MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4225422625 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141397

A machine-learning photometric classifier for massive stars in nearby galaxies

2022· article· en· W4225422625 on OpenAlexfundno aff
G. Maravelias, A. Z. Bonanos, F. Tramper, S. de Wit, Ming Yang, P. Bonfini

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilPlanetary Science DivisionScience Mission DirectorateSmithsonian Astrophysical ObservatoryMax-Planck-Institut für AstronomieQueen's UniversitySpace Telescope Science InstituteLos Alamos National LaboratoryUniversity of ArizonaEuropean Research CouncilNational Central UniversityGordon and Betty Moore FoundationUniversity of EdinburghEötvös Loránd TudományegyetemEuropean CommissionJohns Hopkins UniversityQueen's University BelfastNational Science FoundationEuropean Space AgencyNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationDurham UniversitySmithsonian Institution
KeywordsPhysicsStarsAstrophysicsMetallicityStellar classificationGalaxyAstronomyRandom forestSupergiantArtificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context.Mass loss is a key parameter in the evolution of massive stars. Despite the recent progress in the theoretical understanding of how stars lose mass, discrepancies between theory and observations still hold. Moreover, episodic mass loss in evolved massive stars is not included in models, and the importance of its role in the evolution of massive stars is currently undetermined. Aims.A major hindrance to determining the role of episodic mass loss is the lack of large samples of classified stars. Given the recent availability of extensive photometric catalogs from various surveys spanning a range of metallicity environments, we aim to remedy the situation by applying machine-learning techniques to these catalogs. Methods.We compiled a large catalog of known massive stars in M 31 and M 33 using IR (Spitzer) and optical (Pan-STARRS) photometry, as well asGaiaastrometric information, which helps with foreground source detection. We grouped them into seven classes (Blue, Red, Yellow, B[e] supergiants, luminous blue variables, Wolf-Rayet stars, and outliers, e.g., quasi-stellar objects and background galaxies). As this training set is highly imbalanced, we implemented synthetic data generation to populate the underrepresented classes and improve separation by undersampling the majority class. We built an ensemble classifier utilizing color indices as features. The probabilities from three machine-learning algorithms (Support Vector Classification, Random Forest, and Multilayer Perceptron) were combined to obtain the final classification. Results.The overall weighted balanced accuracy of the classifier is ∼83%. Red supergiants are always recovered at ∼94%. Blue and Yellow supergiants, B[e] supergiants, and background galaxies achieve ∼50 − 80%. Wolf-Rayet sources are detected at ∼45%, while luminous blue variables are recovered at ∼30% from one method mainly. This is primarily due to the small sample sizes of these classes. In addition, the mixing of spectral types, as there are no strict boundaries in the features space (color indices) between those classes, complicates the classification. In an independent application of the classifier to other galaxies (IC 1613, WLM, and Sextans A), we obtained an overall accuracy of ∼70%. This discrepancy is attributed to the different metallicity and extinction effects of the host galaxies. Motivated by the presence of missing values, we investigated the impact of missing data imputation using a simple replacement with mean values and an iterative imputer, which proved to be more capable. We also investigated the feature importance to find thatr − iandy − [3.6] are the most important, although different classes are sensitive to different features (with potential improvement with additional features). Conclusions.The prediction capability of the classifier is limited by the available number of sources per class (which corresponds to the sampling of their feature space), reflecting the rarity of these objects and the possible physical links between these massive star phases. Our methodology is also efficient in correctly classifying sources with missing data as well as at lower metallicities (with some accuracy loss), making it an excellent tool for accentuating interesting objects and prioritizing targets for observations.

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)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.203 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and Astrophysics→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→