CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 16Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsStellar, planetary, and galactic studies

GaMPEN: A Machine Learning Framework for Estimating Bayesian Posteriors of Galaxy Morphological Parameters

Open access
Ghosh, Aritra, Urry, C. Megan, Rau, Amrit, Perreault-Levasseur, Laurence, Cranmer, Miles, Schawinski, Kevin, Stark, Dominic, Tian, Chuan +6 more·2022·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2207.05107arXiv 2207.05107
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We introduce a novel machine learning framework for estimating the Bayesian posteriors of morphological parameters for arbitrarily large numbers of galaxies. The Galaxy Morphology Posterior Estimation Network (GaMPEN) estimates values and uncertainties for a galaxy's bulge-to-total light ratio ($L_B/L_T$), effective radius ($R_e$), and flux ($F$). To estimate posteriors, GaMPEN uses the Monte Carlo Dropout technique and incorporates the full covariance matrix between the output parameters in its loss function. GaMPEN also uses a Spatial Transformer Network (STN) to automatically crop input galaxy frames to an optimal size before determining their morphology. This will allow it to be applied to new data without prior knowledge of galaxy size. Training and testing GaMPEN on galaxies simulated to match $z < 0.25$ galaxies in Hyper Suprime-Cam Wide $g$-band images, we demonstrate that GaMPEN achieves typical errors of $0.1$ in $L_B/L_T$, $0.17$ arcsec ($\sim 7\%$) in $R_e$, and $6.3\times10^4$ nJy ($\sim 1\%$) in $F$. GaMPEN's predicted uncertainties are well-calibrated and accurate ($<5\%$ deviation) -- for regions of the parameter space with high residuals, GaMPEN correctly predicts correspondingly large uncertainties. We also demonstrate that we can apply categorical labels (i.e., classifications such as "highly bulge-dominated") to predictions in regions with high residuals and verify that those labels are $\gtrsim 97\%$ accurate. To the best of our knowledge, GaMPEN is the first machine learning framework for determining joint posterior distributions of multiple morphological parameters and is also the first application of an STN to optical imaging in astronomy.

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

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2207.05107

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.

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?

  • Ghosh et al. (2022) showed that a combination of MDNs and Monte Carlo Dropout can provide well calibrated uncertainties of galaxy structural parameters.

    “This has been recently done by Ghosh et al. (2022) who showed that a combination of MDNs and Monte Carlo Dropout can provide well calibrated uncertainties of galaxy structural parameters.”

    From The Dawes Review 10: The impact of deep learning for the analysis of galaxy surveys (2023) · cites this paper as Ghosh et al. (2022)

    Sections 4.1 and 4.4 describe using Monte Carlo dropout to estimate posteriors for galaxy morphological parameters, and Section 5 reports accurately calibrated posteriors. But Sections 3.2 and 4.2 describe a network predicting a Gaussian mean and covariance, not an MDN; our copy does not support the claim that the demonstrated combination included MDNs. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 83

