Machine Learning Classification of Baseband Data of CHIME FRBs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Fast Radio Bursts (FRBs) are bright millisecond radio pulses. Their origin is still unknown in the field of astronomy. A notable distinction among FRBs is that some sources repeat, while others appear to be non-repeating events. Interestingly, repeating FRBs tend to exhibit broader temporal widths and narrower spectral bandwidths compared to non-repeat events, suggesting they may arise from different physical mechanisms. However, current radio telescopes have limited coverage and sensitivity, which hinders a complete survey with continuous long-term monitoring. This issue makes it difficult to confirm repeat activity and potentially leads to misclassification of repeaters as non-repeaters; these are referred to as repeater candidates. To address this, machine learning techniques have emerged as a useful tool for classifying distinct FRB types in previous studies. In this study, we utilize the Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment (CHIME)/FRB baseband catalog with three orders of magnitude better time resolution than the intensity catalog. Measured fluences are available in the baseband catalog, while only upper limits are reported in the intensity catalog. We apply machine learning to the baseband catalog to evaluate classification outcomes. We identify 15 repeater candidates among 122 non-repeating FRBs in the baseband catalog. Additionally, our classification identifies 31 sources previously categorized as repeater candidates as non-repeaters, highlighting a significant difference from the prior work. Of these repeater candidates, 14 overlap with previous findings, while 1 is newly identified in this work. Notably, one of our candidates was confirmed as a repeater by CHIME/FRB. Follow-up observations for the 14 candidates are highly encouraged.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".