Cited by 10Astronomy and Astrophysical ResearchGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaAstronomical Observations and Instrumentation

The PAU Survey: background light estimation with deep learning techniques

Open access
Cabayol-Garcia, L, Eriksen, M, Alarcón, A, Amara, A, Carretero, J, Casas, R, Castander, F J, Fernández, E +12 more·2020·Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

Abstract

In any imaging survey, measuring accurately the astronomical background light is crucial to obtain good photometry. This paper introduces BKGnet, a deep neural network to predict the background and its associated error. BKGnet has been developed for data from the Physics of the Accelerating Universe Survey (PAUS), an imaging survey using a 40 narrow-band filter camera (PAUCam). The images obtained with PAUCam are affected by scattered light: an optical effect consisting of light multiply reflected that deposits energy in specific detector regions affecting the science measurements. Fortunately, scattered light is not a random effect, but it can be predicted and corrected for. We have found that BKGnet background predictions are very robust to distorting effects, while still being statistically accurate. On average, the use of BKGnet improves the photometric flux measurements by $7{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ and up to $20{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ at the bright end. BKGnet also removes a systematic trend in the background error estimation with magnitude in the i band that is present with the current PAU data management method. With BKGnet, we reduce the photometric redshift outlier rate by $35{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ for the best $20{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ galaxies selected with a photometric quality parameter.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/mnras/stz3274

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?

  • 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-Garcia et al. (2020)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cabayol-Garcia, L., Eriksen, M., Alarcón, A., Amara, A., Carretero, J., Casas, R., Castander, F. J., Fernández, E., García-Bellido, J., Gaztanaga, E., Hoekstra, H., Miquel, R., Neissner, C., Padilla, C., Sánchez, E., Serrano, S., Sevilla-Noarbe, I., Siudek, M., Tallada, P., & Tortorelli, L.
Affiliations
  • Institute for High Energy Physics (ES)
  • Institute of Space Sciences (ICE, CSIC), Campus UAB, Carrer de Can Magrans, s/n, E-08193 Barcelona, Spain
  • University of Portsmouth (GB)
  • Institute of Space Sciences (ES)
  • Institut de Física d’Altes Energies (IFAE), The Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, E-08193 Bellaterra (Barcelona), Spain
  • Instituto de Física Teórica (ES)
  • Leiden University (NL)
  • Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats (ES)
  • Centro de Investigaciones Energéticas, Medioambientales y Tecnológicas (CIEMAT), E-28040 Madrid, Spain
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
Corresponding author
  • Cabayol-Garcia, L
  • Eriksen, M
Venue
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Published
2019-11-23
Volume
491
Issue
4
Pages
5392-5405
ISSN
  • 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2966
OpenAlex
W2991073580
Cited by
10
References
2
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2021: 4
FWCI
0.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (publishedVersion)
  • Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • ETH Zürich Research Collection
Funders
  • Nvidia
  • Centres de Recerca de Catalunya
  • European Commission (HORIZON2020, 776247)
  • Generalitat de Catalunya
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (639.043.512)
  • Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
  • Institut de Física d'Altes Energies
  • European Regional Development Fund (SEV-2016-0588, MDM-2015-0509, SEV-2016-0597, 776247)
  • Centro de Investigaciones Energéticas, Medioambientales y Tecnológicas (MDM-2015-0509)
  • Spanish National Plan for Scientific and Technical Research and Innovation
  • Integrated Electronics Engineering Center, Binghamton University
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Instrumentation › Astronomy and Astrophysical Research
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › Astronomical Observations and Instrumentation
Keywords
background light estimation, scatter correction, deep neural network, narrow-band imaging, photometry, galaxy photometry

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