Classifying exoplanet candidates with convolutional neural networks: application to the Next Generation Transit Survey

Vetting of exoplanet candidates in transit surveys is a manual process, which suffers from a large number of false positives and a lack of consistency. Previous work has shown that convolutional neural networks (CNN) provide an efficient solution to these problems. Here, we apply a CNN to classify planet candidates from the Next Generation Transit Survey (NGTS). For training data sets we compare both real data with injected planetary transits and fully simulated data, as well as how their different compositions affect network performance. We show that fewer hand labelled light curves can be utilized, while still achieving competitive results. With our best model, we achieve an area under the curve (AUC) score of $(95.6\pm {0.2}){{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ and an accuracy of $(88.5\pm {0.3}){{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ on our unseen test data, as well as $(76.5\pm {0.4}){{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ and $(74.6\pm {1.1}){{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ in comparison to our existing manual classifications. The neural network recovers 13 out of 14 confirmed planets observed by NGTS, with high probability. We use simulated data to show that the overall network performance is resilient to mislabelling of the training data set, a problem that might arise due to unidentified, low signal-to-noise transits. Using a CNN, the time required for vetting can be reduced by half, while still recovering the vast majority of manually flagged candidates. In addition, we identify many new candidates with high probabilities which were not flagged by human vetters.

[1]  Lawrence D. Jackel,et al.  Handwritten Digit Recognition with a Back-Propagation Network , 1989, NIPS.

[2]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition , 1998, Proc. IEEE.

[3]  G. Kov'acs,et al.  A box-fitting algorithm in the search for periodic transits , 2002, astro-ph/0206099.

[4]  Jon M. Jenkins,et al.  The Impact of Solar-like Variability on the Detectability of Transiting Terrestrial Planets , 2002 .

[5]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Random Forests , 2001, Machine Learning.

[6]  J. E. Stys,et al.  The XO Project: Searching for Transiting Extrasolar Planet Candidates , 2005, astro-ph/0505560.

[7]  B. Enoch,et al.  The WASP Project and the SuperWASP Cameras , 2006, astro-ph/0608454.

[8]  Frederic Pont,et al.  The effect of red noise on planetary transit detection , 2006, astro-ph/0608597.

[9]  A. Collier Cameron,et al.  A fast hybrid algorithm for exoplanetary transit searches , 2006, astro-ph/0609418.

[10]  F. Fressin,et al.  Transdet: a matched-filter based algorithm for transit detection - application to simulated COROT light curves , 2007, 0709.3727.

[11]  Carnegie,et al.  HAT-P-1b: A Large-Radius, Low-Density Exoplanet Transiting One Member of a Stellar Binary* ** , 2007 .

[12]  R. G. West,et al.  Efficient identification of exoplanetary transit candidates from SuperWASP light curves , 2007, 0707.0417.

[13]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Visualizing Data using t-SNE , 2008 .

[14]  M. R. Haas,et al.  OVERVIEW OF THE KEPLER SCIENCE PROCESSING PIPELINE , 2010, 1001.0258.

[15]  J. Ortiz,et al.  EPSC-DPS Joint Meeting 2011 , 2011 .

[16]  Lutz Prechelt,et al.  Early Stopping - But When? , 2012, Neural Networks: Tricks of the Trade.

[17]  Nitish Srivastava,et al.  Improving neural networks by preventing co-adaptation of feature detectors , 2012, ArXiv.

[18]  S. Csizmadia,et al.  A study of the performance of the transit detection tool DST in space-based surveys - Application of the CoRoT pipeline to Kepler data , 2012, 1211.6550.

[19]  Avi Shporer,et al.  HAT-P-42b and HAT-P-43b. Two Inflated Transiting Hot Jupiters from the HATNet Survey , 2012, 1212.6448.

[20]  Keivan G. Stassun,et al.  KELT-1b: A STRONGLY IRRADIATED, HIGHLY INFLATED, SHORT PERIOD, 27 JUPITER-MASS COMPANION TRANSITING A MID-F STAR , 2012 .

[21]  K. von Braun,et al.  The NASA Exoplanet Archive: Data and Tools for Exoplanet Research , 2013, 1307.2944.

[22]  S. Udry,et al.  Transiting planets from WASP-South, Euler, and TRAPPIST - WASP-68 b, WASP-73 b, and WASP-88 b, three hot Jupiters transiting evolved solar-type stars , 2013, 1312.1827.

[23]  P. Tenenbaum,et al.  AUTOMATIC CLASSIFICATION OF KEPLER PLANETARY TRANSIT CANDIDATES , 2014, 1408.1496.

[24]  Mark Clampin,et al.  Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite , 2014, 1406.0151.

[25]  R. G. West,et al.  Transiting hot Jupiters from WASP-South, Euler and TRAPPIST : WASP-95b to WASP-101b , 2013, 1310.5630.

[26]  Leslie Hebb,et al.  KEPLER FLARES. II. THE TEMPORAL MORPHOLOGY OF WHITE-LIGHT FLARES ON GJ 1243 , 2014, 1411.3723.

[27]  T. Guillot,et al.  SOPHIE velocimetry of Kepler transit candidates XVII. The physical properties of giant exoplanets within 400 days of period , 2015, 1511.00643.

[28]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Deep Learning , 2015, Nature.

[29]  Jimmy Ba,et al.  Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization , 2014, ICLR.

