Cited by 160Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsStellar, planetary, and galactic studies

Galaxy Zoo: probabilistic morphology through Bayesian CNNs and active learning

Open access
Walmsley, Mike, Smith, Lewis, Lintott, Chris, Gal, Yarin, Bamford, Steven, Dickinson, Hugh, Fortson, Lucy, Kruk, Sandor +5 more·2020·Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

Abstract

We use Bayesian convolutional neural networks and a novel generative model of Galaxy Zoo volunteer responses to infer posteriors for the visual morphology of galaxies. Bayesian CNN can learn from galaxy images with uncertain labels and then, for previously unlabelled galaxies, predict the probability of each possible label. Our posteriors are well-calibrated (e.g. for predicting bars, we achieve coverage errors of 11.8 per cent within a vote fraction deviation of 0.2) and hence are reliable for practical use. Further, using our posteriors, we apply the active learning strategy BALD to request volunteer responses for the subset of galaxies which, if labelled, would be most informative for training our network. We show that training our Bayesian CNNs using active learning requires up to 35–60 per cent fewer labelled galaxies, depending on the morphological feature being classified. By combining human and machine intelligence, Galaxy zoo will be able to classify surveys of any conceivable scale on a time-scale of weeks, providing massive and detailed morphology catalogues to support research into galaxy evolution.

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/stz2816

Cites

109 of 109 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?

  • Walmsley et al. (2020) is the first to explore Bayesian deep learning as a way to both estimate uncertainties and also identify the most informative examples.

    “The work by Walmsley et al. (2020) is also the first to explore Bayesian deep learning as a way to both estimate uncertainties an also identify the most informative examples”

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

    Section 5 (Conclusion; page not provided) says the Bayesian CNNs express uncertainty, and Section 3.5 (Application; page not provided) describes using them to identify informative galaxies for labelling. The paper's priority claim is narrower: Section 3.1 calls it the first combination of active learning with CNNs in astrophysics, not the first exploration of Bayesian deep learning for both purposes generally. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Active learning allows one to select the most informative examples for the model which are the ones showed to human classifiers.

    “Active learning allows one to select the most informative examples for the model which are the ones showed to human classifiers.”

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

  • Active learning has been particularly explored in the framework of galaxy morphology.

    “Active learning has been particularly explored in the framework of galaxy morphology (e.g. Walmsley et al. 2020).”

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

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: 11

  1. Caruana R., Lou Y., Gehrke J., Koch P., Sturm M., Elhadad N., 2015, Pro- ceedings of the ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. ACM, Sydney, Australia, p. 1721
  2. Dickinson H., Fortson L., Scarlata C., Beck M., Walmsley M., 2019, in Boquien M., Lusso E., Gruppioni C., Tissera P., eds, Proc. IAU Symp. 341, Challenges in Panchromatic Galaxy Modelling with Next Generation Facilities. Int. Astron. Un., Paris
  3. Fischer J.-L., Dom H., Bernardi M., MNRAS, 2018, 483, 2057
  4. Gal Y., 2016, PhD thesis. University of Cambridge
  5. Gal Y., Islam R., Ghahramani Z., 2017a, Proceedings of the 24th Interna- tional Conference on Machine Learning, Sydney, Australia, 70, 1183
  6. Gal Y., Hron J., Kendall A., 2017b, Advances in Neural Information Pro- cessing Systems 30 (NIPS).
  7. Curran Associates, Inc, p. 3581, Available at: http://papers.nips.cc/paper/6949-concrete-dropout.pdf
  8. Guo C., Pleiss G., Sun Y., Weinberger K. Q., 2017, Int. Conf. Mach. Learn., 70, 1321
  9. Houlsby N., Huszár F., Ghahramani Z., Lengyel M., 2011, PhD thesis, Universty of Cambridge
  10. Lou Y., Caruana R., Gehrke J., 2012, Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Sydney, p. 150
  11. Murphy K. P., 2012, Machine Learning: A Probabilisitic Perspective. MIT Press, Boston, MA

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Walmsley, M., Smith, L., Lintott, C., Gal, Y., Bamford, S., Dickinson, H., Fortson, L., Kruk, S., Masters, K., Scarlata, C., Simmons, B., Smethurst, R., & Wright, D.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • European Space Agency (FR)
  • Haverford College (US)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
Corresponding author
Walmsley, Mike
Venue
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Published
2019-10-07
Volume
491
Issue
2
Pages
1554-1574
ISSN
  • 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2966
OpenAlex
W2946593308
Cited by
160
References
109
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 1
FWCI
9.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • Science and Technology Facilities Council (ST/R505006/1, ST/N003179/1)
  • National Science Foundation (IIS-1619177, OAC-1835530, AST-1716602)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Keywords
Galaxy Zoo, galaxy morphology, Bayesian convolutional neural network, active learning (machine learning), citizen science, galactic bars, label uncertainty, galaxy evolution

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