Search for: All records

The first successful detection of gravitational waves by ground-based observatories, such as the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO), marked a breakthrough in our comprehension of the Universe. However, due to the unprecedented sensitivity required to make such observations, gravitational-wave detectors also capture disruptive noise sources called glitches, which can potentially be confused for or mask gravitational-wave signals. To address this problem, a community-science project, Gravity Spy, incorporates human insight and machine learning to classify glitches in LIGO data. The machine-learning classifier, integrated into the project since 2017, has evolved over time to accommodate increasing numbers of glitch classes. Despite its success, limitations have arisen in the ongoing LIGO fourth observing run (O4) due to the architecture's simplicity, which led to poor generalization and inability to handle multi-time window inputs effectively. We propose an advanced classifier for O4 glitches. Using data from previous observing runs, we evaluate different fusion strategies for multi-time window inputs, using label smoothing to counter noisy labels, and enhancing interpretability through attention module-generated weights. Our new O4 classifier shows improved performance, and will enhance glitch classification, aiding in the ongoing exploration of gravitational-wave phenomena. 

We explore the bi-directional relationship between human and machine learning in citizen science. Theoretically, the study draws on the zone of proximal development (ZPD) concept, which allows us to describe AI augmentation of human learning, human augmentation of machine learning, and how tasks can be designed to facilitate co-learning. The study takes a design-science approach to explore the design, deployment, and evaluations of the Gravity Spy citizen science project. The findings highlight the challenges and opportunities of co-learning, where both humans and machines contribute to each other’s learning and capabilities. The study takes its point of departure in the literature on co-learning and develops a framework for designing projects where humans and machines mutually enhance each other’s learning. The research contributes to the existing literature by developing a dynamic approach to human-AI augmentation, by emphasizing that the ZPD supports ongoing learning for volunteers and keeps machine learning aligned with evolving data. The approach offers potential benefits for project scalability, participant engagement, and automation considerations while acknowledging the importance of tutorials, community access, and expert involvement in supporting learning. 

Abstract The Gravity Spy project aims to uncover the origins of glitches, transient bursts of noise that hamper analysis of gravitational-wave data. By using both the work of citizen-science volunteers and machine learning algorithms, the Gravity Spy project enables reliable classification of glitches. Citizen science and machine learning are intrinsically coupled within the Gravity Spy framework, with machine learning classifications providing a rapid first-pass classification of the dataset and enabling tiered volunteer training, and volunteer-based classifications verifying the machine classifications, bolstering the machine learning training set and identifying new morphological classes of glitches. These classifications are now routinely used in studies characterizing the performance of the LIGO gravitational-wave detectors. Providing the volunteers with a training framework that teaches them to classify a wide range of glitches, as well as additional tools to aid their investigations of interesting glitches, empowers them to make discoveries of new classes of glitches. This demonstrates that, when giving suitable support, volunteers can go beyond simple classification tasks to identify new features in data at a level comparable to domain experts. The Gravity Spy project is now providing volunteers with more complicated data that includes auxiliary monitors of the detector to identify the root cause of glitches. 

