Paper detail

Photometric redshift estimation using Gaussian processes

We present a comparison between Gaussian processes (GPs) and artificial neural networks (ANNs) as methods for determining photometric redshifts for galaxies, given training set data. In particular, we compare their degradation in performance as the training set size is degraded in ways which might be caused by the observational limitations of spectroscopy. We find that performance with large, complete training sets is very similar, although the ANN achieves slightly smaller root mean square errors. If the size of the training set is reduced by random sampling, the RMS errors of both methods increase, but they do so to a lesser extent and in a much smoother manner for the case of GP regression. When training objects are removed at redshifts 1.3<z<1.7, to simulate the effects of the &#34;redshift desert&#34; of optical spectroscopy, the GP regression is successful at interpolating across the redshift gap, while the ANN suffers from strong bias for test objects in this redshift range. Overall, GP regression has attractive properties for photometric redshift estimation, particularly for deep, high-redshift surveys where it is difficult to obtain a large, complete training set. At present, unlike the ANN code, public GP regression codes do not take account of inhomogeneous measurement errors on the photometric data, and thus cannot estimate reliable uncertainties on the predicted redshifts. However, a better treatment of errors is in principle possible, and the promising results in this paper suggest that such improved GP algorithms should be pursued. (abridged)

preprint2010arXivOpen 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.