MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1924089270 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2009

Space Warps – I. Crowdsourcing the discovery of gravitational lenses

2015· article· en· W1924089270 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Philip J. Marshall, A. Verma, Anupreeta More, C. Davis, Surhud More, Amit Kapadia, Michael Parrish, C. T. Snyder, Julianne K. Wilcox, Elisabeth Baeten, Christine Macmillan, Claude Cornen, Michael Baumer, Edwin Simpson, Chris Lintott, David R. Miller, Edward Paget, R. J. Simpson, Arfon M. Smith, Rafael Küng, Prasenjit Saha, Thomas E. Collett

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrowdsourcingPhysicsLens (geology)ScalabilitySample (material)Projection (relational algebra)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceSet (abstract data type)Computer scienceOpticsAlgorithmWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe Space Warps, a novel gravitational lens discovery service that yields samples of high purity and completeness through crowdsourced visual inspection. Carefully produced colour composite images are displayed to volunteers via a web-based classification interface, which records their estimates of the positions of candidate lensed features. Images of simulated lenses, as well as real images which lack lenses, are inserted into the image stream at random intervals; this training set is used to give the volunteers instantaneous feedback on their performance, as well as to calibrate a model of the system that provides dynamical updates to the probability that a classified image contains a lens. Low-probability systems are retired from the site periodically, concentrating the sample towards a set of lens candidates. Having divided 160 deg2 of Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope Legacy Survey imaging into some 430 000 overlapping 82 by 82 arcsec tiles and displaying them on the site, we were joined by around 37 000 volunteers who contributed 11 million image classifications over the course of eight months. This stage 1 search reduced the sample to 3381 images containing candidates; these were then refined in stage 2 to yield a sample that we expect to be over 90 per cent complete and 30 per cent pure, based on our analysis of the volunteers performance on training images. We comment on the scalability of the Space Warps system to the wide field survey era, based on our projection that searches of 105 images could be performed by a crowd of 105 volunteers in 6 d.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.007

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.195 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations114
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207