MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017363291 · doi:10.1109/icdmw.2013.64

Automatic Identification of Hexagonal Pattern Artifacts in Radio Astronomical Surveys

2013· article· en· W2017363291 on OpenAlexaff
Dina Said, J. M. Stil, Russ Taylor, Ken Barker

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadio Astronomy Observations and Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline (software)Artifact (error)Computer scienceTelescopeProcess (computing)Identification (biology)Radio telescopeAutomationComputer visionSkyCube (algebra)Radio-frequency identificationArtificial intelligenceImage processingRemote sensingImage (mathematics)Computer graphics (images)EngineeringAstronomyPhysicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Radio Astronomical Survey (RAS) is a collection of image cubes that represent specific regions in the sky. They are produced through an automated Data Processing Pipeline. In this process, radio astronomical signals received from a radio telescope are mapped to image cubes. Each image cube consists of thousands of two-dimensional images, each image represents the radio signals received by the telescope at a certain frequency. The final stage of the Pipeline process is to visually inspect the produced surveys to discover artifacts. In addition to being a time consuming process, the manual inspection is subjective which makes the validation process imperfect and non-uniform. One of the common artifacts in several RASs is the Hexagonal Pattern Artifact (HPA) which may happen due to telescope influence. Since these artifacts are undesirable, they should be removed or flagged before releasing the RAS to the community. This research presents the first algorithm for Automatic Identification of HPA in RAS (AIHR). The automation process will dramatically reduce the amount of time and effort invested to manually discover HPAs.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.218
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadio Astronomy Observations and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207