  Time-series photometry and spectroscopy of transiting exoplanets allow us to
study their atmospheres. Unfortunately, the required precision to extract
atmospheric information surpasses the design specifications of most general
purpose instrumentation, resulting in instrumental systematics in the light
curves that are typically larger than the target precision. Systematics must
therefore be modelled, leaving the inference of light curve parameters
conditioned on the subjective choice of models and model selection criteria.
This paper aims to test the reliability of the most commonly used systematics
models and model selection criteria. As we are primarily interested in
recovering light curve parameters rather than the favoured systematics model,
marginalisation over systematics models is introduced as a more robust
alternative than simple model selection. This can incorporate uncertainties in
the choice of systematics model into the error budget as well as the model
parameters. Its use is demonstrated using a series of simulated transit light
curves. Stochastic models, specifically Gaussian processes, are also discussed
in the context of marginalisation over systematics models, and are found to
reliably recover the transit parameters for a wide range of systematics
functions. None of the tested model selection criteria - including the BIC -
routinely recovered the correct model. This means that commonly used methods
that are based on simple model selection may underestimate the uncertainties
when extracting transmission and eclipse spectra from real data, and
low-significance claims using such techniques should be treated with caution.
In general, no systematics modelling techniques are perfect; however,
marginalisation over many systematics models helps to mitigate poor model
selection, and stochastic processes provide an even more flexible approach to
modelling instrumental systematics.
