MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963386274 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936345

MAXIMASK and MAXITRACK: Two new tools for identifying contaminants in astronomical images using convolutional neural networks

2019· article· en· W2963386274 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Maxime Paillassa, E. Bertin, H. Bouy

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPlanetary Science DivisionJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceCanadian Space AgencyScience Mission DirectorateSmithsonian Astrophysical ObservatoryInstituto de Astrofísica de CanariasNational Astronomical Observatory of JapanNational Central UniversityCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyQueen's UniversityCabinet Office, Government of JapanAgence Nationale de la RechercheSpace Telescope Science InstituteToray Science FoundationUniversity of TokyoHigh Energy Accelerator Research OrganizationMax-Planck-Institut für AstronomieUniversity of EdinburghEötvös Loránd TudományegyetemAcademia SinicaEuropean CommissionLos Alamos National LaboratoryPrinceton UniversityJohns Hopkins UniversityCentre National d’Etudes SpatialesQueen's University BelfastNvidiaNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationDurham UniversityJapan Science and Technology AgencySmithsonian InstitutionNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPixelConvolutional neural networkComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceClassifier (UML)ResidualSegmentationComputer visionPattern recognition (psychology)Multispectral imageAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we propose two convolutional neural network classifiers for detecting contaminants in astronomical images. Once trained, our classifiers are able to identify various contaminants, such as cosmic rays, hot and bad pixels, persistence effects, satellite or plane trails, residual fringe patterns, nebulous features, saturated pixels, diffraction spikes, and tracking errors in images. They encompass a broad range of ambient conditions, such as seeing, image sampling, detector type, optics, and stellar density. The first classifier, MAXIMASK, performs semantic segmentation and generates bad pixel maps for each contaminant, based on the probability that each pixel belongs to a given contaminant class. The second classifier, MAXITRACK, classifies entire images and mosaics, by computing the probability for the focal plane to be affected by tracking errors. We gathered training and testing data from real data originating from various modern charged-coupled devices and near-infrared cameras, that are augmented with image simulations. We quantified the performance of both classifiers and show that MAXIMASKachieves state-of-the-art performance for the identification of cosmic ray hits. Thanks to a built-in Bayesian update mechanism, both classifiers can be tuned to meet specific science goals in various observational contexts.

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)0.005
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations29
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovaeFrench-language works237,207