yh_82367
Joined 9 years ago
Karma
7
Submissions
5
Member since
Sep 1
Recent submissions
Comment · 9 years ago
surprisingly not that long. We started this in Feb without any expectation that it would work at all, and after 2-3 weeks of playing with things they were working great.
Comment · 9 years ago
yes and no. Most exoplanet detections so far have been indirect: people just search for the dimming from the eclipse or similar other methods. So you're right about that.
But recently we're starting to actually directly take sensitive enough images to be able to see planets (see http://planetimager.org). They aren't using NNs yet. But there have been discussions of using NNs for various aspects of those searches.
Comment · 9 years ago
Bob?
Comment · 9 years ago
yes, in principle you're right. But in this case, the answer from the neural nets is so incredibly close to the true answer, that we think we can trust it for most purposes. If someone really wanted the most accurate answer, then they can start from the NN answer and do a proper model fitting procedure, which of course fits a simulated model with all the appropriate physics in it to the data.
Comment · 9 years ago
hi, Yashar here (one of the authors). These NNs were really fast to train. A day or so. We trained them on half a million simulated images. Then they're good to go for the analysis of any new data. We don't need to keep on training them as we get more data.