The effect of image quality on galaxy merger identification with deep learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Studies have shown that the morphologies of galaxies are substantially transformed following coalescence after a merger, but post-mergers are notoriously difficult to identify, especially in imaging that is shallow or low resolution. We train convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to identify simulated post-merger galaxies in a range of image qualities, modelled after five real surveys: the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS), the Dark Energy Camera Legacy Survey (DECaLS), the Canada–France Imaging Survey (CFIS), the Hyper Suprime-Cam Subaru Strategic Program (HSC-SSP), and the Legacy Survey of Space and Time (LSST). Holding constant all variables other than imaging quality, we present the performance of the CNNs on reserved test set data for each image quality. The success of CNNs on a given data set is found to be sensitive to both imaging depth and resolution. We find that post-merger recovery generally increases with depth, but that limiting 5$\sigma$ point-source depths in excess of $\sim 25$ mag, similar to what is achieved in CFIS, are only marginally beneficial. Finally, we present the results of a cross-survey inference experiment, and find that CNNs trained on a given image quality can sometimes be applied to different imaging data to good effect. The work presented here therefore represents a useful reference for the application of CNNs for merger searches in both current and future imaging surveys.
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 | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".