Normalized to: Azari, A.
[1]
oai:arXiv.org:2006.01927 [pdf] - 2107386
Incorporating Physical Knowledge into Machine Learning for Planetary
Space Physics
Submitted: 2020-06-02
Recent improvements in data collection volume from planetary and space
physics missions have allowed the application of novel data science techniques.
The Cassini mission for example collected over 600 gigabytes of scientific data
from 2004 to 2017. This represents a surge of data on the Saturn system.
Machine learning can help scientists work with data on this larger scale.
Unlike many applications of machine learning, a primary use in planetary space
physics applications is to infer behavior about the system itself. This raises
three concerns: first, the performance of the machine learning model, second,
the need for interpretable applications to answer scientific questions, and
third, how characteristics of spacecraft data change these applications. In
comparison to these concerns, uses of black box or un-interpretable machine
learning methods tend toward evaluations of performance only either ignoring
the underlying physical process or, less often, providing misleading
explanations for it. We build off a previous effort applying a semi-supervised
physics-based classification of plasma instabilities in Saturn's magnetosphere.
We then use this previous effort in comparison to other machine learning
classifiers with varying data size access, and physical information access. We
show that incorporating knowledge of these orbiting spacecraft data
characteristics improves the performance and interpretability of machine
learning methods, which is essential for deriving scientific meaning. Building
on these findings, we present a framework on incorporating physics knowledge
into machine learning problems targeting semi-supervised classification for
space physics data in planetary environments. These findings present a path
forward for incorporating physical knowledge into space physics and planetary
mission data analyses for scientific discovery.
[2]
oai:arXiv.org:2005.03542 [pdf] - 2091276
The STONE curve: A ROC-derived model performance assessment tool
Submitted: 2020-04-22
A new model validation and performance assessment tool is introduced, the
sliding threshold of observation for numeric evaluation (STONE) curve. It is
based on the relative operating characteristic (ROC) curve technique, but
instead of sorting all observations in a categorical classification, the STONE
tool uses the continuous nature of the observations. Rather than defining
events in the observations and then sliding the threshold only in the
classifier (model) data set, the threshold is changed simultaneously for both
the observational and model values, with the same threshold value for both data
and model. This is only possible if the observations are continuous and the
model output is in the same units and scale as the observations, that is, the
model is trying to exactly reproduce the data. The STONE curve has several
similarities with the ROC curve, plotting probability of detection against
probability of false detection, ranging from the (1,1) corner for low
thresholds to the (0,0) corner for high thresholds, and values above the
zero-intercept unity-slope line indicating better than random predictive
ability. The main difference is that the STONE curve can be nonmonotonic,
doubling back in both the x and y directions. These ripples reveal asymmetries
in the data-model value pairs. This new technique is applied to modeling output
of a common geomagnetic activity index as well as energetic electron fluxes in
the Earth's inner magnetosphere. It is not limited to space physics
applications but can be used for any scientific or engineering field where
numerical models are used to reproduce observations.
[3]
oai:arXiv.org:1804.03573 [pdf] - 1663501
Solar System Ice Giants: Exoplanets in our Backyard
Rymer, Abigail;
Mandt, Kathleen;
Hurley, Dana;
Lisse, Carey;
Izenberg, Noam;
Smith, H. Todd;
Westlake, Joseph;
Bunce, Emma;
Arridge, Christopher;
Masters, Adam;
Hofstadter, Mark;
Simon, Amy;
Brandt, Pontus;
Clark, George;
Cohen, Ian;
Allen, Robert;
Vine, Sarah;
Hansen, Kenneth;
Hospodarsky, George;
Kurth, William;
Romani, Paul;
Lamy, Laurent;
Zarka, Philippe;
Cao, Hao;
Paty, Carol;
Hedman, Matthew;
Roussos, Elias;
Cruikshank, Dale;
Farrell, William;
Fieseler, Paul;
Coates, Andrew;
Yelle, Roger;
Parkinson, Christopher;
Militzer, Burkhard;
Grodent, Denis;
Kollmann, Peter;
McNutt, Ralph;
André, Nicolas;
Strange, Nathan;
Barnes, Jason;
Dones, Luke;
Denk, Tilmann;
Rathbun, Julie;
Lunine, Jonathan;
Desai, Ravi;
Cochrane, Corey;
Sayanagi, Kunio M.;
Postberg, Frank;
Ebert, Robert;
Hill, Thomas;
Mueller-Wodarg, Ingo;
Regoli, Leonardo;
Pontius, Duane;
Stanley, Sabine;
Greathouse, Thomas;
Saur, Joachim;
Marouf, Essam;
Bergman, Jan;
Higgins, Chuck;
Johnson, Robert;
Thomsen, Michelle;
Soderlund, Krista;
Jia, Xianzhe;
Wilson, Robert;
Englander, Jacob;
Burch, Jim;
Nordheim, Tom;
Grava, Cesare;
Baines, Kevin;
Quick, Lynnae;
Russell, Christopher;
Cravens, Thomas;
Cecconi, Baptiste;
Aslam, Shahid;
Bray, Veronica;
Garcia-Sage, Katherine;
Richardson, John;
Clark, John;
Hsu, Sean;
Achterberg, Richard;
Sergis, Nick;
Paganelli, Flora;
Kempf, Sasha;
Orton, Glenn;
Portyankina, Ganna;
Jones, Geraint;
Economou, Thanasis;
Livengood, Timothy;
Krimigi, Stamatios;
Szalay, James;
Jackman, Catriona;
Valek, Phillip;
Lecacheux, Alain;
Colwell, Joshua;
Jasinski, Jamie;
Tosi, Federico;
Sulaiman, Ali;
Galand, Marina;
Kotova, Anna;
Khurana, Krishan;
Kivelson, Margaret;
Strobel, Darrell;
Radiota, Aikaterina;
Estrada, Paul;
Livi, Stefano;
Azari, Abigail;
Yates, Japheth;
Allegrini, Frederic;
Vogt, Marissa;
Felici, Marianna;
Luhmann, Janet;
Filacchione, Gianrico;
Moore, Luke
Submitted: 2018-04-10
Future remote sensing of exoplanets will be enhanced by a thorough
investigation of our solar system Ice Giants (Neptune-size planets). What can
the configuration of the magnetic field tell us (remotely) about the interior,
and what implications does that field have for the structure of the
magnetosphere; energy input into the atmosphere, and surface geophysics (for
example surface weathering of satellites that might harbour sub-surface
oceans). How can monitoring of auroral emission help inform future remote
observations of emission from exoplanets? Our Solar System provides the only
laboratory in which we can perform in-situ experiments to understand exoplanet
formation, dynamos, systems and magnetospheres.