Wide Field Imaging. I. Applications of Neural Networks to object detection and star/galaxy classification

[Abriged] Astronomical Wide Field Imaging performed with new large format CCD detectors poses data reduction problems of unprecedented scale which are difficult to deal with traditional interactive tools. We present here NExt (Neural Extractor): a new Neural Network (NN) based package capable to detect objects and to perform both deblending and star/galaxy classification in an automatic way. Traditionally, in astronomical images, objects are first discriminated from the noisy background by searching for sets of connected pixels having brightnesses above a given threshold and then they are classified as stars or as galaxies through diagnostic diagrams having variables choosen accordingly to the astronomer's taste and experience. In the extraction step, assuming that images are well sampled, NExt requires only the simplest a priori definition of "what an object is" (id est, it keeps all structures composed by more than one pixels) and performs the detection via an unsupervised NN approaching detection as a clustering problem which has been thoroughly studied in the artificial intelligence literature. In order to obtain an objective and reliable classification, instead of using an arbitrarily defined set of features, we use a NN to select the most significant features among the large number of measured ones, and then we use their selected features to perform the classification task. In order to optimise the performances of the system we implemented and tested several different models of NN. The comparison of the NExt performances with those of the best detection and classification package known to the authors (SExtractor) shows that NExt is at least as effective as the best traditional packages.Comment: MNRAS, in press. Paper with higher resolution images is available at http://www.na.astro.it/~andreon/listapub.htm

Thirty Years of Machine Learning: The Road to Pareto-Optimal Wireless Networks

Future wireless networks have a substantial potential in terms of supporting a broad range of complex compelling applications both in military and civilian fields, where the users are able to enjoy high-rate, low-latency, low-cost and reliable information services. Achieving this ambitious goal requires new radio techniques for adaptive learning and intelligent decision making because of the complex heterogeneous nature of the network structures and wireless services. Machine learning (ML) algorithms have great success in supporting big data analytics, efficient parameter estimation and interactive decision making. Hence, in this article, we review the thirty-year history of ML by elaborating on supervised learning, unsupervised learning, reinforcement learning and deep learning. Furthermore, we investigate their employment in the compelling applications of wireless networks, including heterogeneous networks (HetNets), cognitive radios (CR), Internet of things (IoT), machine to machine networks (M2M), and so on. This article aims for assisting the readers in clarifying the motivation and methodology of the various ML algorithms, so as to invoke them for hitherto unexplored services as well as scenarios of future wireless networks.Comment: 46 pages, 22 fig

On the adequacy of current empirical evaluations of formal models of categorization

Categorization is one of the fundamental building blocks of cognition, and the study of categorization is notable for the extent to which formal modeling has been a central and influential component of research. However, the field has seen a proliferation of noncomplementary models with little consensus on the relative adequacy of these accounts. Progress in assessing the relative adequacy of formal categorization models has, to date, been limited because (a) formal model comparisons are narrow in the number of models and phenomena considered and (b) models do not often clearly define their explanatory scope. Progress is further hampered by the practice of fitting models with arbitrarily variable parameters to each data set independently. Reviewing examples of good practice in the literature, we conclude that model comparisons are most fruitful when relative adequacy is assessed by comparing well-defined models on the basis of the number and proportion of irreversible, ordinal, penetrable successes (principles of minimal flexibility, breadth, good-enough precision, maximal simplicity, and psychological focus)