MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416774226 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae0d83

Galaxy Model Subtraction with a Convolutional Denoising Autoencoder

2025· article· en· W4416774226 on OpenAlexaff
Rongrong Liu, Eric W. Peng, Kaixiang Wang, Laura Ferrarese, Patrick Côté

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGalaxyConvolutional neural networkResidualPattern recognition (psychology)Spiral galaxyEllipseSubtractionBackground subtraction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Galaxy model subtraction removes the smooth light of nearby galaxies so that fainter sources (e.g., stars, star clusters, and background galaxies) can be identified and measured. Traditional approaches (isophotal or parametric fitting) are semiautomated and can be challenging for large datasets. We build a convolutional denoising autoencoder (DAE) for galaxy model subtraction: images are compressed to a latent representation and reconstructed to yield the smooth galaxy, suppressing other objects. The DAE is trained on GALFIT-generated model galaxies injected into real sky backgrounds and tested on real images from the Next Generation Virgo Cluster Survey. To quantify performance, we conduct an injection-recovery experiment on residual images by adding mock globular clusters (GCs) with known fluxes and positions. Our tests confirm a higher recovery rate of mock GCs near galaxy centers for complex morphologies, while matching ellipse fitting for smooth ellipticals. Overall, the DAE achieves subtraction equivalent to isophotal ellipse fitting for regular ellipticals and superior results for galaxies with high ellipticities or spiral features. Photometry of small-scale sources on DAE residuals is consistent with that on ellipse-subtracted residuals. Once trained, the DAE processes an image cutout in ≲0.1 s, enabling fast, fully automatic analysis of large datasets. We make our code available for download and use.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.224
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image SynthesisFrench-language works237,207