Cited by 35Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena

Predicting dark matter halo formation in N-body simulations with deep regression networks

Open access
Bernardini, M, Mayer, L, Reed, D, Feldmann, R·2020·Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

Abstract

Dark matter haloes play a fundamental role in cosmological structure formation. The most common approach to model their assembly mechanisms is through N-body simulations. In this work, we present an innovative pathway to predict dark matter halo formation from the initial density field using a Deep Learning algorithm. We implement and train a Deep Convolutional Neural Network to solve the task of retrieving Lagrangian patches from which dark matter haloes will condense. The volumetric multilabel classification task is turned into a regression problem by means of the Euclidean distance transformation. The network is complemented by an adaptive version of the watershed algorithm to form the entire protohalo identification pipeline. We show that splitting the segmentation problem into two distinct subtasks allows for training smaller and faster networks, while the predictive power of the pipeline remains the same. The model is trained on synthetic data derived from a single full N-body simulation and achieves deviations of ∼10 per cent when reconstructing the dark matter halo mass function at z = 0. This approach represents a promising framework for learning highly non-linear relations in the primordial density field. As a practical application, our method can be used to produce mock dark matter halo catalogues directly from the initial conditions of N-body simulations.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/mnras/staa1911

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Bernardini et al. (2019) proposed replacing binary segmentation by a regression problem, leading to similar performance but with a smaller model.

    “As a variation of this approach, Bernardini et al. (2019) proposed to replace a binary segmentation by a regression problem, where the target value corresponds to a normalised distance to the centre of the halo, leading to similar performance but with a smaller model.”

    From The Dawes Review 10: The impact of deep learning for the analysis of galaxy surveys (2023) · cites this paper as Bernardini et al. (2019)

    Section 2.2 describes replacing binary protohalo membership predictions with a normalized distance-map regression target, and the Conclusions describe the resulting network as comparatively small, with about 14.5 million parameters. Our copy reports good performance for that network but does not establish similar performance to a binary-segmentation model or show that it is smaller than that model. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 24

  1. Agarwal S., Davé R., Bassett B., 2017, MNRAS, 478 · DOI
  2. Aragon-Calvo M. A., 2019, MNRAS, 484, 5771 · DOI
  3. Bengio Y., Simard P., Frasconi P., 1994, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 5, 157 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Berger P., Stein G., 2019, MNRAS, 482, 2861 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Bond J. R., Cole S., Efstathiou G., Kaiser N., 1991, ApJ, 379, 440 · DOI
  6. Feldmann R., Faucher-Giguère C.-A., Kereš D., 2019, The Astro- physical Journal, 871, L21 · DOI
  7. Guo Q., White S., Li C., Boylan-Kolchin M., 2010, Monthly No- tices of the Royal Astronomical Society · DOI
  8. He S., Li Y., Feng Y., Ho S., Ravanbakhsh S., Chen W., Póczos B., 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 116, 13825 · DOI
  9. Howlett C., Manera M., Percival W. J., 2015, Astronomy and Computing, 12, 109 · DOI
  10. Isensee F., Kickingereder P., Wick W., Bendszus M., Maier-Hein K. H., 2018, Brain Tumor Segmentation and Radiomics Sur- vival Prediction: Contribution to the BRATS 2017 Challenge (arXiv:1802.10508) · arXiv
  11. Karpatne A., Watkins W., Read J., Kumar V., 2017, Physics- guided Neural Networks (PGNN): An Application in Lake Temperature Modeling (arXiv:1710.11431) · arXiv
  12. Kornilov A., Safonov I., 2018, Journal of Imaging, 4, 123 · DOI
  13. Krizhevsky A., Sutskever I., Hinton G. E., 2012, in , Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 25. pp 1097-1105
  14. Liu W., Rabinovich A., Berg A. C., 2015, ParseNet: Looking Wider to See Better (arXiv:1506.04579) · arXiv
  15. Lucie-Smith L., Peiris H. V., Pontzen A., Lochner M., 2018, MN- RAS, 479, 3405 · DOI
  16. Milletari F., Navab N., Ahmadi S.-A., 2016, V-Net: Fully Convo- lutional Neural Networks for Volumetric Medical Image Seg- mentation (arXiv:1606.04797) · arXiv
  17. Naylor P., Laé M., Reyal F., Walter T., 2019, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 38, 448
  18. Noh H., Hong S., Han B., 2015, Learning Deconvolution Network for Semantic Segmentation (arXiv:1505.04366) · arXiv
  19. W. H., Schechter P., 1974, ApJ, 187, 425 · DOI
  20. Reed D., Gardner J., Quinn T., Stadel J., Fardal M., Lake G., Governato F., 2003, MNRAS, 346, 565 · DOI
  21. Sheth R. K., Mo H. J., Tormen G., 2001, MNRAS, 323, 1 · DOI
  22. Srivastava N., Hinton G., Krizhevsky A., Sutskever I., Salakhut- dinov R., 2014, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 15, 1929
  23. Wechsler R. H., Tinker J. L., 2018, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 56, 435-487 · DOI
  24. Zhang X., Wang Y., Zhang W., Sun Y., He S., Contardo G., Villaescusa-Navarro F., Ho S., 2019, From Dark Matter to Galaxies with Convolutional Networks (arXiv:1902.05965) · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bernardini, M., Mayer, L., Reed, D., & Feldmann, R.
Affiliations
University of Zurich (CH)
Corresponding author
Bernardini, M
Venue
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Published
2020-07-07
Volume
496
Issue
4
Pages
5116-5125
ISSN
  • 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2966
OpenAlex
W2996361436
Cited by
35
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5
FWCI
2.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Funders
Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (157591)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Cosmology and Gravitation Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Dark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
Keywords
dark matter halo formation, halo identification, deep convolutional neural networks, watershed segmentation, halo mass function, structure formation

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