many appear to be glitches.
  5. Other
  • 12370: There is only one outlying point yet it is 22 times higher than the base flux, so this must be a glitch.

  ---

  Edit: module 4 targets removed

  Posted August 16, 2016 12:59 AM

• by ajamyajax

  Oh groan, that is soon. I just started to browse through the C12 Index entries, but I'll step on it and will post any possible candidates not already mentioned in the next few days.

  Posted August 16, 2016 1:21 AM

• by Shellface

  Oh groan, that is soon. I just started to browse through the C12 Index entries, but I'll step on it and will post any possible candidates not already mentioned in the next few days.

  If you can, include EBs and other notable variables in that too. The PC count does not look much improved, as the best targets were already studied.

  ---

  Edd's lists, second comment, in-field targets:

  1. Promising Events
  • (No on-silicon targets)
  2. EBs

  • 5815: This star shows a ~5-hour long montransit, which is likely to correspond to a binary with period shorter than one campaign. The primary is late-G, so if it is a dwarf the companion is likely mid-M.

  • (No, really, the overlap is actually this small for OID < 10000)

  3. RR Lyraes
  • (No targets in-field)
  4. Potential dips
  • Again, I will look at these if I have time. The number of in-field stars is probably not large, though.
  5. Other
  • (No targets in-field)
  6. Contamination
  • (No targets in-field)

  ---

  Edit: module 4 targets removed (RIP 8622)

  Posted August 16, 2016 1:48 AM

• by ajamyajax

  Yes, will do. It will be tempting to stop and take a closer look at something, but might not have time for that. Ah maybe later.

  Posted August 16, 2016 2:23 AM

• by Shellface

  Module 4 has recently failed (confirmed today), during C10 observations. This results in the non-observation of a moderate number of targets in C12, I believe around OID ~ 11500. Care should be taken to avoid targeting these stars.

  Incredibly unfortunately, this means that K2-2 will not be reobserved.

  Posted August 16, 2016 2:45 AM

• by ajamyajax

  Ah geez, but based on the news you posted it looks like the K2FOV program could identify those losses. Will run that again tomorrow and see what we get.

  Posted August 16, 2016 3:03 AM

• by ajamyajax in response to ajamyajax's comment.

  Well, the latest K2fov program (5.1) lists 356 fewer Index targets visible in C12 with the loss of Module 4. Here is a list. The corresponding ET ID's, if there is one for each, will be on my previous C12 list.

  https://www.dropbox.com/s/spqy46pspmzqyny/Index_C12_Module4_losses.txt

  Posted August 16, 2016 2:10 PM

• by Dolorous_Edd

  there goes 8622 aka 60019950, apparently

  Posted August 16, 2016 2:20 PM

• by andrew418

  Hi all,

  Yes, it's too bad about module 4... I think we're pretty close to having this ready to go though! I need to put together a written proposal to submit, so while I work on that, would you all be able to: add any new interesting candidates from the Oxford light curves to the target list, and remove the targets in the list that fell on Module 4? Here is a link to the target list again. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_R6gCcLfQxIJ5c-jeNuDjd8hEE2lzofu-BOJMhChglQ/edit#gid=2116846128

  Thanks!
  Andrew

  Posted August 16, 2016 3:43 PM

• by ajamyajax in response to andrew418's comment.

  Andrew,

  What's your time frame then? We'll do what we can, but starting to look like we will run out of time. But will keep working on this until your deadline.

  Best as always, Mark

  Posted August 16, 2016 4:53 PM

• by andrew418

  How about I plan to submit at 8:00 PM Pacific time on Aug 18? That's 4 hours before the official deadline.

  Is it straightforward to remove the targets that won't be observed on Module 4 from the list? I can take a stab at doing that automatically if it's too difficult. I'd imagine it's only ~50 or so that need to be removed though, so may just be easier to go through by hand.

  Is there anything else I can help out with on the targets front?

  Andrew

  Posted August 16, 2016 5:58 PM

• by ajamyajax in response to andrew418's comment.

