Context. Estimating properties of star clusters from unresolved broadband photometry is a challenging problem that is classically tackled using spectral energy distribution (SED) fitting methods that are based on simple stellar population models. However, grid-based methods suffer from computational limitations. Because of their exponential scaling, they can become intractable when the number of inference parameters grows. In addition, nuisance parameters in the model can make the computation of the likelihood function intractable. These limitations can be overcome by modern generative deep learning methods that offer flexible and powerful tools for modeling high-dimensional posterior distributions and fast inference from learned data. Aims. We present a normalizing flow approach for the inference of cluster age, mass, and reddening parameters from Hubble Space Telescope broadband photometry. In particular, we explore our network’s behavior when dealing with an inference problem that has been analyzed in previous works. Methods. We used the SED modeling code CIGALE to create a dataset of synthetic photometric observations for 5 × 106 mock star clusters. Subsequently, this dataset was used to train a coupling-based flow in the form of a conditional invertible neural network to predict posterior probability distributions for cluster age, mass, and reddening from photometric observations. Results. We predicted cluster parameters for the Physics at High Angular resolution in Nearby GalaxieS (PHANGS) Data Release 3 catalog. To evaluate the capabilities of the network, we compared our results to the publicly available PHANGS estimates and found that the estimates agree reasonably well. Conclusions. We demonstrate that normalizing flow methods can be a viable tool for the inference of cluster parameters, and argue that this approach is especially useful when nuisance parameters make the computation of the likelihood intractable and in scenarios that require efficient density estimation.
Walter et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: