Star cluster classification in the PHANGS-HST survey: Comparison between human and machine learning approaches

dc.contributor.authorWhitmore, Bradley
dc.contributor.authorLee, Janice C
dc.contributor.authorChandar, Rupali
dc.contributor.authorThilker, D. A.
dc.contributor.authorHannon, Stephen
dc.contributor.authorWei, Wei
dc.contributor.authorHuerta, E A
dc.contributor.authorBigiel, Frank
dc.contributor.authorBoquien, Médéric
dc.contributor.authorChevance, Mélanie
dc.contributor.authorGrasha, Kathryn
dc.date.accessioned2024-03-20T03:12:36Z
dc.date.available2024-03-20T03:12:36Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.date.updated2022-11-13T07:17:30Z
dc.description.abstractWhen completed, the PHANGS-HST project will provide a census of roughly 50 000 compact star clusters and associations, as well as human morphological classifications for roughly 20 000 of those objects. These large numbers motivated the development of a more objective and repeatable method to help perform source classifications. In this paper, we consider the results for five PHANGS-HST galaxies (NGC 628, NGC 1433, NGC 1566, NGC 3351, NGC 3627) using classifications from two convolutional neural network architectures (RESNET and VGG) trained using deep transfer learning techniques. The results are compared to classifications performed by humans. The primary result is that the neural network classifications are comparable in quality to the human classifications with typical agreement around 70 to 80 per cent for Class 1 clusters (symmetric, centrally concentrated) and 40 to 70 per cent for Class 2 clusters (asymmetric, centrally concentrated). If Class 1 and 2 are considered together the agreement is 82 ± 3 per cent. Dependencies on magnitudes, crowding, and background surface brightness are examined. A detailed description of the criteria and methodology used for the human classifications is included along with an examination of systematic differences between PHANGS-HST and LEGUS. The distribution of data points in a colour-colour diagram is used as a 'figure of merit' to further test the relative performances of the different methods. The effects on science results (e.g. determinations of mass and age functions) of using different cluster classification methods are examined and found to be minimal.en_AU
dc.description.sponsorshipSupport for Program number 15654 was provided through a grant from the STScI under NASA contract NAS5-26555. JMDK and MC gratefully acknowledge funding from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) through an Emmy Noether Research Group (grant number KR4801/1-1) and the DFG Sachbeihilfe (grant number KR4801/2-1). JMDK gratefully acknowledges funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme via the ERC Starting Grant MUSTANG (grant agreement number 714907). TGW acknowledges funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Unions Horizon 2020 ´ research and innovation programme (grant agreement No. 694343). EAH and WW gratefully acknowledge National Science Foundation (NSF) awards OAC-1931561 and OAC-1934757. FB acknowledges funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Unions Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement No.726384/Empire).en_AU
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen_AU
dc.identifier.issn0035-8711en_AU
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1885/316150
dc.language.isoen_AUen_AU
dc.provenancehttps://v2.sherpa.ac.uk/id/publication/24618..."The Published Version can be archived in an Institutional Repository" from SHERPA/RoMEO site (as at 20/03/2024). This article has been accepted for publication in [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] ©: 2021 The Authors Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Royal Astronomical Society. All rights reserved.en_AU
dc.publisherOxford University Pressen_AU
dc.rights© 2021 The Author(s) Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Royal Astronomical Societyen_AU
dc.sourceMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Societyen_AU
dc.subjectcataloguesen_AU
dc.subjectgalaxies: star clusters: generalen_AU
dc.titleStar cluster classification in the PHANGS-HST survey: Comparison between human and machine learning approachesen_AU
dc.typeJournal articleen_AU
dcterms.accessRightsOpen Accessen_AU
local.bibliographicCitation.issue4en_AU
local.bibliographicCitation.lastpage5317en_AU
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage5294en_AU
local.contributor.affiliationWhitmore, Bradley, Space Telescope Science Instituteen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationLee, Janice C, California Institute of Technologyen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationChandar, Rupali, The University of Toledoen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationThilker, D. A., Johns Hopkins Universityen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationHannon, Stephen, University of Californiaen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationWei, Wei, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaignen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationHuerta, E A, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaignen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationBigiel, Frank, Universitat Bonnen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationBoquien, Médéric, Universidad de Antofagastaen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationChevance, Mélanie, Heidelberg Universityen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationGrasha, Kathryn, College of Science, ANUen_AU
local.contributor.authoruidGrasha, Kathryn, u1050982en_AU
local.description.notesImported from ARIESen_AU
local.identifier.absfor461104 - Neural networksen_AU
local.identifier.absfor510100 - Astronomical sciencesen_AU
local.identifier.absseo280120 - Expanding knowledge in the physical sciencesen_AU
local.identifier.ariespublicationa383154xPUB23632en_AU
local.identifier.citationvolume506en_AU
local.identifier.doi10.1093/mnras/stab2087en_AU
local.identifier.scopusID2-s2.0-85118128068
local.publisher.urlhttps://academic.oup.com/en_AU
local.type.statusPublished Versionen_AU

Downloads

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
stab2087.pdf
Size:
9.21 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description: