MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Photometric classification of quasars from RCS-2 using Random Forest

2015· article· en· W89208645 on OpenAlexaff
Daniela Carrasco, L. Felipe Barrientos, Karim Pichara, T. Anguita, D. N. A. Murphy, D. G. Gilbank, M. D. Gladders, H. K. C. Yee, Bau-Ching Hsieh, Sebastián López

Bibliographic record

VenueSpringer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersFondo de Fomento al Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico
KeywordsQuasarRandom forestAstrophysicsPhysicsStarsFalse positive paradoxPrecision and recallRedshiftComputer scienceAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The classification and identification of quasars is fundamental to many astronomical research areas. Given the large volume of photometric survey data available in the near future, automated methods for doing so are required. In this article, we present a new quasar candidate catalog from the Red-Sequence Cluster Survey 2 (RCS-2), identified solely from photometric information using an automated algorithm suitable for large surveys. The algorithm performance is tested using a well-defined SDSS spectroscopic sample of quasars and stars. The Random Forest algorithm constructs the catalog from RCS-2 point sources using SDSS spectroscopically-confirmed stars and quasars. The algorithm identifies putative quasars from broadband magnitudes (g, r, i, z) and colors. Exploiting NUV GALEX measurements for a subset of the objects, we refine the classifier by adding new information. An additional subset of the data with WISE W1 and W2 bands is also studied. Upon analyzing 542 897 RCS-2 point sources, the algorithm identified 21 501 quasar candidates with a training-set-derived precision (the fraction of true positives within the group assigned quasar status) of 89.5% and recall (the fraction of true positives relative to all sources that actually are quasars) of 88.4%. These performance metrics improve for the GALEX subset: 6529 quasar candidates are identified from 16 898 sources, with a precision and recall of 97.0% and 97.5%, respectively. Algorithm performance is further improved when WISE data are included, with precision and recall increasing to 99.3% and 99.1%, respectively, for 21 834 quasar candidates from 242 902 sources. We compiled our final catalog (38 257) by merging these samples and removing duplicates. An observational follow up of 17 bright (r < 19) candidates with long-slit spectroscopy at DuPont telescope (LCO) yields 14 confirmed quasars. The results signal encouraging progress in the classification of point sources with Random Forest algorithms to search for quasars within current and future large-area photometric 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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.860

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations24
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpringer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology)Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207