  Ok, appreciate that. Full speed ahead then! And there are 59 count Module 4 entries in your spreadsheet from a quick program comparison I just ran. Probably few enough to delete manually, and I'll try to do that on the 18th after done looking for more candidates. Unless you are someone else wants to do that first. Here are those rows to be deleted by ET ID search though, as I see it:

  ET ID, Index, RA, Dec
  
  60018662,8100,355.530583,0.547972
  
  60019740,8114,355.75288,0.6559
  
  60020174,8117,355.33521,0.31935
  
  60023720,8123,355.506655,0.344487
  
  60023804,8143,356.061215,0.504142
  
  60021281,8152,355.76668,0.177065
  
  60018002,8156,356.01238,0.34464
  
  60018115,8157,356.019721,0.381883
  
  60018054,8170,356.03496,0.34231
  
  60023792,8179,355.96143,0.266044
  
  60018014,8191,356.151292,0.303467
  
  60018330,8583,355.492725,1.354381
  
  60023690,8590,355.280581,1.518433
  
  60018959,8595,354.80096,1.23432
  
  60018272,8610,354.903928,1.502268
  
  60018956,8614,354.75828,1.5498
  
  60019950,8622,354.9707,1.98333
  
  60023551,8629,354.371318,1.64715
  
  60023588,8631,354.633212,1.857653
  
  60020635,10884,354.892958,0.042417
  
  60017942,10889,354.83187,-0.04258
  
  60018277,10898,354.731254,-0.198078
  
  60021268,10900,354.74491,-0.227061
  
  60020237,10910,354.72328,-0.37328
  
  60020428,10922,354.53573,-0.22557
  
  60018813,10923,354.77309,-0.56859
  
  60021288,10944,354.5643,-0.554548
  
  60019586,10955,354.32944,-0.38594
  
  60019240,10959,354.54205,-0.74728
  
  60020843,10963,354.41514,-0.62559
  
  60021260,10968,354.49484,-0.801444
  
  60021005,10971,354.179678,-0.436498
  
  60019402,10981,354.13498,-0.50985
  
  60019401,10985,354.0623,-0.54525
  
  60020563,11454,353.657875,-0.137083
  
  60023550,11462,354.36602,0.563011
  
  60023467,11468,353.682354,0.130255
  
  60023505,11475,353.962992,0.364767
  
  60023487,11486,353.8378,0.31654
  
  60020832,11492,354.286343,0.677978
  
  60020381,11499,353.87943,0.38488
  
  60019727,11504,353.80261,0.33439
  
  60021410,11509,353.955353,0.445516
  
  60018358,11524,353.583351,0.201379
  
  60017880,11530,353.513885,0.179413
  
  60020164,11535,353.70029,0.53665
  
  60021240,11546,353.95212,0.894477
  
  60019721,11549,353.78179,0.78316
  
  60023466,11562,353.678927,0.77046
  
  60023470,11575,353.694502,0.866694
  
  60023403,11583,353.179487,0.571493
  
  60020165,11584,354.00724,1.19618
  
  60023452,11596,353.586519,0.916586
  
  60023509,11601,354.028165,1.271299
  
  60021243,11606,353.2737,0.76154
  
  60023433,11615,353.42721,1.021281
  
  60020378,12060,353.43532,1.25214
  
  60019353,12062,353.69574,1.40808
  
  60019528,12070,353.00547,0.87885
  

  Posted August 16, 2016 6:55 PM

• by Shellface

  Andrew, what is your opinion on the ideal length of the target list? With the loss of targets from other programs, and the loss of one of our SC targets, I wonder how many free pixels there are.

  For example, there are nearly 500 stars brighter than Kp = 15 in the list, of which 42% are not already present on the proposal. Even if their engineering lightcurves are unremarkable, would a brightness-limited subsample be viable?

  Posted August 16, 2016 8:00 PM

• by andrew418

  My thoughts are that the length of the target list don't matter too much, as long as we put them in order of our priority. My guess is that most of the targets we propose will already have been proposed, so even if we submit 500 targets, we may only be proposing 50-100 new ones or so. The directors will cut the target list as they see fit.

  For now, let's plan to submit (in order of priority) : 1 planet candidate for short cadence (particularly 60020287), any interesting objects (possible transits, EBs, etc) from the 250 or so of the main targets that fall in the K2C12 field of view, any interesting objects from the 2000 or so of the secondary targets that fall in the K2C12 field of view, and then the rest of the 250 or so main targets that fall in the field of view. I would imagine there will be about 300 objects or fewer total then that we propose. We'll just tell the GO office to cut targets from the bottom of the list.

  I'd be inclined to not necessarily include the brighter of the non-targeted stars, since those are more likely to be uninteresting stars from a planet-search perspective (probably hotter stars, giants, etc, which you wouldn't necessarily detect planets around).

