MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396569791 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.083536

Field-level simulation-based inference of galaxy clustering with convolutional neural networks

2024· article· en· W4396569791 on OpenAlexaff
Pablo Lemos, Liam Parker, ChangHoon Hahn, Shirley Ho, Michael Eickenberg, Jiamin Hou, Elena Massara, Chirag Modi, Azadeh Moradinezhad Dizgah, Bruno Régaldo-Saint Blancard, David N. Spergel

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence InstituteUniversité de MontréalCentre for Research in Astrophysics of Québec
FundersEuropean CommissionH2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie ActionsSimons Foundation
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkInferenceCluster analysisComputer scienceField (mathematics)GalaxyArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)AstrophysicsMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the first simulation-based inference (SBI) of cosmological parameters from field-level analysis of galaxy clustering. Standard galaxy clustering analyses rely on analyzing summary statistics, such as the power spectrum ${P}_{\ensuremath{\ell}}$, with analytic models based on perturbation theory. Consequently, they do not fully exploit the nonlinear and non-Gaussian features of the galaxy distribution. To address these limitations, we use the SimBIG forward modeling framework to perform SBI using normalizing flows. We apply SimBIG to a subset of the Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey CMASS galaxy sample using a convolutional neural network with stochastic weight averaging to perform massive data compression of the galaxy field. We infer constraints on ${\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Omega}}}_{m}={0.267}_{\ensuremath{-}0.029}^{+0.033}$ and ${\ensuremath{\sigma}}_{8}={0.762}_{\ensuremath{-}0.035}^{+0.036}$. While our constraints on ${\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Omega}}}_{m}$ are in line with standard ${P}_{\ensuremath{\ell}}$ analyses, ours on ${\ensuremath{\sigma}}_{8}$ are $2.65\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}$ tighter. Our analysis also provides constraints on the Hubble constant ${H}_{0}=64.5\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}3.8\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{km}/\mathrm{s}/\mathrm{Mpc}$ from galaxy clustering alone. This higher constraining power comes from additional non-Gaussian cosmological information, inaccessible with ${P}_{\ensuremath{\ell}}$. We demonstrate the robustness of our analysis by showcasing our ability to infer unbiased cosmological constraints from a series of test simulations that are constructed using different forward models than the one used in our training dataset. This work not only presents competitive cosmological constraints but also introduces novel methods for leveraging additional cosmological information in upcoming galaxy surveys like the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument, Prime Focus Spectrograph, and Euclid.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.351 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207