Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Detecting Solar-like Oscillations in Red Giants with Deep Learning

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1804.07495 v1 pith:IXCRQX4H submitted 2018-04-20 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.IM

Detecting Solar-like Oscillations in Red Giants with Deep Learning

classification astro-ph.SR astro-ph.IM
keywords deepdatadetectionlearningstarsexpertmathrmoscillations
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Time-resolved photometry of tens of thousands of red giant stars from space missions like Kepler and K2 has created the need for automated asteroseismic analysis methods. The first and most fundamental step in such analysis, is to identify which stars show oscillations. It is critical that this step can be performed with no, or little, detection bias, particularly when performing subsequent ensemble analyses that aim to compare properties of observed stellar populations with those from galactic models. Yet, an efficient, automated solution to this initial detection step has still not been found, meaning that expert visual inspection of data from each star is required to obtain the highest level of detections. Hence, to mimic how an expert eye analyses the data, we use supervised deep learning to not only detect oscillations in red giants, but also predict the location of the frequency at maximum power, $\nu_{\mathrm{max}}$, by observing features in 2D images of power spectra. By training on Kepler data, we benchmark our deep learning classifier against K2 data that are given detections by the expert eye, achieving a detection accuracy of 98% on K2 Campaign 6 stars and a detection accuracy of 99% on K2 Campaign 3 stars. We further find that the estimated uncertainty of our deep learning-based $\nu_{\mathrm{max}}$ predictions is about 5%. This is comparable to human-level performance using visual inspection. When examining outliers we find that the deep learning results are more likely to provide robust $\nu_{\mathrm{max}}$ estimates than the classical model-fitting method.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.