Paper detail

Classifying Galaxy Morphologies with Few-Shot Learning

The taxonomy of galaxy morphology is critical in astrophysics as the morphological properties are powerful tracers of galaxy evolution. With the upcoming Large-scale Imaging Surveys, billions of galaxy images challenge astronomers to accomplish the classification task by applying traditional methods or human inspection. Consequently, machine learning, in particular supervised deep learning, has been widely employed to classify galaxy morphologies recently due to its exceptional automation, efficiency, and accuracy. However, supervised deep learning requires extensive training sets, which causes considerable workloads; also, the results are strongly dependent on the characteristics of training sets, which leads to biased outcomes potentially. In this study, we attempt Few-shot Learning to bypass the two issues. Our research adopts the dataset from Galaxy Zoo Challenge Project on Kaggle, and we divide it into five categories according to the corresponding truth table. By classifying the above dataset utilizing few-shot learning based on Siamese Networks and supervised deep learning based on AlexNet, VGG_16, and ResNet_50 trained with different volumes of training sets separately, we find that few-shot learning achieves the highest accuracy in most cases, and the most significant improvement is $21\%$ compared to AlexNet when the training sets contain 1000 images. In addition, to guarantee the accuracy is no less than 90\%, few-shot learning needs $\sim$6300 images for training, while ResNet_50 requires 13000 images. Considering the advantages stated above, foreseeably, few-shot learning is suitable for the taxonomy of galaxy morphology and even for identifying rare astrophysical objects, despite limited training sets consisting of observational data only.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.