Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > How Accurate are Transient Spectral Classificat...

Associated organisational unit

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

How Accurate are Transient Spectral Classification Tools?— A Study Using 4646 SEDMachine Spectra

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

How Accurate are Transient Spectral Classification Tools?— A Study Using 4646 SEDMachine Spectra. / Kim, Young-Lo; Hook, Isobel; Milligan, Andrew et al.
In: Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, Vol. 136, No. 11, 114501, 01.11.2024.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Kim, Y-L, Hook, I, Milligan, A, Galbany, L, Sollerman, J, Burgaz, U, Dimitriadis, G, Fremling, C, Johansson, J, Müller-Bravo, TE, Neill, JD, Nordin, J, Nugent, P, Purdum, J, Qin, Y-J, Rosnet, P & Sharma, Y 2024, 'How Accurate are Transient Spectral Classification Tools?— A Study Using 4646 SEDMachine Spectra', Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, vol. 136, no. 11, 114501. https://doi.org/10.1088/1538-3873/ad85cd

APA

Kim, Y.-L., Hook, I., Milligan, A., Galbany, L., Sollerman, J., Burgaz, U., Dimitriadis, G., Fremling, C., Johansson, J., Müller-Bravo, T. E., Neill, J. D., Nordin, J., Nugent, P., Purdum, J., Qin, Y.-J., Rosnet, P., & Sharma, Y. (2024). How Accurate are Transient Spectral Classification Tools?— A Study Using 4646 SEDMachine Spectra. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 136(11), Article 114501. https://doi.org/10.1088/1538-3873/ad85cd

Vancouver

Kim YL, Hook I, Milligan A, Galbany L, Sollerman J, Burgaz U et al. How Accurate are Transient Spectral Classification Tools?— A Study Using 4646 SEDMachine Spectra. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific. 2024 Nov 1;136(11):114501. doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ad85cd

Author

Kim, Young-Lo ; Hook, Isobel ; Milligan, Andrew et al. / How Accurate are Transient Spectral Classification Tools?— A Study Using 4646 SEDMachine Spectra. In: Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific. 2024 ; Vol. 136, No. 11.

Bibtex

@article{fc3095344d7f4210b2e6ccbefe3a8041,
title = "How Accurate are Transient Spectral Classification Tools?— A Study Using 4646 SEDMachine Spectra",
abstract = "Accurate classification of transients obtained from spectroscopic data are important to understand their nature and discover new classes of astronomical objects. For supernovae (SNe), SNID, NGSF (a Python version of SUPERFIT), and DASH are widely used in the community. Each tool provides its own metric to help determine classification, such as rlap of SNID, chi2/dof of NGSF, and Probability of DASH. However, we do not know how accurate these tools are, and they have not been tested with a large homogeneous data set. Thus, in this work, we study the accuracy of these spectral classification tools using 4646 SEDMachine spectra, which have accurate classifications obtained from the Zwicky Transient Facility Bright Transient Survey (BTS). Comparing our classifications with those from BTS, we have tested the classification accuracy in various ways. We find that NGSF has the best performance (overall Accuracy 87.6% when samples are split into SNe Ia and Non-Ia types), while SNID and DASH have similar performance with overall Accuracy of 79.3% and 76.2%, respectively. Specifically for SNe Ia, SNID can accurately classify them when rlap > 15 without contamination from other types, such as Ibc, II, SLSN, and other objects that are not SNe (Purity > 98%). For other types, determining their classification is often uncertain. We conclude that it is difficult to obtain an accurate classification from these tools alone. This results in additional human visual inspection effort being required in order to confirm the classification. To reduce this human visual inspection and to support the classification process for future large-scale surveys, this work provides supporting information, such as the accuracy of each tool as a function of its metric.",
keywords = "Spectroscopy, Astronomy data analysis, Classification, Surveys, Supernovae",
author = "Young-Lo Kim and Isobel Hook and Andrew Milligan and Llu{\'i}s Galbany and Jesper Sollerman and Umut Burgaz and Georgios Dimitriadis and Christoffer Fremling and Joel Johansson and M{\"u}ller-Bravo, {Tom{\'a}s E.} and Neill, {James D.} and Jakob Nordin and Peter Nugent and Josiah Purdum and Yu-Jing Qin and Philippe Rosnet and Yashvi Sharma",
year = "2024",
month = nov,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1088/1538-3873/ad85cd",
language = "English",
volume = "136",
journal = "Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific",
issn = "0004-6280",
publisher = "University of Chicago",
number = "11",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - How Accurate are Transient Spectral Classification Tools?— A Study Using 4646 SEDMachine Spectra