  Does that sound good?

  Posted August 16, 2016 9:58 PM

• by Shellface in response to andrew418's comment.

  Yep, that philosophy is more or less what I had intended.

  I agree that inclusion of unsuitable stars should be avoided, but I think it would be better to actively cut them so that viable dwarfs are included if possible. I'll try a colour + proper motion cutting method for brighter stars of both samples.

  (Gaia really can't come fast enough!)

  Posted August 16, 2016 11:13 PM

• by Shellface

  The cutting method was surprisingly simple. This was my methodology:

  I started with the entire on-silicon, overlapping target list. I excluded stars fainter than Kp = 15 - there is not a strong physical justification for this, but generally Kepler's photometric precision becomes poor beyond Kp = 15, so this cut is in the interest of data usability. This leaves 488 targets out of 2152.

  Next I collected proper motions plus J and H magnitudes from the EPIC. All of the stars had proper motions but a handful did not have the 2MASS magnitudes, so I collected them from the 2MASS point source catalogue where necessary. I added columns for J-H colour and total proper motion, as in the square root of the sum of the RA and declination proper motions squared.

  I chose to exclude stars with J - H < 0.15 (<~F4). Mid-F stars are around the hottest stars where follow-up is viable, as earlier stars are rapid rotators. This cut removes 10 stars. However, inspection of these stars finds several to be interesting; 2 are sdB stars, 1 is a white dwarf, 1 is an RR Lyrae, and 1 is an EB. While unsuitable for planet detection these are all objects of interest, so I would suggest they should be considered for targeting.

  Next comes the exclusion of giants, which is more problematic as they have similar appearance to dwarfs. In absence of distance indicators, proper motions are well-suited for determining what stars are dwarfs. This is because giants of a certain brightness are much further away than dwarfs, so they necessarily have lower proper motions. This method is prone to false negatives because it is possible for a closer stars to have lower proper motions, but as we are more interested in excluding giants than maintaining completeness this will suffice.

  Plotted below are total proper motions for all stars with J - H > 0.6. For dwarfs this corresponds to M-type stars, while for giants this mostly corresponds to mid-K. M-dwarfs are faint, so the the stars brighter than Kp = 13 are giants. None of these show total proper motions above 30 mas/yr (marked by the line), which suggests the proper motion upper limit for giants is around here; I checked the Kp 13 -14 stars just above this line and they seem to be dwarfs, which supports this limit. Thus I adopted the exclusion of stars with PM < 30 mas/yr; this removes 273 stars.

  

  Shown below is J - H against Kp for the remaining 203 stars. Two populations are visible, FGK stars with mostly Kp < 13, and the M-dwarfs with mostly Kp > 13. The lack of FGK stars with Kp > 13 is a selection effect due to the proper motion cut which increasingly removes dwarfs for fainter stars, but as Kp = 13 is roughly the limit for follow-up for most stars this should not be greatly problematic. Plus, others are likely to have targeted some of these stars anyway.

  

  I think this is satisfactory for the "broad" low-priority subsample, so now all that remains is to sort the "narrow" targets-of-interest.

  Posted August 17, 2016 12:52 PM

• by Shellface

  I've reworked the spreadsheet; since I had to effectively start from the bottom, the previous version is saved on sheet 2. I am working on merging the target lists, and once this is done the old version should be removed.

  The current subsample order is planets + planet candidates -> binaries -> unusual targets (mostly the RR Lyraes) -> high proper motion stars (see previous comment). Each subsample is internally sorted by brightness, except for the short cadence target which is placed at the top.

  Since we now have a separate document which lists all the engineering IDs, and I don't expect they are necessary for the proposal itself, I have not included the IDs in the comment section. This, at the least, makes it less cluttered.

  Now for more vetting:

  ---

  EPIC 246313046 (60023173/13919): I am very hard-pressed to see any structure in either lightcurve. The implied transit depth is at least two times smaller than the standard deviation of the lightcurve, and considering the short lightcurve duration sqrt(n) is not large enough to make a difference. This star appears in the high proper motion subsample and it is a good target for planet detection, but I cannot consider it a planet candidate.

  EPIC 246472354 (60023224/11818): I maintain my previous opinion on this target; the apparent dip sinks further into the pointing-based noise in the Oxford reduction, and I would guess the extra noise is due to saturation (Kep = 10.6). The star has low proper motions for its brightness, so it is more likely to be a giant than a dwarf.

