Pixelated Reconstruction of Gravitational Lenses using Recurrent Inference Machine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modeling strong gravitational lenses to quantify the distortions of the background sources and reconstruct the mass density in the foreground lens has traditionally been a major computational challenge. As the quality of gravitational lens images increases, the task of fully exploiting the information they contain becomes computationally and algorithmically more difficult. In order to tackle this challenge, we have trained a Recurrent Inference Machine (RIM) on a large dataset of realistic gravitational lenses simulated from galaxy images from the COSMOS survey and convergence maps from the IllustrisTNG simulation. This dataset contains the dataset used to train the RIM and the Variational AutoEncoder (VAE) used in our work, Pixelated Reconstruction of Gravitational Lenses using Recurrent Inference Machine, presented at the Machine Learning for Astrophysics Workshop at the Thirty-ninth International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML 2022), as well as the checkpoint files for the neural networks. The source code for our work is published under the package name Censai.
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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".