  1. Aihara, H., Alsayyad, Y., Ando, M., et al. 2019, PASJ, 71, 114 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Aihara, H., Armstrong, R., Bickerton, S., et al. 2018, PASJ, 70, S8 · DOI
  3. Bender, R., Burstein, D., & Faber, S. M. 1992, ApJ, 399, 462 · DOI
  4. Bernardi, M., Meert, A., Sheth, R. K., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 436, 697 · DOI
  5. Binney, J., & Merrifield, M. 1998, Galactic Astronomy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press), 796
  6. Chen, A., Chow, A., Davidson, A., et al. 2020, in Proc. Fourth Int. Workshop on Data Management for End-to-End Machine Learning (New York: ACM), 1
  7. Cheng, T.-Y., Conselice, C. J., Aragón-Salamanca, A., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 4425 · DOI
  8. Cholesky, A.-L. 1924, BGeod, 2, 67 · DOI
  9. Chollet, F. 2021, Deep Learning with Python (2nd edn.; New York: Simon & Schuster), https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Deep-Learning- with-Python-Second-Edition/Francois-Chollet/9781617296864
  10. Cranmer, M., Tamayo, D., Rein, H., et al. 2021, PNAS, 118, 2026053118 · DOI
  11. Denker, J. S., & Lecun, Y. 1990, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 3, ed.
  12. R. P. Lippmann, J. Moody, & D. Touretzky (San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann), https://proceedings.neurips.cc/ paper/1990/file/7eacb532570ff6858afd2723755ff790-Paper.pdf
  13. Dieleman, S., Willett, K. W., & Dambre, J. 2015, MNRAS, 450, 1441 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Dimauro, P., Daddi, E., Shankar, F., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 256 · DOI
  15. Dodge, Y. 2008, The Concise Encyclopedia of Statistics (New York: Springer), 502, http://www.stewartschultz.com/statistics/books/The% 20Concise%20Encyclopedia%20of%20Statistics.pdf
  16. Foreman-Mackey, D. 2016, JOSS, 1, 24 · DOI
  17. Fukushima, K. 1980, Biol. Cybern., 36, 193 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Gal, Y., & Ghahramani, Z. 2016, in 33rd Int. Conf. Machine Learning, 48, ICML 2016 (PMLR) (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), 1050, https:// proceedings.mlr.press/v48/gal16.html
  19. Ghosh, A., Urry, C. M., Wang, Z., et al. 2020, ApJ, 895, 112 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Goodfellow, I., Bengio, Y., & Courville, A. 2016, Deep Learning (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), https://www.deeplearningbook.org/
  21. Grogin, N. A., Kocevski, D. D., Faber, S. M., et al. 2011, ApJS, 197, 35 · DOI
  22. Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Natur, 585, 357 · DOI · Paper page
  23. Hausen, R., & Robertson, B. E. 2020, ApJS, 248, 20 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Haussler, B., McIntosh, D. H., Barden, M., et al. 2007, ApJS, 172, 615 · DOI
  25. Hoyle, B. 2016, A&C, 16, 34 · DOI
  26. Hubble, E. P. 1926, ApJ, 64, 321 · DOI
  27. Huertas-Company, M., Bernardi, M., Pérez-González, P. G., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 462, 4495 · DOI
  28. Huertas-Company, M., Gravet, R., Cabrera-Vives, G., et al. 2015, ApJS, 221, 8 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Hunter, J. D. 2007, CSE, 9, 90 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Ivezić, Z., Kahn, S. M., Tyson, J. A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 873, 111 · DOI · Paper page
  31. Jaderberg, M., Simonyan, K., Zisserman, A., & Kavukcuoglu, K. 2015, in Proc. 28th Int. Conf. on Neural Information Processing Systems, Vol. 1, ed.
  32. C. Cortes et al. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), http://proceedings.neurips. cc/paper/2015/file/33ceb07bf4eeb3da587e268d663aba1a-Paper.pdf
  33. Jordan, M. I., Ghahramani, Z., Jaakkola, T. S., & Saul, L. K. 1999, Mach. Learn., 37, 183 · DOI
  34. Kendall, A., & Gal, Y. 2017, arXiv:1703.04977 · arXiv
  35. Kim, E. J., & Brunner, R. J. 2017, MNRAS, 464, 4463 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Kloek, T., & van Dijk, H. K. 1978, Econometrica, 46, 1 · DOI
  37. Lecun, Y., Bengio, Y., & Hinton, G. 2015, Natur, 521, 436 · DOI · Paper page
  38. LeCun, Y., Bottou, L., Bengio, Y., & Haffner, P. 1998, IEEEP, 86, 2278 · DOI · Paper page
  39. Lintott, C. J., Schawinski, K., Slosar, A., et al. 2008, MNRAS, 389, 1179 · DOI · Paper page
  40. McKinney, W. 2010, in Proc. of the 9th Python in Science Conf., ed.
  41. Meert, A., Vikram, V., & Bernardi, M. 2013, MNRAS, 433, 1344 · DOI
  42. Natarajan, P., Tang, K. S., Khochfar, S., et al. 2021, arXiv:2103.13932 · arXiv
  43. Nielsen, M. A. 2015, Neural Networks and Deep Learning (Determination Press), http://neuralnetworksanddeeplearning.com/
  44. Paszke, A., Gross, S., Massa, F., et al. 2019, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 (NeurIPS 2019), ed.
  45. H. Wallach et al. (Red Hook, NY: Curran Associates Inc.), 8024, https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/ 2019/hash/bdbca288fee7f92f2bfa9f7012727740-Abstract.html
  46. Pawlowski, N., Brock, A., Lee, M. C. H., Rajchl, M., & Glocker, B. 2017, arXiv:1711.01297 · arXiv
  47. Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., et al. 2011, J. Mach. Learn. Res., 12, 2825 · DOI
  48. Peng, C. Y., Ho, L. C., Impey, C. D., & Rix, H.-W. 2002, AJ, 124, 266 · DOI
  49. Perreault Levasseur, L., Hezaveh, Y. D., & Wechsler, R. H. 2017, ApJL, 850, L7 · DOI · Paper page
  50. Planck Collaboration, Aghanim, N., Akrami, Y., et al. 2018, A&A, 641, A6 · DOI · Paper page
  51. Powell, M. C., Urry, C. M., Cardamone, C. N., et al. 2017, ApJ, 835, 22 · DOI
