MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134014877 · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abea7e

An Astronomical Image Content-based Recommendation System Using Combined Deep Learning Models in a Fully Unsupervised Mode

2021· article· en· W3134014877 on OpenAlexaff
Hossen Teimoorinia, Sara Shishehchi, Ahnaf Tazwar, Ping Lin, Finn Archinuk, Stephen Gwyn, J. J. Kavelaars

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of TorontoHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceDeep learningPipeline (software)Unsupervised learningCluster analysisSelf-organizing mapGridPattern recognition (psychology)EncoderData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We have developed a method that maps large astronomical images onto a two-dimensional map and clusters them. A combination of various state-of-the-art machine-learning algorithms is used to develop a fully unsupervised image-quality assessment and clustering system. Our pipeline consists of a data pre-processing step where individual image objects are identified in a large astronomical image and converted to smaller pixel images. This data is then fed to a deep convolutional auto-encoder jointly trained with a self-organizing map (SOM). This part can be used as a recommendation system. The resulting output is eventually mapped onto a two-dimensional grid using a second, deep, SOM. We use data taken from ground-based telescopes and, as a case study, compare the system’s ability and performance with the results obtained by supervised methods presented by Teimoorinia et al. The availability of target labels in this data allowed for a comprehensive performance comparison between our unsupervised and supervised methods. In addition to image-quality assessments performed in this project, our method can have various other applications. For example, it can help experts label images in a considerably shorter time with minimum human intervention. It can also be used as a content-based recommendation system capable of filtering images based on the desired content.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207