Are light curve classification metrics good proxies for SN Ia cosmological constraining power?

Context. When selecting a light curve classifier for use as part of a photometric supernova Ia (SN Ia) cosmological analysis, it is common to make decisions based on metrics of classification performance, such as the contamination within the photometrically classified SN Ia sample, rather than a measure of cosmological constraining power. If the former is an appropriate proxy for the latter, this practice would eliminate the computational expense of a full cosmology forecast in the analysis pipeline design process. Aims. This study tests the assumption that light curve classification metrics are an appropriate proxy for cosmology metrics. Methods. We emulated photometric SN Ia cosmology light curve samples with controlled contamination rates of individual contaminant classes and evaluated each of them under a set of classification metrics. We then derived cosmological parameter constraints from all samples under two common analysis approaches and quantified the impact of contamination by each contaminant class on the resulting cosmological parameter estimates. Results. We observe that cosmology metrics are sensitive to both the contamination rate and the class of the contaminating population, whereas the classification metrics are shown to be insensitive to the latter. Conclusions. Based on these findings, we discourage any exclusive reliance on light curve classification-based metrics for analysis design decisions, which (counterintuitively) include but are not limited to the classifier choice. Instead, we recommend optimising science analysis pipeline design choices using a metric of the information gained about the physical parameters of interest.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Published
2024-09-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202346891
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Gamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.33

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Are light curve classification metrics good proxies for SN Ia cosmological constraining power?

L. Galbany, Rafael S. de Souza, Mi Dai, Sreevarsha Sreejith et al.
1 citations
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Gamma-ray bursts and supernovae
0.33
article

Are light curve classification metrics good proxies for SN Ia cosmological constraining power?

L. Galbany, Rafael S. de Souza, Mi Dai, Sreevarsha Sreejith, Rupesh Durgesh, K. A. Ponder, Alex I. Malz, Émille E. O. Ishida, Noble Kennamer, Santiago Gonzalez-Gaitain, A. Krone-Martins
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Context. When selecting a light curve classifier for use as part of a photometric supernova Ia (SN Ia) cosmological analysis, it is common to make decisions based on metrics of classification performance, such as the contamination within the photometrically classified SN Ia sample, rather than a measure of cosmological constraining power. If the former is an appropriate proxy for the latter, this practice would eliminate the computational expense of a full cosmology forecast in the analysis pipeline design process. Aims. This study tests the assumption that light curve classification metrics are an appropriate proxy for cosmology metrics. Methods. We emulated photometric SN Ia cosmology light curve samples with controlled contamination rates of individual contaminant classes and evaluated each of them under a set of classification metrics. We then derived cosmological parameter constraints from all samples under two common analysis approaches and quantified the impact of contamination by each contaminant class on the resulting cosmological parameter estimates. Results. We observe that cosmology metrics are sensitive to both the contamination rate and the class of the contaminating population, whereas the classification metrics are shown to be insensitive to the latter. Conclusions. Based on these findings, we discourage any exclusive reliance on light curve classification-based metrics for analysis design decisions, which (counterintuitively) include but are not limited to the classifier choice. Instead, we recommend optimising science analysis pipeline design choices using a metric of the information gained about the physical parameters of interest.

Astronomy and AstrophysicsVol. 694
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR), Institute of Space Sciences (ES), University of Hertfordshire (GB), University of Lisbon (PT), University of Pittsburgh (US), Université Clermont Auvergne (FR), Brookhaven National Laboratory (US), University of California, Irvine (US), SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory (US), Instituto Superior de Gestão (PT), Institut d'Estudis Espacials de Catalunya (ES), Laboratoire de Physique de Clermont Auvergne (FR), Klinikum Ingolstadt (DE), Carnegie Mellon University (US)
National Science Foundation, U.S. Department of Energy, Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung, Johns Hopkins University, Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación, Centre National pour la Recherche Scientifique et Technique, Office of Science, Science and Technology Facilities Council, Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, Institut National de Physique Nucléaire et de Physique des Particules
Openalex Percentile: Top 35%
Gamma-ray bursts and supernovae
0.33
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.