Real-time Detection of Anomalies in Multivariate Time Series of Astronomical Data
Open accessAbstract
Astronomical transients are stellar objects that become temporarily brighter on various timescales and have led to some of the most significant discoveries in cosmology and astronomy. Some of these transients are the explosive deaths of stars known as supernovae while others are rare, exotic, or entirely new kinds of exciting stellar explosions. New astronomical sky surveys are observing unprecedented numbers of multi-wavelength transients, making standard approaches of visually identifying new and interesting transients infeasible. To meet this demand, we present two novel methods that aim to quickly and automatically detect anomalous transient light curves in real-time. Both methods are based on the simple idea that if the light curves from a known population of transients can be accurately modelled, any deviations from model predictions are likely anomalies. The first approach is a probabilistic neural network built using Temporal Convolutional Networks (TCNs) and the second is an interpretable Bayesian parametric model of a transient. We show that the flexibility of neural networks, the attribute that makes them such a powerful tool for many regression tasks, is what makes them less suitable for anomaly detection when compared with our parametric model.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
The explanation put forward is that neural networks are too efficient and can generate, with decent accuracy, even light curves not part of the original dataset.
“The explanation put forward is that neural networks are too efficient and are therefore able to generate, with descent accuracy, even light curves which were not part of the original dataset (Figure 36).”
From The Dawes Review 10: The impact of deep learning for the analysis of galaxy surveys (2023) · cites this paper as Muthukrishna et al. (2021)
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
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 23
- Bai S., Zico Kolter J., Koltun V., 2018, arXiv e-prints, p. arXiv:1803.01271 · arXiv
- Bazin G., et al., 2009, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 499, 653 · DOI
- Bellm E. C., et al., 2019, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 131, 018002 · DOI
- Coppejans D. L., et al., 2020, Astrophysical Journal, 895, L23 · DOI
- Duev D. A., et al., 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 489, 3582 · DOI
- Gal Y., Ghahramani Z., 2015a, arXiv e-prints, p. arXiv:1506.02142 · arXiv
- Gal Y., Ghahramani Z., 2015b, arXiv e-prints, p. arXiv:1506.02157 · arXiv
- Ishida E. E. O., et al., 2019, arXiv e-prints, p. arXiv:1909.13260 · arXiv
- Ivezić Ž., et al., 2019, Astrophysical Journal, 873, 111 · DOI · Paper page
- Jamal S., Bloom J. S., 2020, Astrophysical Journals, 250, 30 · DOI
- Kessler R., et al., 2009, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 121, 1028 · DOI
- Kessler R., et al., 2019, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 131, 094501 · DOI
- Kingma D. P., Ba J., 2015, in Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations. ICLR 2015
- Lang K. R., 2010, Science, 327, 39 · DOI
- Lochner M., Bassett B. A., 2020, arXiv e-prints, p. arXiv:2010.11202 · arXiv
- Malanchev K. L., et al., 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 502, 5147 · DOI
- Muthukrishna D., Narayan G., Mandel K. S., Biswas R., Hložek R., 2019, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 131, 118002 · DOI
- Muthukrishna D., Mandel K. S., Lochner M., Webb S., Narayan G., 2021, arXiv e-prints, p. arXiv:2111.00036 · arXiv
- Naul B., Bloom J. S., Pérez F., van der Walt S., 2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 151 · DOI
- Pruzhinskaya M. V., Malanchev K. L., Kornilov M. V., Ishida E. E. O., Mondon F., Volnova A. A., Korolev V. S., 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 489, 3591 · DOI
- Soraisam M. D., et al., 2020, Astrophysical Journal, 892, 112 · DOI
- Villar V. A., Cranmer M., Berger E., Contardo G., Ho S., Hosseinzadeh G., Yao-Yu Lin J., 2021, arXiv e-prints, p. arXiv:2103.12102 · arXiv
- Webb S., et al., 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 498, 3077 · DOI
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
- Authors
- Muthukrishna, D., Mandel, K. S., Lochner, M., Webb, S., & Narayan, G.
- Affiliations
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- South African Radio Astronomy Observatory (ZA)
- Swinburne University of Technology (AU)
- University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2021
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2112.08415
- OpenAlex
- W4225873919
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- European Commission (873089, 101002652)
- National Research Foundation
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Gamma-ray bursts and supernovae
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
- Keywords
- astronomical transients, anomaly detection, multivariate time series, transient light curves, supernovae, probabilistic neural network, temporal convolutional network, real-time detection, sky survey, interpretable models
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