[30]  M. R. Haas,et al.  A MACHINE LEARNING TECHNIQUE TO IDENTIFY TRANSIT SHAPED SIGNALS , 2015, 1509.00041.

[31]  KELT-10b: the first transiting exoplanet from the KELT-South survey – a hot sub-Jupiter transiting a V = 10.7 early G-star , 2015, 1509.02323.

[32]  Bolei Zhou,et al.  Learning Deep Features for Discriminative Localization , 2015, 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[33]  Leslie Greengard,et al.  Fast Direct Methods for Gaussian Processes , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[34]  E. Bachelet,et al.  SIDRA: a blind algorithm for signal detection in photometric surveys , 2015, 1511.03456.

[35]  P. Maxted ELLC - a fast, flexible light curve model for detached eclipsing binary stars and transiting exoplanets , 2016, 1603.08484.

[36]  Gorjan Alagic,et al.  #p , 2019, Quantum information & computation.

[37]  Kyle A. Pearson,et al.  Searching for exoplanets using artificial intelligence , 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

[38]  S. Udry,et al.  WASP-South transiting exoplanets: WASP-130b, WASP-131b, WASP-132b, WASP-139b, WASP-140b, WASP-141b & WASP-142b , 2016, 1604.04195.

[39]  David J Armstrong,et al.  Centroid vetting of transiting planet candidates from the Next Generation Transit Survey , 2017, 1707.07978.

[40]  M. F. Andersen,et al.  MASCARA-1 b. A hot Jupiter transiting a bright m V = 8.3 A-star in a misaligned orbit , 2017, 1707.04262.

[41]  David J Armstrong,et al.  Transit shapes and self-organizing maps as a tool for ranking planetary candidates: application to Kepler and K2 , 2016, 1611.01968.

[42]  Chen Sun,et al.  Revisiting Unreasonable Effectiveness of Data in Deep Learning Era , 2017, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV).

[43]  Nir Shavit,et al.  Deep Learning is Robust to Massive Label Noise , 2017, ArXiv.

[44]  Christopher J. Shallue,et al.  Identifying Exoplanets with Deep Learning: A Five-planet Resonant Chain around Kepler-80 and an Eighth Planet around Kepler-90 , 2017, 1712.05044.

[45]  Raja Giryes,et al.  Shallow Transits—Deep Learning. I. Feasibility Study of Deep Learning to Detect Periodic Transits of Exoplanets , 2017, 1711.03163.

[46]  Brice-Olivier Demory,et al.  A new yield simulator for transiting planets and false positives: application to the Next Generation Transit Survey , 2016, 1611.02526.

[47]  David J Armstrong,et al.  Machine-learning approaches to exoplanet transit detection and candidate validation in wide-field ground-based surveys , 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

[48]  T. Guillot,et al.  Planets, candidates, and binaries from the CoRoT/Exoplanet programme , 2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics.

[49]  David J Armstrong,et al.  NGTS-2b: an inflated hot-Jupiter transiting a bright F-dwarf , 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

[50]  Edward Gillen,et al.  The Next Generation Transit Survey (NGTS) , 2018 .

[51]  Alexander D. Weston,et al.  What Does Deep Learning See? Insights From a Classifier Trained to Predict Contrast Enhancement Phase From CT Images. , 2018, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[52]  David J Armstrong,et al.  Automatic vetting of planet candidates from ground based surveys: Machine learning with NGTS , 2018, 1805.07089.

[53]  Edward Gillen,et al.  Unmasking the hidden NGTS-3Ab: a hot Jupiter in an unresolved binary system , 2018, 1805.01378.

[54]  Sahar Shahaf,et al.  Probabilistic Random Forest: A Machine Learning Algorithm for Noisy Data Sets , 2018, The Astronomical Journal.

[55]  David J Armstrong,et al.  NGTS-1b : a hot Jupiter transiting an M-dwarf , 2017, 1710.11099.

[56]  M. Sasdelli,et al.  Scientific Domain Knowledge Improves Exoplanet Transit Classification with Deep Learning , 2018, The Astrophysical Journal.

[57]  P. Rannou,et al.  Supersaturation on Pluto and elsewhere , 2018, Icarus.

[58]  Liang Yu,et al.  Identifying Exoplanets with Deep Learning. II. Two New Super-Earths Uncovered by a Neural Network in K2 Data , 2019, The Astronomical Journal.

[59]  D. Bayliss,et al.  NGTS-5b: a highly inflated planet offering insights into the sub-Jovian desert , 2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics.

[60]  D. Bayliss,et al.  NGTS-6b: an ultrashort period hot-Jupiter orbiting an old K dwarf , 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

[61]  David J Armstrong,et al.  NGTS-4b: A sub-Neptune transiting in the desert , 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

[62]  Sara Seager,et al.  Identifying Exoplanets with Deep Learning. III. Automated Triage and Vetting of TESS Candidates , 2019, The Astronomical Journal.

[63]  Joseph E. Rodriguez,et al.  The PDS 110 observing campaign – photometric and spectroscopic observations reveal eclipses are aperiodic , 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

[64]  Daniel Angerhausen,et al.  Rapid classification of TESS planet candidates with convolutional neural networks , 2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics.

[65]  Samet Oymak,et al.  Gradient Descent with Early Stopping is Provably Robust to Label Noise for Overparameterized Neural Networks , 2019, AISTATS.