MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402340160 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449548

YOLO-CIANNA: Galaxy detection with deep learning in radio data

2024· article· en· W4402340160 on OpenAlexaff
David Cornu, P. Salomé, B. Semelin, A. Marchal, Jonathan Freundlich, S. Aicardi, Xing Lu, G. Sainton, Florent Mertens, F. Combes, C. Tasse

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadio Astronomy Observations and Technology
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersObservatoire de Paris, Université de Recherche Paris Sciences et LettresGrand Équipement National De Calcul Intensif
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxyAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context . The upcoming Square Kilometer Array (SKA) will set a new standard regarding data volume generated by an astronomical instrument, which is likely to challenge widely adopted data-analysis tools that scale inadequately with the data size. Aims . The aim of this study is to develop a new source detection and characterization method for massive radio astronomical datasets based on modern deep-learning object detection techniques. For this, we seek to identify the specific strengths and weaknesses of this type of approach when applied to astronomical data. Methods . We introduce YOLO-CIANNA, a highly customized deep-learning object detector designed specifically for astronomical datasets. In this paper, we present the method and describe all the elements introduced to address the specific challenges of radio astronomical images. We then demonstrate the capabilities of this method by applying it to simulated 2D continuum images from the SKA observatory Science Data Challenge 1 (SDC1) dataset. Results . Using the SDC1 metric, we improve the challenge-winning score by +139% and the score of the only other post-challenge participation by +61%. Our catalog has a detection purity of 94% while detecting 40–60% more sources than previous top-score results, and exhibits strong characterization accuracy. The trained model can also be forced to reach 99% purity in post-process and still detect 10–30% more sources than the other top-score methods. It is also computationally efficient, with a peak prediction speed of 500 images of 512×512 pixels per second on a single GPU. Conclusions . YOLO-CIANNA achieves state-of-the-art detection and characterization results on the simulated SDC1 dataset and is expected to transfer well to observational data from SKA precursors.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicRadio Astronomy Observations and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207