GRAVITATIONAL LENS MODELING WITH GENETIC ALGORITHMS AND PARTICLE SWARM OPTIMIZERS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Strong gravitational lensing of an extended object is described by a mapping from source to image coordinates that is nonlinear and cannot generally be inverted analytically. Determining the structure of the source intensity distribution also requires a description of the blurring effect due to a point spread function. This initial study uses an iterative gravitational lens modeling scheme based on the semilinear method to determine the linear parameters (source intensity profile) of a strongly lensed system. Our 'matrix-free' approach avoids construction of the lens and blurring operators while retaining the least squares formulation of the problem. The parameters of an analytical lens model are found through nonlinear optimization by an advanced genetic algorithm (GA) and particle swarm optimizer (PSO). These global optimization routines are designed to explore the parameter space thoroughly, mapping model degeneracies in detail. We develop a novel method that determines the L-curve for each solution automatically, which represents the trade-off between the image chi-square and regularization effects, and allows an estimate of the optimally regularized solution for each lens parameter set. In the final step of the optimization procedure, the lens model with the lowest chi-square is used while the global optimizer solves for the source intensity distribution directly. This allows us to accurately determine the number of degrees of freedom in the problem to facilitate comparison between lens models and enforce positivity on the source profile. In practice we find that the GA conducts a more thorough search of the parameter space than the PSO.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".