This data set contains the individual classifications that the Gravity Spy citizen science volunteers made for glitches through 20 July 2024. Classifications made by science team members or in testing workflows have been removed as have classifications of glitches lacking a Gravity Spy identifier. See Zevin et al. (2017) for an explanation of the citizen science task and classification interface. Data about glitches with machine-learning labels are provided in an earlier data release (Glanzer et al., 2021). Final classifications combining ML and volunteer classifications are provided in Zevin et al. (2022).  22 of the classification labels match the labels used in the earlier data release, namely 1080Lines, 1400Ripples, Air_Compressor, Blip, Chirp, Extremely_Loud, Helix, Koi_Fish, Light_Modulation, Low_Frequency_Burst, Low_Frequency_Lines, No_Glitch, None_of_the_Above, Paired_Doves, Power_Line, Repeating_Blips, Scattered_Light, Scratchy, Tomte, Violin_Mode, Wandering_Line and Whistle. One glitch class that was added to the machine-learning classification has not been added to the Zooniverse project and so does not appear in this file, namely Blip_Low_Frequency. Four classes were added to the citizen science platform but not to the machine learning model and so have only volunteer labels, namely 70HZLINE, HIGHFREQUENCYBURST, LOWFREQUENCYBLIP and PIZZICATO. The glitch class Fast_Scattering added to the machine-learning classification has an equivalent volunteer label CROWN, which is used here (Soni et al. 2021). Glitches are presented to volunteers in a succession of workflows. Workflows include glitches classified by a machine learning classifier as being likely to be in a subset of classes and offer the option to classify only those classes plus None_of_the_Above. Each level includes the classes available in lower levels. The top level does not add new classification options but includes all glitches, including those for which the machine learning model is uncertain of the class. As the classes available to the volunteers change depending on the workflow, a glitch might be classified as None_of_the_Above in a lower workflow and subsequently as a different class in a higher workflow. Workflows and available classes are shown in the table below.  Workflow ID Name Number of glitch classes Glitches added 1610  Level 1 3 Blip, Whistle, None_of_the_Above 1934 Level 2 6 Koi_Fish, Power_Line, Violin_Mode 1935 Level 3 10 Chirp, Low_Frequency_Burst, No_Glitch, Scattered_Light 2360 Original level 4 22 1080Lines, 1400Ripples, Air_Compressor, Extremely_Loud, Helix, Light_Modulation, Low_Frequency_Lines, Paired_Doves, Repeating_Blips, Scratchy, Tomte, Wandering_Line 7765 New level 4 15 1080Lines, Extremely_Loud, Low_Frequency_Lines, Repeating_Blips, Scratchy 2117 Original level 5 22 No new glitch classes 7766 New level 5 27 1400Ripples, Air_Compressor, Paired_Doves, Tomte, Wandering_Line, 70HZLINE, CROWN, HIGHFREQUENCYBURST, LOWFREQUENCYBLIP, PIZZICATO 7767 Level 6 27 No new glitch classes Description of data fields Classification_id: a unique identifier for the classification. A volunteer may choose multiple classes for a glitch when classifying, in which case there will be multiple rows with the same classification_id. Subject_id: a unique identifier for the glitch being classified. This field can be used to join the classification to data about the glitch from the prior data release.  User_hash: an anonymized identifier for the user making the classification or for anonymous users an identifier that can be used to track the user within a session but which may not persist across sessions.  Anonymous_user: True if the classification was made by a non-logged in user.  Workflow: The Gravity Spy workflow in which the classification was made.  Workflow_version: The version of the workflow. Timestamp: Timestamp for the classification.  Classification: Glitch class selected by the volunteer.  Related datasets For machine learning classifications on all glitches in O1, O2, O3a, and O3b, please see Gravity Spy Machine Learning Classifications on Zenodo For classifications of glitches combining machine learning and volunteer classifications, please see Gravity Spy Volunteer Classifications of LIGO Glitches from Observing Runs O1, O2, O3a, and O3b. For the training set used in Gravity Spy machine learning algorithms, please see Gravity Spy Training Set on Zenodo. For detailed information on the training set used for the original Gravity Spy machine learning paper, please see Machine learning for Gravity Spy: Glitch classification and dataset on Zenodo. 

Although participation of citizen scientists is critical for a success of citizen science projects (a distinctive form of crowdsourcing), little attention has been paid to what types of messages can effectively recruit citizen scientists. Derived from previous studies on citizen scientists’ motivations, we created and sent participants one of four recruiting messages for a new project, Gravity Spy, appealing to different motivations (i.e., learning about science, social proof, contribution to science, and altruism). Counter to earlier studies on motivation, our results showed that messages appealing to learning, contribution and social proof were more effective than a message appealing to altruism. We discuss the inconsistency between the present and prior study results and plans for future work. 

In this paper, we describe the results of an online field experiment examining the impacts of messaging about task novelty on the volume of volunteers’ contributions to an online citizen science project. Encouraging volunteers to provide a little more content as they work is an attractive strategy to increase the community’s output. Prior research found that an important motivation for participation in online citizen science is the wonder of being the first person to observe a particular image. To appeal to this motivation, a pop-up message was added to an online citizen science project that alerted volunteers when they were the first to annotate a particular image. Our analysis reveals that new volunteers who saw these messages increased the volume of annotations they contributed. The results of our study suggest an additional strategy to increase the amount of work volunteers contribute to online communities and citizen science projects specifically.