MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401687726 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346798

Predicting stellar rotation periods using XGBoost

2024· article· en· W4401687726 on OpenAlexaff
Nuno Gomes, Fabio Del Sordo, Luı́s Torgo

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAstronomical Observations and Instrumentation
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersIntegrated Electronics Engineering Center, Binghamton UniversityAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónEuropean Commission
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsStellar rotationRotation (mathematics)AstronomyStarsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context . The estimation of rotation periods of stars is a key challenge in stellar astrophysics. Given the large amount of data available from ground-based and space-based telescopes, there is a growing interest in finding reliable methods to quickly and automatically estimate stellar rotation periods with a high level of accuracy and precision. Aims . This work aims to develop a computationally inexpensive approach, based on machine learning techniques, to accurately predict thousands of stellar rotation periods. Methods . The innovation in our approach is the use of the XGBoost algorithm to predict the rotation periods of Kepler targets by means of regression analysis. Therefore, we focused on building a robust supervised machine learning model to predict surface stellar rotation periods from structured data sets built from the Kepler catalogue of K and M stars. We analysed the set of independent variables extracted from Kepler light curves and investigated the relationships between them and the ground truth. Results . Using the extreme gradient boosting (GB) method, we obtained a minimal set of variables that can be used to build machine learning models for predicting stellar rotation periods. Our models have been validated by predicting the rotation periods of about 2900 stars. The results are compatible with those obtained by classical techniques and comparable to those obtained by other recent machine learning approaches, with the advantage of using fewer predictors. When restricting the analysis to stars with rotation periods of less than 45 d, our models are on average wrong less than 5% of the time. Conclusions . We have developed an innovative approach based on a machine learning method to accurately fit the rotation periods of stars. Based on the results of this study, we conclude that the best models generated by the proposed methodology can compete with the latest state-of-the-art approaches, while offering the advantage of being computationally cheaper, easy to train, and reliant only on small sets of predictors.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicAstronomical Observations and InstrumentationFrench-language works237,207