A machine-learning photometric classifier for massive stars in nearby galaxies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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.
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".