Tom Charnock

T. Lucas Makinen, Alan Heavens, Natalia Porqueres et al.

In inference problems, we often have domain knowledge which allows us to define summary statistics that capture most of the information content in a dataset. In this paper, we present a hybrid approach, where such physics-based summaries are augmented by a set of compressed neural summary statistics that are optimised to extract the extra information that is not captured by the predefined summaries. The resulting statistics are very powerful inputs to simulation-based or implicit inference of model parameters. We apply this generalisation of Information Maximising Neural Networks (IMNNs) to parameter constraints from tomographic weak gravitational lensing convergence maps to find summary statistics that are explicitly optimised to complement angular power spectrum estimates. We study several dark matter simulation resolutions in low- and high-noise regimes. We show that i) the information-update formalism extracts at least $3\times$ and up to $8\times$ as much information as the angular power spectrum in all noise regimes, ii) the network summaries are highly complementary to existing 2-point summaries, and iii) our formalism allows for networks with smaller, physically-informed architectures to match much larger regression networks with far fewer simulations needed to obtain asymptotically optimal inference.

Tom Charnock, Adam Moss

We apply deep recurrent neural networks, which are capable of learning complex sequential information, to classify supernovae\footnote{Code available at \href{https://github.com/adammoss/supernovae}{https://github.com/adammoss/supernovae}}. The observational time and filter fluxes are used as inputs to the network, but since the inputs are agnostic additional data such as host galaxy information can also be included. Using the Supernovae Photometric Classification Challenge (SPCC) data, we find that deep networks are capable of learning about light curves, however the performance of the network is highly sensitive to the amount of training data. For a training size of 50\% of the representational SPCC dataset (around $10^4$ supernovae) we obtain a type-Ia vs. non-type-Ia classification accuracy of 94.7\%, an area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve AUC of 0.986 and a SPCC figure-of-merit $F_1=0.64$. When using only the data for the early-epoch challenge defined by the SPCC we achieve a classification accuracy of 93.1\%, AUC of 0.977 and $F_1=0.58$, results almost as good as with the whole light-curve. By employing bidirectional neural networks we can acquire impressive classification results between supernovae types -I,~-II and~-III at an accuracy of 90.4\% and AUC of 0.974. We also apply a pre-trained model to obtain classification probabilities as a function of time, and show it can give early indications of supernovae type. Our method is competitive with existing algorithms and has applications for future large-scale photometric surveys.

Tom Charnock, Laurence Perreault-Levasseur, François Lanusse

In recent times, neural networks have become a powerful tool for the analysis of complex and abstract data models. However, their introduction intrinsically increases our uncertainty about which features of the analysis are model-related and which are due to the neural network. This means that predictions by neural networks have biases which cannot be trivially distinguished from being due to the true nature of the creation and observation of data or not. In order to attempt to address such issues we discuss Bayesian neural networks: neural networks where the uncertainty due to the network can be characterised. In particular, we present the Bayesian statistical framework which allows us to categorise uncertainty in terms of the ingrained randomness of observing certain data and the uncertainty from our lack of knowledge about how data can be created and observed. In presenting such techniques we show how errors in prediction by neural networks can be obtained in principle, and provide the two favoured methods for characterising these errors. We will also describe how both of these methods have substantial pitfalls when put into practice, highlighting the need for other statistical techniques to truly be able to do inference when using neural networks.