The PAU survey: estimating galaxy photometry with deep learning
Open accessAbstract
With the dramatic rise in high-quality galaxy data expected from Euclid and Vera C. Rubin Observatory, there will be increasing demand for fast high-precision methods for measuring galaxy fluxes. These will be essential for inferring the redshifts of the galaxies. In this paper, we introduce Lumos, a deep learning method to measure photometry from galaxy images. Lumos builds on BKGnet, an algorithm to predict the background and its associated error, and predicts the background-subtracted flux probability density function. We have developed Lumos for data from the Physics of the Accelerating Universe Survey (PAUS), an imaging survey using a 40 narrow-band filter camera (PAUCam). PAUCam images are affected by scattered light, displaying a background noise pattern that can be predicted and corrected for. On average, Lumos increases the SNR of the observations by a factor of 2 compared to an aperture photometry algorithm. It also incorporates other advantages like robustness towards distorting artefacts, e.g. cosmic rays or scattered light, the ability of deblending and less sensitivity to uncertainties in the galaxy profile parameters used to infer the photometry. Indeed, the number of flagged photometry outlier observations is reduced from 10 to 2 per cent, comparing to aperture photometry. Furthermore, with Lumos photometry, the photo-z scatter is reduced by ≈10 per cent with the Deepz machine-learning photo-z code and the photo-z outlier rate by 20 per cent. The photo-z improvement is lower than expected from the SNR increment, however, currently the photometric calibration and outliers in the photometry seem to be its limiting factor.
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?
Cabayol-Garcia et al. (2020) and Cabayol et al. (2021) find that the deep learning approach improves the photometric accuracy by up to ~40%.
“They find in this case that the deep learning approach improves the photometric accuracy by up to ∼ 40%.”
From The Dawes Review 10: The impact of deep learning for the analysis of galaxy surveys (2023) · cites this paper as Cabayol et al. (2021)
Cites
Dawid, A. P. (1984) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General) · doi:10.2307/2981683 · Cited by 1,085 · see citing works
Morpheus: A Deep Learning Framework for the Pixel-level Analysis of Astronomical Image Data
Hausen, R., & Robertson, B. E. (2020) · The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series · doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab8868 · Cited by 110 · 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
“Cabayol-Garcia et al. (2020) and Cabayol et al. (2021) explored CNNs to systematically measure photometry on the narrow band PAU survey.”
Background
- Authors
- Cabayol, L., Eriksen, M., Amara, A., Carretero, J., Casas, R., Castander, F. J., De Vicente, J., Fernández, E., García-Bellido, J., Gaztanaga, E., Hildebrandt, H., Miquel, R., Padilla, C., Sánchez, E., Serrano, S., Sevilla-Noarbe, I., & Tallada-Crespí, P.
- Affiliations
- Institute for High Energy Physics (ES)
- University of Portsmouth (GB)
- Institute of Space Sciences (ES)
- Centro de Investigaciones Energéticas, Medioambientales y Tecnológicas (CIEMAT), 28040 Madrid, Spain
- Institut de Física d’Altes Energies (IFAE), The Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, E-08193 Bellaterra, Spain
- Instituto de Física Teórica (ES)
- Institute of Space Sciences (ICE, CSIC), Campus UAB, Carrer de Can Magrans, s/n, 08193 Barcelona, Spain
- Ruhr University Bochum (DE)
- Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats (ES)
- Centro de Investigaciones Energéticas, Medioambientales y Tecnológicas (ES)
- Corresponding author
- Cabayol, L
- ORCID
- Venue
- Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2021-07-06
- Volume
- 506
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 4048-4069
- ISSN
- 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2966
- OpenAlex
- W3144796588
- Cited by
- 18
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 3
- FWCI
- 2.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.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)
- DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- MINECO (CSD2007-00060, AYA2015-71825, ESP2017-89838, PGC2018-094773, PGC2018-102021, SEV-2016-0588, SEV-2016-0597, MDM-2015-0509, PID2019-111317GB-C31)
- EWC (No 734374, no.776247)
- ERDF
- Durham University (DEGAS-259586)
- Leiden University (ADULT-279396)
- Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (639.043.512)
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (1495/5-1)
- ERC (No. 770935)
- University College London
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Instrumentation › Astronomy and Astrophysical Research
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › Astronomical Observations and Instrumentation
- Keywords
- galaxy photometry, lowest unoccupied molecular orbital, deep learning, background subtraction, scattered light, narrow-band imaging, photometric redshifts, deblending, cosmic rays, photometric calibration
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