  EPIC 246378979 (60018403/11389): The second dip (~1864.65 in BJD-4833, ~2.65 in the Oxford reduction) seems to be significant, non-instrumental, and consistent in both lightcurves, so it may very well be real. The others are nowhere near as clear, so while I would say the ~2.65d dip is possibly a transit I would not assign it a periodicity. This is a rather hot star (~F3), and it is actually a Hipparcos star; the Hipparcos parallax is consistent with a dwarf. The largest issue is that the dip is only ~2 hours long, which is very difficult to produce on such a large star. I would regard this as a low-confidence planet candidate.

  EPIC 246142272 (60020306/13089): This is a rather noisy star, and the variability seems to be explainable by a rather coarse rotational signal. A rotational period of 2.5 days is very short for an M4 dwarf which indicates a young star, so the coarse lightcurve can be explained by complex surface features due to activity. This star is included in the high proper motion subsample.

  EPIC 246470777 (60018007/11814): This star lies within one of the diffraction spikes of the very bright Kappa Piscium, and it is not actually visible in the Kepler aperture due to the amount of light from the brighter star. The target's variability is bizarre for any GK-type star, so the lightcurve is probably entirely from Kappa Piscium (which is a known variable). Since it is effectively unobservable by Kepler, this is a very unsuitable target.

  ---

  I have gone through the old sheet. Most of the noted targets show no variability (e.g EPIC 246246329), or variability that has been misinterpreted. Some of the notable objects are:

  • EPIC 246415941: This star shows peculiar variability, with "sharp" extrema rather than the curved shape of a sinusoid. Though similar to rotational variability the star is apparently rather hot (~6500 K according to RAVE), so I am not sure of its nature.

  • Asteroseismic giants: These are giants that display prominent solar-type oscillations. The beating of different frequencies means that occasionally a deep trough in the lightcurve is observed, which has a transit-like appearance. These are notable because the large amplitude of the oscillatons mean that asteroseismology is possible, but they are not transit hosts.

  • 246234071

  • 246310887

  • Many of the targets appear to have had simple glitches or pointing systematics interpreted as transits, despite them being non-periodic and not transit-like (usually 1 outlying datapoint)

  Regardless, all the noted objects with any significance have been added to the main sheet.

  Posted August 17, 2016 2:54 PM

• by andrew418

  Awesome, thanks so much!

  Keep an eye out for a proposal draft soon.

  Andrew

  Posted August 17, 2016 10:07 PM

• by andrew418

  Hi everyone,

  I just submitted the proposal! I couldn't have done it without your help. I think this work will benefit to the community, and we appreciate your hard work.

  Thanks,
  Andrew

  Posted August 19, 2016 3:54 AM

• by ajamyajax

  FWIW/or as an example I suppose, here are the C1/C10 overlaps I get matching that data when run thru the K2fov program.
  If any other future campaign overlaps are worth another work-up like the ET data, let me know and I'll generate more of these lists.

