MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416839758 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.14854

Frabjous: Deep Learning Fast Radio Burst Morphologies

2025· preprint· en· W4416839758 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ajay Kumar, A. Mahabal, Shriharsh P. Tendulkar

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsDeep learningClassifier (UML)Training setScope (computer science)Field (mathematics)Set (abstract data type)Random forestArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing field of view of radio telescopes and improved data processing capabilities have led to a surge in the detection of Fast Radio Bursts (FRBs). The discovery rate of FRBs is already a few per day and is expected to increase rapidly with new surveys coming online. The growing number of events necessitates prioritized follow-up due to limited multi-wavelength resources, requiring rapid and automated classification. In this study, we introduce Frabjous, a deep learning framework for an automated morphology classifier with an aim towards enabling the prompt follow-up of anomalous and intriguing FRBs, and a comprehensive statistical analysis of FRB morphologies. Deep learning models require a large training set of each FRB archetype, however, publicly available data lacks sufficient samples for most FRB types. In this paper, we build a simulation framework for generating realistic examples of FRBs and train a network based on a combination of simulated and real data, starting with the CHIME/FRB catalog. Applying our framework to the first CHIME/FRB catalog, we achieve an overall classification accuracy of approximately 55%, well over a random multiclass classification rate of 20 % with five balanced classes during training. While this falls short of desirable performance, we critically discuss the limitations of our approach and propose potential avenues for improvement. Future work should explore strategies to augment training datasets and broaden the scope of FRB morphological studies, aiming for more accurate and reliable classification results.

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)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.199 · 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
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 venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research→French-language works237,207→