Cosmological constraints from HSC survey first-year data using deep learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We present cosmological constraints from the Subaru Hyper Suprime-Cam (HSC) first-year weak lensing shear catalogue using convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and conventional summary statistics. We crop 19 $3\times 3\, \mathrm{{deg}^2}$ sub-fields from the first-year area, divide the galaxies with redshift 0.3 ≤ z ≤ 1.5 into four equally spaced redshift bins, and perform tomographic analyses. We develop a pipeline to generate simulated convergence maps from cosmological N-body simulations, where we account for effects such as intrinsic alignments (IAs), baryons, photometric redshift errors, and point spread function errors, to match characteristics of the real catalogue. We train CNNs that can predict the underlying parameters from the simulated maps, and we use them to construct likelihood functions for Bayesian analyses. In the Λ cold dark matter model with two free cosmological parameters Ωm and σ8, we find $\Omega _\mathrm{m}=0.278_{-0.035}^{+0.037}$, $S_8\equiv (\Omega _\mathrm{m}/0.3)^{0.5}\sigma _{8}=0.793_{-0.018}^{+0.017}$, and the IA amplitude $A_\mathrm{IA}=0.20_{-0.58}^{+0.55}$. In a model with four additional free baryonic parameters, we find $\Omega _\mathrm{m}=0.268_{-0.036}^{+0.040}$, $S_8=0.819_{-0.024}^{+0.034}$, and $A_\mathrm{IA}=-0.16_{-0.58}^{+0.59}$, with the baryonic parameters not being well-constrained. We also find that statistical uncertainties of the parameters by the CNNs are smaller than those from the power spectrum (5–24 per cent smaller for S8 and a factor of 2.5–3.0 smaller for Ωm), showing the effectiveness of CNNs for uncovering additional cosmological information from the HSC data. With baryons, the S8 discrepancy between HSC first-year data and Planck 2018 is reduced from $\sim 2.2\, \sigma$ to $0.3\!-\!0.5\, \sigma$.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".