DECISION TREE CLASSIFIERS FOR STAR/GALAXY SEPARATION

We study the star/galaxy classification efficiency of 13 different decision tree algorithms applied to photometric objects in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey Data Release Seven (SDSS-DR7). Each algorithm is defined by a set of parameters which, when varied, produce different final classification trees. We extensively explore the parameter space of each algorithm, using the set of 884,126 SDSS objects with spectroscopic data as the training set. The efficiency of star-galaxy separation is measured using the completeness function. We find that the Functional Tree algorithm (FT) yields the best results as measured by the mean completeness in two magnitude intervals: 14 <= r <= 21 (85.2%) and r >= 19 (82.1%). We compare the performance of the tree generated with the optimal FT configuration to the classifications provided by the SDSS parametric classifier, 2DPHOT, and Ball et al. We find that our FT classifier is comparable to or better in completeness over the full magnitude range 15 <= r <= 21, with much lower contamination than all but the Ball et al. classifier. At the faintest magnitudes (r > 19), our classifier is the only one that maintains high completeness (> 80%) while simultaneously achieving low contamination (similar to 2.5%). We also examine the SDSS parametric classifier (psfMag - modelMag) to see if the dividing line between stars and galaxies can be adjusted to improve the classifier. We find that currently stars in close pairs are often misclassified as galaxies, and suggest a new cut to improve the classifier. Finally, we apply our FT classifier to separate stars from galaxies in the full set of 69,545,326 SDSS photometric objects in the magnitude range 14 <= r <= 21.

SIZE AS A LINE OF LEAST RESISTANCE II: DIRECT SELECTION ON SIZE OR CORRELATED RESPONSE DUE TO CONSTRAINTS?

Evolutionary change in New World Monkey (NWM) skulls occurred primarily along the line of least resistance defined by size (including allometric) variation (g(max)). Although the direction of evolution was aligned with this axis, it was not clear whether this macroevolutionary pattern results from the conservation of within population genetic covariance patterns (long-term constraint) or long-term selection along a size dimension, or whether both, constraints and selection, were inextricably involved. Furthermore, G-matrix stability can also be a consequence of selection, which implies that both, constraints embodied in g(max) and evolutionary changes observed on the trait averages, would be influenced by selection Here, we describe a combination of approaches that allows one to test whether any particular instance of size evolution is a correlated by-product due to constraints (g(max)) or is due to direct selection on size and apply it to NWM lineages as a case study. The approach is based on comparing the direction and amount of evolutionary change produced by two different simulated sets of net-selection gradients (beta), a size (isometric and allometric size) and a nonsize set. Using this approach it is possible to distinguish between the two hypotheses (indirect size evolution due to constraints or direct selection on size), because although both may produce an evolutionary response aligned with g(max), the amount of change produced by random selection operating through the variance/covariance patterns (constraints hypothesis) will be much smaller than that produced by selection on size (selection hypothesis). Furthermore, the alignment of simulated evolutionary changes with g(max) when selection is not on size is not as tight as when selection is actually on size, allowing a statistical test of whether a particular observed case of evolution along the line of least resistance is the result of selection along it or not. Also, with matrix diagonalization (principal components [PC]) it is possible to calculate directly the net-selection gradient on size alone (first PC [PC1]) by dividing the amount of phenotypic difference between any two populations by the amount of variation in PC1, which allows one to benchmark whether selection was on size or not