News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Taking a sharper look at the M87 black hole by ckastner on Friday April 21, 2023 @03:46AM (#35650874)
I can only assume so, given the nature of the experiment. But it seems counterintuitive to add yet more of it. Naively speaking, it feels a bit like the actual data is being "guided" towards the simulation.

However, I have zero subject matter expertise with physics, so my intuition is probably not worth much.

Re:Taking a sharper look at the M87 black hole by brokeAstronomer on Friday April 21, 2023 @06:51AM (#35651988)
Since the EHT is an interferometer, the observations contain less information than what would be available from a single telescope of the same equivalent size. Therefore to reconstruct the 'full image' you need to find the model which best fits your interferometric observables. As far as I can tell, what they've done with PRIMO is basically a fancy version this kind of modelling. The data isn't necessarily being guided towards the simulations, it's more like we have a better computational technique to precisely fit the data.
Re:Taking a sharper look at the M87 black hole by weego on Friday April 21, 2023 @07:25AM (#35652217)
As I had to explain to the execs at a lab on a chip startup I was helping to put together, you're generating the proposition of what the data might be that still needs to be qualified with physical testing, and not actual data.

This concept seems to be worryingly lost in the flurry of excitement at using ML/AI in academic research by some.

Re:Taking a sharper look at the M87 black hole by ryanjamurphy on Friday April 21, 2023 @09:10AM (#35653169)
This is well-said. We're looking for what the best guess should be, but we still need to test the guess.