1 Automating Discovery and Classification of Transients and Variable Stars in the Synoptic Survey Era
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rate of image acquisition in modern synoptic imaging surveys has already begun to outpace the feasibility of keeping astronomers in the real-time discovery and classification loop. Here we present the inner workings of a framework, based on machine-learning algorithms, that captures expert training and ground-truth knowledge about the variable and transient sky to automate 1) the process of discovery on image differences and, 2) the generation of preliminary science-type classifications of discovered sources. Since follow-up resources for extracting novel science from fast-changing transients are precious, self-calibrating classification probabilities must be couched in terms of efficiencies for discovery and purity of the samples generated. We estimate the purity and efficiency in identifying real sources with a two-epoch image-difference discovery algorithm for the Palomar Transient Factory (PTF) survey. Once given a source discovery, using machine-learned classification trained on PTF data, we distinguish between transients and variable stars with a 3.8% overall error rate (with 1.7% errors for imaging within the Sloan Digital Sky Survey footprint). At >96% classification efficiency, the samples achieve 90% purity. Initial classifications are shown to rely primarily on context-based features, determined from the data itself and external archival databases. In the ~one year since autonomous operations, this discovery and classification framework has led to several significant science results, from outbursting young stars to subluminous Type IIP supernovae to candidate tidal disruption events. We discuss future directions of this approach, including the possible roles of crowdsourcing and the scalability of machine learning to future surveys such a the Large Synoptical Survey Telescope (LSST).
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".