On the minimum number of radiation field parameters to specify gas cooling and heating functions

Fast and accurate approximations of gas cooling and heating functions are needed for hydrodynamic galaxy simulations. We use machine learning to analyze atomic gas cooling and heating functions in the presence of a generalized incident local radiation field computed by Cloudy. We characterize the r...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: David Robinson, Camille Avestruz, Nickolay Y. Gnedin
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Maynooth Academic Publishing 2025-06-01
Series:The Open Journal of Astrophysics
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.33232/001c.141235
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849685514266869760
author David Robinson
Camille Avestruz
Nickolay Y. Gnedin
author_facet David Robinson
Camille Avestruz
Nickolay Y. Gnedin
author_sort David Robinson
collection DOAJ
description Fast and accurate approximations of gas cooling and heating functions are needed for hydrodynamic galaxy simulations. We use machine learning to analyze atomic gas cooling and heating functions in the presence of a generalized incident local radiation field computed by Cloudy. We characterize the radiation field through binned radiation field intensities instead of the photoionization rates used in our previous work. We find a set of 6 energy bins whose intensities exhibit relatively low correlation. We use these bins as features to train machine learning models to predict Cloudy cooling and heating functions at fixed metallicity. We compare the relative SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) value importance of the features. From the SHAP analysis, we identify a feature subset of 3 energy bins ($0.5-1, 1-4$, and $13-16 \, \mathrm{Ry}$) with the largest importance and train additional models on this subset. We compare the mean squared errors and distribution of errors on both the entire training data table and a randomly selected 20\% test set withheld from model training. The machine learning models trained with 3 and 6 bins, as well as 3 and 4 photoionization rates, have comparable accuracy everywhere, with errors $\gtrsim 10$ times smaller than for the interpolation table of [Gnedin and Hollon (2012)](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJS..202...13G/abstract). We conclude that 3 energy bins (or 3 analogous photoionization rates: molecular hydrogen photodissociation, neutral hydrogen HI, and fully ionized carbon CVI) are sufficient to characterize the dependence of the gas cooling and heating functions on our assumed incident radiation field model.
format Article
id doaj-art-0de04c2dfe984d9c95af8908e923e69d
institution DOAJ
issn 2565-6120
language English
publishDate 2025-06-01
publisher Maynooth Academic Publishing
record_format Article
series The Open Journal of Astrophysics
spelling doaj-art-0de04c2dfe984d9c95af8908e923e69d2025-08-20T03:23:07ZengMaynooth Academic PublishingThe Open Journal of Astrophysics2565-61202025-06-01810.33232/001c.141235On the minimum number of radiation field parameters to specify gas cooling and heating functionsDavid RobinsonCamille AvestruzNickolay Y. GnedinFast and accurate approximations of gas cooling and heating functions are needed for hydrodynamic galaxy simulations. We use machine learning to analyze atomic gas cooling and heating functions in the presence of a generalized incident local radiation field computed by Cloudy. We characterize the radiation field through binned radiation field intensities instead of the photoionization rates used in our previous work. We find a set of 6 energy bins whose intensities exhibit relatively low correlation. We use these bins as features to train machine learning models to predict Cloudy cooling and heating functions at fixed metallicity. We compare the relative SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) value importance of the features. From the SHAP analysis, we identify a feature subset of 3 energy bins ($0.5-1, 1-4$, and $13-16 \, \mathrm{Ry}$) with the largest importance and train additional models on this subset. We compare the mean squared errors and distribution of errors on both the entire training data table and a randomly selected 20\% test set withheld from model training. The machine learning models trained with 3 and 6 bins, as well as 3 and 4 photoionization rates, have comparable accuracy everywhere, with errors $\gtrsim 10$ times smaller than for the interpolation table of [Gnedin and Hollon (2012)](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJS..202...13G/abstract). We conclude that 3 energy bins (or 3 analogous photoionization rates: molecular hydrogen photodissociation, neutral hydrogen HI, and fully ionized carbon CVI) are sufficient to characterize the dependence of the gas cooling and heating functions on our assumed incident radiation field model.https://doi.org/10.33232/001c.141235
spellingShingle David Robinson
Camille Avestruz
Nickolay Y. Gnedin
On the minimum number of radiation field parameters to specify gas cooling and heating functions
The Open Journal of Astrophysics
title On the minimum number of radiation field parameters to specify gas cooling and heating functions
title_full On the minimum number of radiation field parameters to specify gas cooling and heating functions
title_fullStr On the minimum number of radiation field parameters to specify gas cooling and heating functions
title_full_unstemmed On the minimum number of radiation field parameters to specify gas cooling and heating functions
title_short On the minimum number of radiation field parameters to specify gas cooling and heating functions
title_sort on the minimum number of radiation field parameters to specify gas cooling and heating functions
url https://doi.org/10.33232/001c.141235
work_keys_str_mv AT davidrobinson ontheminimumnumberofradiationfieldparameterstospecifygascoolingandheatingfunctions
AT camilleavestruz ontheminimumnumberofradiationfieldparameterstospecifygascoolingandheatingfunctions
AT nickolayygnedin ontheminimumnumberofradiationfieldparameterstospecifygascoolingandheatingfunctions