Hydra I: An extensible multi-source-finder comparison and cataloguing tool
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The latest generation of radio surveys are now producing sky survey images containing many millions of radio sources. In this context it is highly desirable to understand the performance of radio image source finder (SF) software and to identify an approach that optimises source detection capabilities. We have created Hydra to be an extensible multi-SF and cataloguing tool that can be used to compare and evaluate different SFs. Hydra, which currently includes the SFs Aegean, Caesar, ProFound, PyBDSF, and Selavy, provides for the addition of new SFs through containerisation and configuration files. The SF input RMS noise and island parameters are optimised to a 90% ‘percentage real detections’ threshold (calculated from the difference between detections in the real and inverted images), to enable comparison between SFs. Hydra provides completeness and reliability diagnostics through observed-deep ( $\mathcal{D}$ ) and generated-shallow ( $\mathcal{S}$ ) images, as well as other statistics. In addition, it has a visual inspection tool for comparing residual images through various selection filters, such as S/N bins in completeness or reliability. The tool allows the user to easily compare and evaluate different SFs in order to choose their desired SF, or a combination thereof. This paper is part one of a two part series. In this paper we introduce the Hydra software suite and validate its $\mathcal{D/S}$ metrics using simulated data. The companion paper demonstrates the utility of Hydra by comparing the performance of SFs using both simulated and real images.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it