M. J. Way et al. 2009 ApJ 706 623 doi:10.1088/0004-637X/706/1/623
M. J. Way1,3,5, L. V. Foster2, P. R. Gazis3 and A. N. Srivastava4
Show affiliationsExpanding upon the work of Way & Srivastava we demonstrate how the use of training sets of comparable size continue to make Gaussian process regression (GPR) a competitive approach to that of neural networks and other least-squares fitting methods. This is possible via new large-size matrix inversion techniques developed for Gaussian processes (GPs) that do not require that the kernel matrix be sparse. This development, combined with a neural-network kernel function appears to give superior results for this problem. Our best-fit results for the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) Main Galaxy Sample using u, g, r, i, z filters gives an rms error of 0.0201 while our results for the same filters in the luminous red galaxy sample yield 0.0220. We also demonstrate that there appears to be a minimum number of training-set galaxies needed to obtain the optimal fit when using our GPR rank-reduction methods. We find that morphological information included with many photometric surveys appears, for the most part, to make the photometric redshift evaluation slightly worse rather than better. This would indicate that most morphological information simply adds noise from the GP point of view in the data used herein. In addition, we show that cross-match catalog results involving combinations of the Two Micron All Sky Survey, SDSS, and Galaxy Evolution Explorer have to be evaluated in the context of the resulting cross-match magnitude and redshift distribution. Otherwise one may be misled into overly optimistic conclusions.
Issue 1 (2009 November 20)
Received 2009 May 25, accepted for publication 2009 October 8
Published 2009 November 3
M. J. Way et al. 2009 ApJ 706 623
D. D. Sasselov and M. Lecar 2000 ApJ 528 995
C. Dominik and A. G. G. M. Tielens 1997 ApJ 480 647
Jingzhi Yan et al. 2007 The Astronomical Journal 133 1478
Alexis Brandeker et al. 2003 The Astronomical Journal 126 2009
Yuanshui Zheng et al 2009 Phys. Med. Biol. 54 6943
Janice C. Lee et al. 2009 ApJ 706 599
J E Hansen 2007 Environ. Res. Lett. 2 024002
S. T. Strasser et al. 2007 The Astronomical Journal 134 2252
John S. Mulchaey and Michael W. Regan 1997 ApJ 482 L135