Galaxy Spin Classification. I. Z-wise versus S-wise Spirals with the Chirality Equivariant Residual Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The angular momentum of galaxies (galaxy spin) contains rich information about the initial condition of the universe, yet it is challenging to efficiently measure the spin direction for the tremendous amount of galaxies that are being mapped by ongoing and forthcoming cosmological surveys. We present a machine-learning-based classifier for the Z-wise versus S-wise spirals, which can help to break the degeneracy in the galaxy spin direction measurement. The proposed chirality equivariant residual network (CE-ResNet) is manifestly equivariant under a reflection of the input image, which guarantees that there is no inherent asymmetry between the Z-wise and S-wise probability estimators. We train the model with Sloan Digital Sky Survey images, with the training labels given by the Galaxy Zoo 1 project. A combination of data augmentation techniques is used during the training, making the model more robust to be applied to other surveys. We find an ∼30% increase in both types of spirals when Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) images are used for classification, due to the better imaging quality of DESI. We verify that the ∼7σ difference between the numbers of Z-wise and S-wise spirals is due to human bias, since the discrepancy drops to <1.8σ with our CE-ResNet classification results. We discuss the potential systematics relevant to future cosmological applications.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".