Measuring photometric redshifts for high-redshift radio source surveys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract With the advent of deep, all-sky radio surveys, the need for ancillary data to make the most of the new, high-quality radio data from surveys like the Evolutionary Map of the Universe (EMU), GaLactic and Extragalactic All-sky Murchison Widefield Array survey eXtended, Very Large Array Sky Survey, and LOFAR Two-metre Sky Survey is growing rapidly. Radio surveys produce significant numbers of Active Galactic Nuclei (AGNs) and have a significantly higher average redshift when compared with optical and infrared all-sky surveys. Thus, traditional methods of estimating redshift are challenged, with spectroscopic surveys not reaching the redshift depth of radio surveys, and AGNs making it difficult for template fitting methods to accurately model the source. Machine Learning (ML) methods have been used, but efforts have typically been directed towards optically selected samples, or samples at significantly lower redshift than expected from upcoming radio surveys. This work compiles and homogenises a radio-selected dataset from both the northern hemisphere (making use of Sloan Digital Sky Survey optical photometry) and southern hemisphere (making use of Dark Energy Survey optical photometry). We then test commonly used ML algorithms such as k-Nearest Neighbours (kNN), Random Forest, ANNz, and GPz on this monolithic radio-selected sample. We show that kNN has the lowest percentage of catastrophic outliers, providing the best match for the majority of science cases in the EMU survey. We note that the wider redshift range of the combined dataset used allows for estimation of sources up to $z = 3$ before random scatter begins to dominate. When binning the data into redshift bins and treating the problem as a classification problem, we are able to correctly identify $\approx$ 76% of the highest redshift sources—sources at redshift $z > 2.51$ —as being in either the highest bin ( $z > 2.51$ ) or second highest ( $z = 2.25$ ).
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".