Normalized to: Turp, M.
[1]
oai:arXiv.org:1812.01114 [pdf] - 1793155
Exploring galaxy evolution with generative models
Submitted: 2018-12-03, last modified: 2018-12-05
Context. Generative models open up the possibility to interrogate scientific
data in a more data-driven way. Aims: We propose a method that uses generative
models to explore hypotheses in astrophysics and other areas. We use a neural
network to show how we can independently manipulate physical attributes by
encoding objects in latent space. Methods: By learning a latent space
representation of the data, we can use this network to forward model and
explore hypotheses in a data-driven way. We train a neural network to generate
artificial data to test hypotheses for the underlying physical processes.
Results: We demonstrate this process using a well-studied process in
astrophysics, the quenching of star formation in galaxies as they move from
low-to high-density environments. This approach can help explore astrophysical
and other phenomena in a way that is different from current methods based on
simulations and observations.
[2]
oai:arXiv.org:1805.10289 [pdf] - 1698242
Using transfer learning to detect galaxy mergers
Submitted: 2018-05-25, last modified: 2018-05-29
We investigate the use of deep convolutional neural networks (deep CNNs) for
automatic visual detection of galaxy mergers. Moreover, we investigate the use
of transfer learning in conjunction with CNNs, by retraining networks first
trained on pictures of everyday objects. We test the hypothesis that transfer
learning is useful for improving classification performance for small training
sets. This would make transfer learning useful for finding rare objects in
astronomical imaging datasets. We find that these deep learning methods perform
significantly better than current state-of-the-art merger detection methods
based on nonparametric systems like CAS and GM$_{20}$. Our method is end-to-end
and robust to image noise and distortions; it can be applied directly without
image preprocessing. We also find that transfer learning can act as a
regulariser in some cases, leading to better overall classification accuracy
($p = 0.02$). Transfer learning on our full training set leads to a lowered
error rate from 0.038 $\pm$ 1 down to 0.032 $\pm$ 1, a relative improvement of
15%. Finally, we perform a basic sanity-check by creating a merger sample with
our method, and comparing with an already existing, manually created merger
catalogue in terms of colour-mass distribution and stellar mass function.
[3]
oai:arXiv.org:1803.08925 [pdf] - 1656404
PSFGAN: a generative adversarial network system for separating quasar
point sources and host galaxy light
Stark, Dominic;
Launet, Barthelemy;
Schawinski, Kevin;
Zhang, Ce;
Koss, Michael;
Turp, M. Dennis;
Sartori, Lia F.;
Zhang, Hantian;
Chen, Yiru;
Weigel, Anna K.
Submitted: 2018-03-23
The study of unobscured active galactic nuclei (AGN) and quasars depends on
the reliable decomposition of the light from the AGN point source and the
extended host galaxy light. The problem is typically approached using
parametric fitting routines using separate models for the host galaxy and the
point spread function (PSF). We present a new approach using a Generative
Adversarial Network (GAN) trained on galaxy images. We test the method using
Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) r-band images with artificial AGN point sources
added which are then removed using the GAN and with parametric methods using
GALFIT. When the AGN point source PS is more than twice as bright as the host
galaxy, we find that our method, PSFGAN, can recover PS and host galaxy
magnitudes with smaller systematic error and a lower average scatter ($49\%$).
PSFGAN is more tolerant to poor knowledge of the PSF than parametric methods.
Our tests show that PSFGAN is robust against a broadening in the PSF width of
$\pm 50\%$ if it is trained on multiple PSF's. We demonstrate that while a
matched training set does improve performance, we can still subtract point
sources using a PSFGAN trained on non-astronomical images. While initial
training is computationally expensive, evaluating PSFGAN on data is more than
$40$ times faster than GALFIT fitting two components. Finally, PSFGAN it is
more robust and easy to use than parametric methods as it requires no input
parameters.