  201237755,180.017801,-3.394739,14.27
  
  201238919,179.909965,-3.377506,15.34
  
  201258965,180.032269,-3.072727,17.78
  
  201260075,180.141109,-3.056697,17.86
  
  201219907,179.93152,-3.663535,15.55
  
  201240429,179.946215,-3.354373,15.63
  
  201240659,179.919641,-3.350724,16.16
  
  201267653,180.180781,-2.94056,11.41
  
  201242018,179.947428,-3.329977,13.22
  
  201243908,180.121164,-3.301515,12.3
  
  201268307,180.17453,-2.930844,9.12
  
  201245622,180.095035,-3.276088,13.69
  
  201226808,179.90657,-3.558641,13.2
  
  201226951,179.968288,-3.556892,16.87
  
  201265757,179.987331,-2.968347,16.69
  
  201227474,180.075126,-3.549092,16.98
  
  201246963,179.950642,-3.254692,14.32
  
  201247383,179.949917,-3.247881,16.51
  
  201247470,180.133536,-3.246633,16.47
  
  201229393,179.939019,-3.520662,17.46
  
  201248219,180.065749,-3.234952,16.47
  
  201230010,179.891686,-3.511766,9.63
  
  201232006,179.88494,-3.481396,15.74
  
  201233437,179.915117,-3.459777,13.99
  
  201252730,179.984148,-3.166258,13.27
  
  201234956,180.070246,-3.437626,17.84
  
  201235374,179.920877,-3.431738,13.68
  
  201235531,180.097329,-3.429183,14.6
  
  201253686,179.922393,-3.152185,15.24
  
  201254570,180.008489,-3.138731,15.28
  
  201278191,180.161104,-2.781035,16.33
  
  201335717,180.240814,-1.920164,13.74
  
  201335842,180.24303,-1.918437,13.74
  
  201336487,180.278484,-1.908416,12.54
  
  201337455,180.309384,-1.893728,15.38
  
  201281569,180.217427,-2.729076,17.07
  
  201282597,180.142205,-2.71351,14.73
  
  201312438,180.097458,-2.266611,16.02
  
  201338814,180.279808,-1.873799,16.3
  
  201283991,180.222569,-2.69286,10.04
  
  201314531,180.299414,-2.236815,14.33
  
  201338833,180.2598,-1.873505,15.56
  
  201285120,180.052082,-2.675666,16.76
  
  201286038,180.226313,-2.661377,12.83
  
  201286208,180.176468,-2.658848,18.16
  
  201317992,180.300459,-2.183958,14.21
  
  201288189,180.080263,-2.627735,16.71
  
  201288370,180.073881,-2.624789,15.7
  
  201319511,180.120674,-2.159952,15.08
  
  201320240,180.265796,-2.149485,13.72
  
  201343245,180.306099,-1.808378,11.99
  
  201289623,180.018973,-2.604909,16.42
  
  201289997,180.131255,-2.599838,15.11
  
  201290692,180.159597,-2.589212,15.56
  
  201321584,180.135932,-2.130178,11.56
  
  201321645,180.09729,-2.1291,16.74
  
  201291136,180.169367,-2.58189,14.62
  
  201291512,180.13106,-2.576284,15.38
  
  201292464,180.061841,-2.56257,16.07
  
  201345486,180.361278,-1.774096,17.59
  
  201292811,180.029703,-2.557201,10.82
  
  201270140,180.083232,-2.902925,15.06
  
  201295365,180.155853,-2.520229,17.66
  
  201296116,180.060923,-2.509511,16.5
  
  201327123,180.300093,-2.04625,14.01
  
  201347993,180.362586,-1.736179,18.39
  
  201270310,180.074814,-2.900574,13.6
  
  201297345,180.19187,-2.490352,18.77
  
  201297635,180.216482,-2.486302,14.54
  
  201328324,180.14126,-2.028256,17.7
  
  201348282,180.279343,-1.731552,10.53
  
  201272216,180.021324,-2.871767,16.13
  
  201300402,180.164538,-2.444076,16.43
  
  201300685,180.148539,-2.440307,16.51
  
  201349707,180.318183,-1.71073,15.88
  
  201272989,180.022979,-2.859977,14.35
  
  201302050,180.142056,-2.420475,16.1
  
  201350210,180.245908,-1.702657,17.41
  
  201275316,180.180384,-2.824307,12.4
  
  201276278,180.175646,-2.809249,14.99
  
  201303441,180.200136,-2.399722,14.51
  
  201303545,180.100542,-2.398509,16.32
  
  201303772,180.135331,-2.394886,12.97
  
  201305552,180.177283,-2.367451,17.35
  
  201276886,180.052579,-2.799942,16.0
  

  Posted August 25, 2016 5:21 AM

• by Shellface in response to ajamyajax's comment.

  This agrees well with the actual target list, though a handful were not targeted for some reason.

  Andrew has expressed support for making proposals for C13 (C4) and C15 (C2), so would it be possible to produce overlaps lists for those? We have up to the 10th of November to place a DDT proposal for C13, while GO proposals for C15 are open until the 23rd of September (DDT proposals for C15 will close sometime around next April, I imagine).

  As the overlaps are much smaller than the C12 overlap, there should be much less targets to consider. (They deserve their own threads, though)

  Posted August 25, 2016 11:20 PM

• by ajamyajax in response to Shellface's comment.

  Sure, try these. The K2fov program found 334 overlaps for c4/c13 and 874 for c2/c15. And it's good to have more time also.

  https://www.dropbox.com/s/njwrjdpzg96cwch/c4_c13.csv?dl=0

  https://www.dropbox.com/s/16wc6xmfnhsorrh/c2_c15.csv?dl=0

  Posted August 26, 2016 12:22 AM

• by Shellface

  C13 thread

  C15 thread

  Posted August 26, 2016 3:55 PM