跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.06484 · v1

Object-independent evaluation of small-data astronomical image classifiers: architecture, representation, and acquisition shortcuts

首次提交 2026-11-04 21:25
版本更新 2026-11-04 21:25
雷达观测 2026-11-05 11:10
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Reported performance in small astronomical image datasets can reflect object reuse, field-of-view differences, acquisition settings, and catalogue-derived properties as well as astronomical morphology. We designed \dataset{} to measure these effects in a four-class task comprising galaxies, globular clusters, nebulae, and open clusters. The dataset contains 370 catalogue-supported physical objects, each represented by three Digitised Sky Survey FITS bands, and uses a group-constrained split of 222 training, 75 validation, and 73 test objects. We compared a custom CNN--Transformer trained from scratch with ImageNet-pretrained ResNet-50 and ViT-B/16 under an adaptive full-field representation, a common angular field, and two central-region-masked controls, using three fixed seeds. In the one-pass object-independent test, mean balanced accuracy on the adaptive view was $0.773\pm0.014$, $0.874\pm0.054$, and $0.866\pm0.023$ for the custom model, ResNet-50, and ViT-B/16, respectively. No primary architecture contrast rejected its null after Holm correction; ResNet-50 and ViT-B/16 differed by 0.007 balanced-accuracy points (95\% cluster-bootstrap interval $[-0.048,0.062]$). Controls based on acquisition and catalogue metadata reached 0.721--0.735, and central-region-masked adaptive views reached 0.731--0.800. These results demonstrate generalisation to unseen physical objects, but also show that image context, acquisition settings, and catalogue-derived object properties carry substantial class information. In this regime, high accuracy cannot be interpreted as evidence that a classifier learned target morphology, and the comparison does not isolate architecture from pretraining.

作者备注:17 pages and 3 figures

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-04 21:25 · 最新观测版本

Object-independent evaluation of small-data astronomical image classifiers: architecture, representation, and acquisition shortcuts

Reported performance in small astronomical image datasets can reflect object reuse, field-of-view differences, acquisition settings, and catalogue-derived properties as well as astronomical morphology. We designed \dataset{} to measure these effects in a four-class task comprising galaxies, globular clusters, nebulae, and open clusters. The dataset contains 370 catalogue-supported physical objects, each represented by three Digitised Sky Survey FITS bands, and uses a group-constrained split of 222 training, 75 validation, and 73 test objects. We compared a custom CNN--Transformer trained from scratch with ImageNet-pretrained ResNet-50 and ViT-B/16 under an adaptive full-field representation, a common angular field, and two central-region-masked controls, using three fixed seeds. In the one-pass object-independent test, mean balanced accuracy on the adaptive view was $0.773\pm0.014$, $0.874\pm0.054$, and $0.866\pm0.023$ for the custom model, ResNet-50, and ViT-B/16, respectively. No primary architecture contrast rejected its null after Holm correction; ResNet-50 and ViT-B/16 differed by 0.007 balanced-accuracy points (95\% cluster-bootstrap interval $[-0.048,0.062]$). Controls based on acquisition and catalogue metadata reached 0.721--0.735, and central-region-masked adaptive views reached 0.731--0.800. These results demonstrate generalisation to unseen physical objects, but also show that image context, acquisition settings, and catalogue-derived object properties carry substantial class information. In this regime, high accuracy cannot be interpreted as evidence that a classifier learned target morphology, and the comparison does not isolate architecture from pretraining.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