\begin{table}%t2 \caption{\label{ResultsTable}The input values of the simulated CB planets (``Examiner'' rows) and their respective solution (``Solver'' rows).} \begin{tabular}{p{1.0cm} l c p{1cm} p{1.8cm} p{1.6cm} p{1.4cm} p{0.8cm} p{4.3cm}} \hline\hline Test dataset & Attribute & Detection\footnote{The possible detection levels are: ``+++'' (Strong and secure), ``++'' (Probable. Noisy), ``+'' (Weak detection) and ``no planet''.}& Period \ [d]& Baricenter crossing \ [CoRoT JD] & Depth (\mbox{primary}\footnote{The depth of the secondary transit is omitted since it is simply $J$ times the primary transit.}) [mmag] & In-transit points & $\alpha_{\rm single}$ & Comment\\ \hline \raisebox{-1.7ex}{Test0} & Examiner & & 13.54 & 2594.54 & 4.683 & & &\\ & Solver & +++ & 13.545 & 2594.525 & 4.768 & 148 & 44.0 & Not blind.\\ \hline \raisebox{-1.7ex}{Test1} & Examiner & & 12.673 & 2563.567 & 2.749 & & & \\ & Solver & +++ & 12.667 & 2595.251 & 2.494 & 145 & 22.8 & A bug (since then fixed) caused the detected reference time to be when the planet crossed the baricenter \textit{behind} the EB system, causing a half-integer difference (2.5 periods) from the correct one.\\ \hline \raisebox{-1.7ex}{Test2} & Examiner & & 13.08 & 2594.54 & 1.853 & & & \\ & Solver & +++ & 13.091 & 2594.513 & 1.560 & 248 & 18.6 & \\ \hline \raisebox{-1.7ex}{Test3} & Examiner & & 17.748 & 2597.54 & 1.901 & & & \\ & Solver & +++ & 17.738 & 2597.571 & 1.349 & 132& 11.7 & \\ \hline \raisebox{-1.7ex}{Test4} & Examiner & & 12.673 & 2563.567 & 2.749 & & & \\ & Solver & +++ & 12.652 & 2595.295 & 2.579 & 143 & 23.4 & See comment to Test1\\ \hline \raisebox{-1.7ex}{Test5} & Examiner & no planet& -- & -- & -- & & &\\ & Solver & no planet& -- & -- & -- & 0 & 0 & A very weak signal was initially suspected before using the single-depth analysis. That periodogram peak completely disappeared when this feature was added and used.\\ \hline \end{tabular} \end{table}