A Quantitative Comparison of Exoplanet Catalogs

TL;DR

This paper compares four major exoplanet catalogs using statistical tests, revealing general agreement but also some differences, and emphasizes the need for a unified catalog for consistent exoplanet research.

Contribution

It provides a quantitative analysis of differences between major exoplanet catalogs and discusses implications for statistical studies and standardization.

Findings

Good agreement in planetary and stellar parameters

Some differences in catalog overlaps and unique entries

Statistical impact of catalog differences is minimal

Abstract

In this study, we investigated the differences between four commonly-used exoplanet catalogs (exoplanet.eu; exoplanetarchive.ipac.caltech.edu; openexoplanetcatalogue.com; exoplanets.org) using a Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) test. We found a relatively good agreement in terms of the planetary parameters (mass, radius, period) and stellar properties (mass, temperature, metallicity), although a more careful analysis of the overlap and unique parts of each catalog revealed some differences. We quantified the statistical impact of these differences and their potential cause. We concluded that although statistical studies are unlikely to be significantly affected by the choice of catalog, it would be desirable to have one consistent catalog accepted by the general exoplanet community as a base for exoplanet statistics and comparison with theoretical predictions.