MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3153715239 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038911

Interpreting automatic AGN classifiers with saliency maps

2021· article· en· W3153715239 on OpenAlexfundno aff
T. Peruzzi, Mario Pasquato, S. Ciroi, M. Berton, P. Marziani, E. Nardini

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLawrence Berkeley National LaboratorySmithsonian Astrophysical ObservatoryUniversity of Colorado BoulderInstituto de Astrofísica de CanariasOffice of ScienceMax-Planck-Institut für AstronomieMinistério da Ciência, Tecnologia e InovaçãoUniversity of OxfordYork UniversityCarnegie Institution for ScienceNew Mexico State UniversityNew York University Abu DhabiLeibniz-GemeinschaftUniversity of Notre DameCarnegie Mellon UniversityUniversidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoAlfred P. Sloan FoundationUniversity of WashingtonJohns Hopkins UniversityCarnegie Institution of WashingtonUniversity of UtahOhio State UniversityU.S. Department of EnergySmithsonian InstitutionUniversity of PortsmouthVanderbilt UniversityYale UniversityMax-Planck-Institut für AstrophysikTamkeenEuropean Commission
KeywordsInterpretabilityClassifier (UML)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningActive galactic nucleusComputer scienceSupport vector machineHyperparameterSpectral lineAstrophysicsPattern recognition (psychology)PhysicsGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classification of the optical spectra of active galactic nuclei (AGN) into different types is currently based on features such as line widths and intensity ratios. Although well founded on AGN physics, this approach involves some degree of human oversight and cannot scale to large datasets. Machine learning (ML) tackles this classification problem in a fast and reproducible way, but is often (and not without reason) perceived as a black box. However, ML interpretability and are active research areas in computer science that are providing us with tools to mitigate this issue. We apply ML interpretability tools to a classifier trained to predict AGN types from spectra. Our goal is to demonstrate the use of such tools in this context, obtaining for the first time insight into an otherwise black box AGN classifier. In particular, we want to understand which parts of each spectrum most affect the predictions of our classifier, checking that the results make sense in the light of our theoretical expectations. We trained a support-vector machine on 3346 high-quality, low-redshift AGN spectra from SDSS DR15. We considered either two-class classification (type 1 versus 2) or multiclass (type 1 versus 2 versus intermediate-type). The spectra were previously and independently hand-labeled and divided into types 1 and 2, and intermediate-type (i.e., sources in which the Balmer line profile consists of a sharp narrow component superimposed on a broad component). We performed a train-validation-test split, tuning hyperparameters and independently measuring performance via a variety of metrics. On a selection of test-set spectra, we computed the gradient of the predicted class probability at a given spectrum. Regions of the spectrum were then color-coded based on the direction and the amount by which they influence the predicted class, effectively building a saliency map. We also visualized the high-dimensional space of AGN spectra using t-distributed stochastic neighbor embedding (t-SNE), showing where the spectra for which we computed a saliency map are located. Our best classifier reaches an F-score of 0.942 on our test set (with 0.948 precision and 0.936 recall). We computed saliency maps on all misclassified spectra in the test set and on a sample of randomly selected spectra. Regions that affect the predicted AGN type often coincide with physically relevant features, such as spectral lines. t-SNE visualization shows good separability of type 1 and type 2 spectra. Intermediate-type spectra either lie in-between, as expected, or appear mixed with type 2 spectra. Misclassified spectra are typically found among the latter. Some clustering structure is apparent among type 2 and intermediate-type spectra, though this may be an artifact. Saliency maps show why a given AGN type was predicted by our classifier resulting in a physical interpretation in terms of regions of the spectrum that affected its decision, making it no longer a black box. These regions coincide with those used by human experts, for example relevant spectral lines, and are even used in a similar way; the classifier effectively measures the width of a line by weighing its center and its tails oppositely.

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)0.009
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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