AU - Kim, Young-Lo

AU - Hook, Isobel

AU - Milligan, Andrew

AU - Galbany, Lluís

AU - Sollerman, Jesper

AU - Burgaz, Umut

AU - Dimitriadis, Georgios

AU - Fremling, Christoffer

AU - Johansson, Joel

AU - Müller-Bravo, Tomás E.

AU - Neill, James D.

AU - Nordin, Jakob

AU - Nugent, Peter

AU - Purdum, Josiah

AU - Qin, Yu-Jing

AU - Rosnet, Philippe

AU - Sharma, Yashvi

PY - 2024/11/1

Y1 - 2024/11/1

N2 - Accurate classification of transients obtained from spectroscopic data are important to understand their nature and discover new classes of astronomical objects. For supernovae (SNe), SNID, NGSF (a Python version of SUPERFIT), and DASH are widely used in the community. Each tool provides its own metric to help determine classification, such as rlap of SNID, chi2/dof of NGSF, and Probability of DASH. However, we do not know how accurate these tools are, and they have not been tested with a large homogeneous data set. Thus, in this work, we study the accuracy of these spectral classification tools using 4646 SEDMachine spectra, which have accurate classifications obtained from the Zwicky Transient Facility Bright Transient Survey (BTS). Comparing our classifications with those from BTS, we have tested the classification accuracy in various ways. We find that NGSF has the best performance (overall Accuracy 87.6% when samples are split into SNe Ia and Non-Ia types), while SNID and DASH have similar performance with overall Accuracy of 79.3% and 76.2%, respectively. Specifically for SNe Ia, SNID can accurately classify them when rlap > 15 without contamination from other types, such as Ibc, II, SLSN, and other objects that are not SNe (Purity > 98%). For other types, determining their classification is often uncertain. We conclude that it is difficult to obtain an accurate classification from these tools alone. This results in additional human visual inspection effort being required in order to confirm the classification. To reduce this human visual inspection and to support the classification process for future large-scale surveys, this work provides supporting information, such as the accuracy of each tool as a function of its metric.

AB - Accurate classification of transients obtained from spectroscopic data are important to understand their nature and discover new classes of astronomical objects. For supernovae (SNe), SNID, NGSF (a Python version of SUPERFIT), and DASH are widely used in the community. Each tool provides its own metric to help determine classification, such as rlap of SNID, chi2/dof of NGSF, and Probability of DASH. However, we do not know how accurate these tools are, and they have not been tested with a large homogeneous data set. Thus, in this work, we study the accuracy of these spectral classification tools using 4646 SEDMachine spectra, which have accurate classifications obtained from the Zwicky Transient Facility Bright Transient Survey (BTS). Comparing our classifications with those from BTS, we have tested the classification accuracy in various ways. We find that NGSF has the best performance (overall Accuracy 87.6% when samples are split into SNe Ia and Non-Ia types), while SNID and DASH have similar performance with overall Accuracy of 79.3% and 76.2%, respectively. Specifically for SNe Ia, SNID can accurately classify them when rlap > 15 without contamination from other types, such as Ibc, II, SLSN, and other objects that are not SNe (Purity > 98%). For other types, determining their classification is often uncertain. We conclude that it is difficult to obtain an accurate classification from these tools alone. This results in additional human visual inspection effort being required in order to confirm the classification. To reduce this human visual inspection and to support the classification process for future large-scale surveys, this work provides supporting information, such as the accuracy of each tool as a function of its metric.

KW - Spectroscopy

KW - Astronomy data analysis

KW - Classification

KW - Surveys

KW - Supernovae

U2 - 10.1088/1538-3873/ad85cd

DO - 10.1088/1538-3873/ad85cd

M3 - Journal article

VL - 136

JO - Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific

JF - Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific

SN - 0004-6280

IS - 11

M1 - 114501

ER -