Rare Event Classification with Weighted Logistic Regression for Identifying Repeating Fast Radio Bursts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An important task in the study of fast radio bursts (FRBs) remains the automatic classification of repeating and nonrepeating sources based on their morphological properties. We propose a statistical model that considers a modified logistic regression to classify FRB sources. The classical logistic regression model is modified to accommodate the small proportion of repeaters in the data, a feature that is likely due to the sampling procedure and duration and is not a characteristic of the population of FRB sources. The weighted logistic regression hinges on the choice of a tuning parameter that represents the true proportion τ of repeating FRB sources in the entire population. The proposed method has a sound statistical foundation, direct interpretability, and operates with only five parameters, enabling quicker retraining with added data. Using the CHIME/FRB Collaboration sample of repeating and nonrepeating FRBs and numerical experiments, we achieve a classification accuracy for repeaters of nearly 75% or higher when τ is set in the range of 50%–60%. This implies a tentative high proportion of repeaters, which is surprising, but is also in agreement with recent estimates of τ that are obtained using other methods.
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 | 0.007 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".