[vsnet-alert 25232] Determination of the superoutburst cycle lengths of 206 SU UMa type dwarf novae: too many flaws?

[Taichi Kato]

Determination of the superoutburst cycle lengths of 206 SU UMa type dwarf novae: too many flaws?

https://arxiv.org/abs/2101.02756
"Determination of the superoutburst cycle lengths of 206 SU UMa type dwarf novae"
by N. Vogt, E. C. Puebla, A. Contreras-Quijada

   I checked their Table 1 for familiar objects and
have been surprised to see that many of their supercycles
cannot be confirmed.

        C(SO)   real value   comment
BE Oct  476.3    140-170     ASAS-SN recorded many superoutbursts
BB Ari  399.5     longer     only three are known recently (2016, 2019, 2020)
                             probably once in two years
PV Per  240.5    150-190     many superoutbursts in ZTF
FT Cam  247.3       -        no superoutburst has been recorded
HV Aur  274.2    120-140     ZTF data
BZ UMa  303.4     longer     only two superoutburst (2007, 2012) are known 

   Some values are correct, but some are seriously flawed.
I checked only a small fraction of GCVS variables.
I'm afraid that the authors couldn't identify superoutbursts
correctly.

   For an easier reference to broader members, I post this
to vsnet-alert.