4.7 Article

Automatic identification of outliers in Hubble Space Telescope galaxy images

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 501, Issue 4, Pages 5229-5238

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/staa4036

Keywords

methods: data analysis; catalogues; galaxies: peculiar

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [AST-1903823]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Rare extragalactic objects often require computer algorithms for detection due to the impracticality of manual search. This paper introduces an unsupervised machine learning algorithm for automatically detecting outlier galaxy images, reducing the data set significantly while allowing practical manual identification. The algorithm successfully identified 147 objects that would be challenging to identify without automation.
Rare extragalactic objects can carry substantial information about the past, present, and future universe. Given the size of astronomical data bases in the information era, it can be assumed that very many outlier galaxies are included in existing and future astronomical data bases. However, manual search for these objects is impractical due to the required labour, and therefore the ability to detect such objects largely depends on computer algorithms. This paper describes an unsupervised machine learning algorithm for automatic detection of outlier galaxy images, and its application to several Hubble Space Telescope fields. The algorithm does not require training, and therefore is not dependent on the preparation of clean training sets. The application of the algorithm to a large collection of galaxies detected a variety of outlier galaxy images. The algorithm is not perfect in the sense that not all objects detected by the algorithm are indeed considered outliers, but it reduces the data set by two orders of magnitude to allow practical manual identification. The catalogue contains 147 objects that would be very difficult to identify without using automation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available