Benchmarking and scalability of machine-learning methods for photometric redshift estimation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Obtaining accurate photometric redshift (photo-z) estimations is an important aspect of cosmology, remaining a prerequisite of many analyses. In creating novel methods to produce photo-z estimations, there has been a shift towards using machine-learning techniques. However, there has not been as much of a focus on how well different machine-learning methods scale or perform with the ever-increasing amounts of data being produced. Here, we introduce a benchmark designed to analyse the performance and scalability of different supervised machine-learning methods for photo-z estimation. Making use of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS – DR12) data set, we analysed a variety of the most used machine-learning algorithms. By scaling the number of galaxies used to train and test the algorithms up to one million, we obtained several metrics demonstrating the algorithms’ performance and scalability for this task. Furthermore, by introducing a new optimization method, time-considered optimization, we were able to demonstrate how a small concession of error can allow for a great improvement in efficiency. From the algorithms tested, we found that the Random Forest performed best with a mean squared error, MSE = 0.0042; however, as other algorithms such as Boosted Decision Trees and k-Nearest Neighbours performed very similarly, we used our benchmarks to demonstrate how different algorithms could be superior in different scenarios. We believe that benchmarks like this will become essential with upcoming surveys, such as the Vera C. Rubin Observatory’s Legacy Survey of Space and Time (LSST), which will capture billions of galaxies requiring photometric redshifts.
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 | 0.015 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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".