MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3132091879 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stab466

A reassessment of strong line metallicity conversions in the machine learning era

2021· article· en· W3132091879 on OpenAlexafffund
Hossen Teimoorinia, Mansoureh Jalilkhany, Jillian M. Scudder, Jaclyn Jensen, Sara L. Ellison

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMetallicityPhysicsPolynomialGalaxySkyAstrophysicsCalibrationParametric statisticsLine (geometry)Random forestSpectral lineAlgorithmAstronomyComputer scienceStatisticsMachine learningMathematical analysisMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Strong line metallicity calibrations are widely used to determine the gas phase metallicities of individual H ii regions and entire galaxies. Over a decade ago, based on the Sloan Digital Sky Survey Data Release 4, Kewley & Ellison published the coefficients of third-order polynomials that can be used to convert between different strong line metallicity calibrations for global galaxy spectra. Here, we update the work of Kewley & Ellison in three ways. First, by using a newer data release, we approximately double the number of galaxies used in polynomial fits, providing statistically improved polynomial coefficients. Second, we include in the calibration suite five additional metallicity diagnostics that have been proposed in the last decade and were not included by Kewley & Ellison. Finally, we develop a new machine learning approach for converting between metallicity calibrations. The random forest (RF) algorithm is non-parametric and therefore more flexible than polynomial conversions, due to its ability to capture non-linear behaviour in the data. The RF method yields the same accuracy as the (updated) polynomial conversions, but has the significant advantage that a single model can be applied over a wide range of metallicities, without the need to distinguish upper and lower branches in R23 calibrations. The trained RF is made publicly available for use in the community.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.079
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.079
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations22
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→