Detecting outliers in astronomical images with deep generative networks
Open accessAbstract
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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
Finding strong lenses in CFHTLS using convolutional neural networks
Jacobs, C., Glazebrook, K., Collett, T., More, A., & McCarthy, C. (2017) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1492 · Cited by 133 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…of labeled or annotated data are available for classification (e.g Huertas-Company et al. 2015; Kim & Brunner 2017; Cabrera-Vives et al. 2017; Jacobs et al. 2017; Sreejith et al. 2018; Domı́nguez Sánchez et al. 2018; Huertas-Company et al. 2018; Davidzon et al. 2019), regression (e.g.…”
BackgroundDeep learning for galaxy surface brightness profile fitting
Tuccillo, D., Huertas-Company, M., Decencière, E., Velasco-Forero, S., Domínguez Sánchez, H., & Dimauro, P. (2018) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stx3186 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Dawes Review 10: The impact of deep learning for the analysis of galaxy surveys
Huertas-Company, M., & Lanusse, F. (2023) · Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia · doi:10.1017/pasa.2022.55 · Cited by 102 · see citing works
“Margalef-Bentabol et al. (2020) use the same WGAN approach outlined in Storey-Fisher et al. (2021) but in a slightly different context.”
MethodSelf-supervised Representation Learning for Astronomical Images
Hayat, M. A., Stein, G., Harrington, P., Lukić, Z., & Mustafa, M. (2021) · The Astrophysical Journal Letters · doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abf2c7 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
“Many such methods have already been applied to studies of galaxy morphology (Hocking et al. 2018; Cheng et al. 2020a; Martin et al. 2020; Spindler et al. 2020), identification of strong lenses (Cheng et al. 2020b), and anomaly detection (Xiong et al. 2018; Margalef-Bentabol et al. 2020).”
MethodZanisi, L., Huertas-Company, M., Lanusse, F., Bottrell, C., Pillepich, A., Nelson, D., Rodriguez-Gomez, V., Shankar, F., Hernquist, L., Dekel, A., et al. (2021) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3864 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Self-citationAnomaly detection in Hyper Suprime-Cam galaxy images with generative adversarial networks
Storey-Fisher, K., Huertas-Company, M., Ramachandra, N., Lanusse, F., Leauthaud, A., Luo, Y., Huang, S., & Prochaska, J. X. (2021) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2589 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Self-citationCañameras, R., Schuldt, S., Shu, Y., Suyu, S. H., Taubenberger, S., Andika, I. T., Bag, S., Inoue, K. T., Jaelani, A. T., Leal-Taixé, L., et al. (2024) · Astronomy & Astrophysics · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347072 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
- 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
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- 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
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
- 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