astro-ph.IMNov 4, 2026

Object-independent evaluation of small-data astronomical image classifiers: architecture, representation, and acquisition shortcuts

Authors: Eraldo Pereira Marinho

Organizations: Institute of Geoscience and Exact Sciences, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Av. 24 A, 1515, Rio Claro, 13506-900, São Paulo, Brazil

Abstract

Reported performance in small astronomical image datasets can reflect object reuse, field-of-view differences, acquisition settings, and catalogue-derived properties as well as astronomical morphology. We designed \dataset{} to measure these effects in a four-class task comprising galaxies, globular clusters, nebulae, and open clusters. The dataset contains 370 catalogue-supported physical objects, each represented by three Digitised Sky Survey FITS bands, and uses a group-constrained split of 222 training, 75 validation, and 73 test objects. We compared a custom CNN--Transformer trained from scratch with ImageNet-pretrained ResNet-50 and ViT-B/16 under an adaptive full-field representation, a common angular field, and two central-region-masked controls, using three fixed seeds. In the one-pass object-independent test, mean balanced accuracy on the adaptive view was 0.773±0.0140.773\pm0.014, 0.874±0.0540.874\pm0.054, and 0.866±0.0230.866\pm0.023 for the custom model, ResNet-50, and ViT-B/16, respectively. No primary architecture contrast rejected its null after Holm correction; ResNet-50 and ViT-B/16 differed by 0.007 balanced-accuracy points (95% cluster-bootstrap interval [−0.048,0.062][-0.048,0.062]). Controls based on acquisition and catalogue metadata reached 0.721--0.735, and central-region-masked adaptive views reached 0.731--0.800. These results demonstrate generalisation to unseen physical objects, but also show that image context, acquisition settings, and catalogue-derived object properties carry substantial class information. In this regime, high accuracy cannot be interpreted as evidence that a classifier learned target morphology, and the comparison does not isolate architecture from pretraining.

Figures & tables

Explore similar work

Jun 7, 2026

Classifying galaxies in the Galaxy10 DECals dataset using Inception and Residual CNNs

Image data regarding galactic morphology is expected to increase both in quantity and quality for the next foreseeable years; thus it is important to explore which deep learning architectures adapted for image classification tasks are cost-effective. Residual and Inception networks are ideal for exploring classification convolutional neural networks (CNNs) due to their computational efficiency, achieved through techniques such as residual connections and parallelized inception modules, enabling deeper networks without excessively increasing computational complexity. In this work, we analyze the performance of ResNet101 and InceptionV4 on a spatially-augmented Galaxy10 DECals dataset. Retaining the ten-class classification of galaxies, we modify the image count of each class. We find that ResNet101 and InceptionV4 models achieved accuracies of ∼\sim 90%, comparable with reported performance in the literature. In terms of performance metrics, ResNet101 is superior to InceptionV4. Our results indicate that either of these CNN architectures could serve as a robust foundation for specialized pipelines for classification of galaxy images from upcoming surveys.
Oct 25, 2026

Accuracy Is Not Enough: An Efficiency- and Statistics-Aware Benchmark of ResNet50 and Vision Transformer for Explainable Multi-Class Gastrointestinal Diseases Classification

Automated classification of gastrointestinal (GI) findings in endoscopic images could support early diagnosis, but architectures are often chosen on accuracy alone. We present a controlled, reproducible benchmark of ResNet50 and ViT-B/16 for eight-class GI classification on the public Kvasir dataset (4,000 images), using a stratified split (400 test images) and stratified group 5-fold cross-validation over all images. In cross-validation, ResNet50 and ViT-B/16 reached 92.12% and 91.70% accuracy, and a two one-sided tests (TOST) procedure showed equivalence within a +/-3 percentage-point margin (difference +0.43 points, 90% CI -0.33 to +1.18; p < 0.001). The architectures differed mainly in cost: ResNet50 had 3.6 times fewer parameters and 4.3 times fewer operations, 2.5-fold lower single-image CPU latency (69 vs. 177 ms) and 3.8-fold higher GPU throughput. Cross-validated calibration was similar (expected calibration error 0.021 vs. 0.023). An edge-oriented transformer, MobileViT-S, was most accurate on the test split (95.5%) but lost 9.4 points when an acquisition artefact present in some classes (the ScopeGuide inset) was occluded, whereas ResNet50 was not significantly affected. On 500 unseen polyp images with expert masks, both models' Grad-CAM maps focused on the lesion (3.6 times chance). On a de-duplicated external subset of GastroVision (1,998 images), accuracy fell to 78-80% for all three models and differences between them remained small. Accuracy differences between architectures were thus small relative to the effects of shortcut learning and domain shift, whereas efficiency differences were large. An efficient CNN is a defensible default for resource-constrained screening, but no model is deployment-ready without local validation.
Sep 13, 2026

Evaluating Contextual Bias in CNN Image Classification: Evidence from Agricultural Benchmark Datasets

Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are typically evaluated using held-out classification accuracy, an approach that presupposes predictions are based primarily on the intended object of interest rather than incidental surrounding context. We test this assumption in CNN-based agricultural image classification by comparing model performance on original images with performance on background-dominated patches extracted from the same images across eight publicly available agricultural benchmark datasets and four widely used CNN architectures. Background-dominated patches were classified above dataset-specific random chance for six of the eight datasets, and substantially above chance for four of them, indicating that contextual information contributes to model predictions for the majority of datasets evaluated. For these four datasets, we further evaluated whether this behavior reflected genuine class-discriminative information or was primarily attributable to class imbalance using macro-averaged precision, recall, and F1 together with class-balanced test subsets. The results show that contextual reliance does not admit a single explanation: class imbalance accounts for a substantial portion of the observed signal for some datasets and architectures, whereas above-chance contextual classification persists after balancing for others. Together with previous evidence from curated object recognition and cancer pathology imaging, these findings support the growing view that contextual bias is a recurring characteristic of CNN-based image classification rather than a phenomenon confined to a single application domain. More broadly, this work provides a systematic framework for quantifying contextual bias across heterogeneous image datasets by combining dataset-specific random-chance baselines, contextual bias categorization, macro-averaged evaluation, and class-balanced robustness analysis.