Finding strong lenses in CFHTLS using convolutional neural networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We train and apply convolutional neural networks, a machine learning technique developed to learn from and classify image data, to Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope Legacy Survey (CFHTLS) imaging for the identification of potential strong lensing systems. An ensemble of four convolutional neural networks was trained on images of simulated galaxy–galaxy lenses. The training sets consisted of a total of 62 406 simulated lenses and 64 673 non-lens negative examples generated with two different methodologies. An ensemble of trained networks was applied to all of the 171 deg2 of the CFHTLS wide field image data, identifying 18 861 candidates including 63 known and 139 other potential lens candidates. A second search of 1.4 million early-type galaxies selected from the survey catalogue as potential deflectors, identified 2465 candidates including 117 previously known lens candidates, 29 confirmed lenses/high-quality lens candidates, 266 novel probable or potential lenses and 2097 candidates we classify as false positives. For the catalogue-based search we estimate a completeness of 21–28 per cent with respect to detectable lenses and a purity of 15 per cent, with a false-positive rate of 1 in 671 images tested. We predict a human astronomer reviewing candidates produced by the system would identify 20 probable lenses and 100 possible lenses per hour in a sample selected by the robot. Convolutional neural networks are therefore a promising tool for use in the search for lenses in current and forthcoming surveys such as the Dark Energy Survey and the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".