Papers › Re-calibrating Photometric Redshift Probability Distributions Using Feature-space Regression

Re-calibrating Photometric Redshift Probability Distributions Using Feature-space Regression

28 Oct 2021arXiv:2110.15209links table onlyarchive 2025-07-28

Biprateep Dey, Jeffrey A. Newman, Brett H. Andrews, Rafael Izbicki, Ann B. Lee, David Zhao, Markus Michael Rau, Alex I. Malz

The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.

Many astrophysical analyses depend on estimates of redshifts (a proxy for distance) determined from photometric (i.e., imaging) data alone. Inaccurate estimates of photometric redshift uncertainties can result in large systematic errors. However, probability distribution outputs from many photometric redshift methods do not follow the frequentist definition of a Probability Density Function (PDF) for redshift -- i.e., the fraction of times the true redshift falls between two limits z₁ and z₂ should be equal to the integral of the PDF between these limits. Previous works have used the global distribution of Probability Integral Transform (PIT) values to re-calibrate PDFs, but offsetting inaccuracies in different regions of feature space can conspire to limit the efficacy of the method. We leverage a recently developed regression technique that characterizes the local PIT distribution at any location in feature space to perform a local re-calibration of photometric redshift PDFs. Though we focus on an example from astrophysics, our method can produce PDFs which are calibrated at all locations in feature space for any use case.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

7 samples harvested; 4 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 3 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 7 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from biprateep/recalibrate-pdfs. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections