TL;DR
This paper compares various CNN architectures for radio galaxy classification, analyzing overfitting, performance metrics, and architectural factors, and proposes a ranking system for practical applicability.
Contribution
It provides a comprehensive comparison of CNN models for radio galaxy classification, addressing overfitting issues and evaluating practical performance metrics.
Findings
MCRGNet, Radio Galaxy Zoo, and ConvXpress balance accuracy and computational efficiency.
Receptive field, stride, and coverage significantly affect recognition performance.
Ensemble methods improve classification accuracy.
Abstract
The morphological classification of radio sources is important to gain a full understanding of galaxy evolution processes and their relation with local environmental properties. Furthermore, the complex nature of the problem, its appeal for citizen scientists and the large data rates generated by existing and upcoming radio telescopes combine to make the morphological classification of radio sources an ideal test case for the application of machine learning techniques. One approach that has shown great promise recently is Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs). Literature, however, lacks two major things when it comes to CNNs and radio galaxy morphological classification. Firstly, a proper analysis of whether overfitting occurs when training CNNs to perform radio galaxy morphological classification using a small curated training set is needed. Secondly, a good comparative study regarding…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