  52. Pozzetti, L., Bolzonella, M., Zucca, E., et al. 2010, A&A, 523, A13 · DOI
  53. Price-Whelan, A. M., Sipőcz, B. M., Günther, H. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123 · DOI
  54. Racca, G. D., Laureijs, R., Stagnaro, L., et al. 2016, Proc. SPIE, 9904, 99040O · DOI
  55. Rix, H., Barden, M., Beckwith, S. V. W., et al. 2004, ApJS, 152, 163 · DOI
  56. Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., Greenfield, P., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33 · DOI · Paper page
  57. Rowe, B. T., Jarvis, M., Mandelbaum, R., et al. 2015, A&C, 10, 121 · DOI
  58. Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E., & Williams, R. J. 1986, Natur, 323, 533 · DOI · Paper page
  59. Schawinski, K., Urry, C. M., Simmons, B. D., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 440, 889 · DOI
  60. Schmidhuber, J. 2015, NN, 61, 85 · DOI · Paper page
  61. Shallue, C. J., & Vanderburg, A. 2018, AJ, 155, 94 · DOI
  62. Sharma, K., Kembhavi, A., Kembhavi, A., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 2280 · DOI
  63. Shimakawa, R., Tanaka, T. S., Toshikage, S., & Tanaka, M. 2021, PASJ, 73, 1575 · DOI
  64. Simard, L., Willmer, C. N. A., Vogt, N. P., et al. 2002, ApJS, 142, 1 · DOI
  65. Simmons, B. D., Lintott, C., Willett, K. W., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 464, 4420 · DOI
  66. Simonyan, K., & Zisserman, A. 2014, arXiv:1409.1556 · arXiv
  67. Spergel, D., Gehrels, N., Breckinridge, J., et al. 2013, arXiv:1305.5422 · arXiv
  68. Srivastava, N., Hinton, G., Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., & Salakhutdinov, R. 2014, J. Mach. Learn. Res., 15, 1929, https://jmlr.org/papers/v15/ srivastava14a.html
  69. Tanaka, T. S., Shimakawa, R., Shimasaku, K., et al. 2022, PASJ, 74, 1 · DOI
  70. Tarsitano, F., Bruderer, C., Schawinski, K., & Hartley, W. G. 2022, MNRAS, 511, 3330 · DOI
  71. Tremaine, S., Gebhardt, K., Bender, R., et al. 2002, ApJ, 574, 740 · DOI
  72. Tuccillo, D., Huertas-Company, M., Decencière, E., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 894 · DOI · Paper page
  73. van der Wel, A., Franx, M., van Dokkum, P. G., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, 28 · DOI
  74. Vega-Ferrero, J., Domínguez Sánchez, H., Bernardi, M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 1927 · DOI
  75. Wagner-Carena, S., Park, J. W., Birrer, S., et al. 2021, ApJ, 909, 187 · DOI
  76. Walmsley, M., Lintott, C., Géron, T., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 509, 3966 · DOI
  77. Walmsley, M., Smith, L., Lintott, C., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 1554 · DOI · Paper page
  78. Wilson, A. G. 2020, arXiv:2001.10995 · arXiv
  79. Wilson, A. G., & Izmailov, P. 2020, arXiv:2002.08791 · arXiv
  80. Wu, C., Wong, O. I., Rudnick, L., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 1211 · DOI
  81. Wuyts, S., Förster Schreiber, N. M., van der Wel, A., et al. 2011, ApJ, 742, 96 · DOI
  82. York, D. G., Adelman, J., Anderson, J. E., Jr+, et al. 2000, AJ, 120, 1579 · DOI
  83. Zanisi, L., Huertas-Company, M., Lanusse, F., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 4359 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ghosh, A., Urry, C. M., Rau, A., Perreault-Levasseur, L., Cranmer, M., Schawinski, K., Stark, D., Tian, C., Ofman, R., Ananna, T. T., Auge, C., Cappelluti, N., Sanders, D. B., & Treister, E.
Affiliations
  • Yale University (US)
  • Mila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute (CA)
  • Princeton University (US)
  • Dartmouth College (US)
  • University of Miami (US)
  • University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (US)
  • Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile (CL)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2022
Volume
935
Issue
2
Pages
138-138
ISSN
0004-637X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2207.05107
arXiv
2207.05107
OpenAlex
W4293239474
Cited by
16
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2
FWCI
1.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • The Astrophysical Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1715512, ACE210002, FB210003, AFB-170002, 1238877)
  • Smithsonian Institution
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration (80NSSC18K0418, FB210003, NNX08AR22G, AST-1238877)
  • Yale University
  • Princeton University
  • Johns Hopkins University
  • Space Telescope Science Institute (NNX08AR22G)
  • Durham University
  • Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
  • Academia Sinica
  • Cabinet Office, Government of Japan
  • National Central University
  • National Astronomical Observatory of Japan
  • High Energy Accelerator Research Organization
  • Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem
  • Agencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo (NCN19-058, 1200495, ACE210002, 1190818, FB210003)
  • Max-Planck-Institut für Astronomie
  • Toray Science Foundation
  • Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory
  • Science Mission Directorate (NNX08AR22G)
  • Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
  • Japan Science and Technology Agency
  • Planetary Science Division (NNX08AR22G)
  • Los Alamos National Laboratory
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 morphology, Bayesian posterior estimation, effective radius, Monte Carlo dropout, spatial transformer network, uncertainty calibration, joint posterior distribution, Hyper Suprime-Cam, optical imaging

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