MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3166608861 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1748

Artificial Neural Network classification of 4FGL sources

2021· article· en· W3166608861 on OpenAlexfundno aff
S. Germani, G. Tosti, P. Lubrano, S. Cutini, I. Mereu, A. Berretta

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstituto Nazionale di Fisica NucleareInstitut sur la Nutrition et les Aliments Fonctionnels
KeywordsBlazarQuasarPhysicsFeature (linguistics)Artificial neural networkOutlierAstrophysicsEquipartition theoremPattern recognition (psychology)Fermi Gamma-ray Space TelescopeArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceGamma rayLinguisticsGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The Fermi-LAT DR1 and DR2 4FGL catalogues feature more than 5000 gamma-ray sources of which about one fourth are not associated with already known objects, and approximately one third are associated with blazars of uncertain nature. We perform a three-category classification of the 4FGL DR1 and DR2 sources independently, using an ensemble of Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) to characterize them based on the likelihood of being a Pulsar (PSR), a BL Lac type blazar (BLL) or a Flat Spectrum Radio Quasar (FSRQ). We identify candidate PSR, BLL, and FSRQ among the unassociated sources with approximate equipartition among the three categories and select 10 classification outliers as potentially interesting for follow-up studies.

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)0.003
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena→French-language works237,207→