Cited by 56Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsAstronomical Observations and Instrumentation

Detecting outliers in astronomical images with deep generative networks

Open access
Margalef-Bentabol, Berta, Huertas-Company, Marc, Charnock, Tom, Margalef-Bentabol, Carla, Bernardi, Mariangela, Dubois, Yohan, Storey-Fisher, Kate, Zanisi, Lorenzo·2020·Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

Abstract

With the advent of future big-data surveys, automated tools for unsupervised discovery are becoming ever more necessary. In this work, we explore the ability of deep generative networks for detecting outliers in astronomical imaging data sets. The main advantage of such generative models is that they are able to learn complex representations directly from the pixel space. Therefore, these methods enable us to look for subtle morphological deviations which are typically missed by more traditional moment-based approaches. We use a generative model to learn a representation of expected data defined by the training set and then look for deviations from the learned representation by looking for the best reconstruction of a given object. In this first proof-of-concept work, we apply our method to two different test cases. We first show that from a set of simulated galaxies, we are able to detect ${\sim}90{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ of merging galaxies if we train our network only with a sample of isolated ones. We then explore how the presented approach can be used to compare observations and hydrodynamic simulations by identifying observed galaxies not well represented in the models. The code used in this is available at https://github.com/carlamb/astronomical-outliers-WGAN.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/mnras/staa1647

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Margalef-Bentabol et al. (2020) use the same WGAN approach to assess the realism of galaxies produced by cosmological simulations.

    “Margalef-Bentabol et al. (2020) use the same WGAN approach outlined in Storey-Fisher et al. (2021) but in a slightly different context. In this work, the anomaly detection setting is used to assess the realism of galaxies produced by cosmological simulations.”

    From The Dawes Review 10: The impact of deep learning for the analysis of galaxy surveys (2023) · cites this paper as Margalef-Bentabol et al. (2020)

  • Margalef-Bentabol et al. (2020) conclude that the neural network struggles to reconstruct some observed galaxies, meaning they do not exist among the simulated galaxies.

    “The authors compare then the anomaly scores from both datasets and conclude that the neural network struggles to reconstruct some of the observed galaxies, meaning that they do not exist among the simulated galaxies.”

    From The Dawes Review 10: The impact of deep learning for the analysis of galaxy surveys (2023) · cites this paper as Margalef-Bentabol et al. (2020)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Margalef-Bentabol, B., Huertas-Company, M., Charnock, T., Margalef-Bentabol, C., Bernardi, M., Dubois, Y., Storey-Fisher, K., & Zanisi, L.
Affiliations
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • LERMA, Observatoire de Paris, PSL Research University, CNRS, Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ. Paris 06, F-75014 Paris, France
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • University of Southampton (GB)
Corresponding author
Margalef-Bentabol, Berta
Venue
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Published
2020-06-16
Volume
496
Issue
2
Pages
2346-2361
ISSN
  • 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2966
OpenAlex
W3012556652
Cited by
56
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6
FWCI
4.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
National Science Foundation (AST-1816330)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › Astronomical Observations and Instrumentation
Keywords
outlier detection, celestial imagery, deep generative models, generative adversarial networks, galaxy mergers, simulated galaxies, unsupervised discovery, hydrodynamic modeling, image reconstruction, morphological abnormalities

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review