Identifying star clusters in a field: A comparison of different algorithms

被引:58
|
作者
Schmeja, S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Heidelberg Univ, Inst Theoret Astrophys, Zentrum Astron, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany
关键词
open clusters and associations: general; methods: statistical; LARGE-SCALE STRUCTURE; MINIMUM SPANNING TREE; MOLECULAR CLOUD COMPLEX; YOUNG STELLAR CLUSTERS; SMALL-MAGELLANIC-CLOUD; MAIN-SEQUENCE STARS; SPATIAL-DISTRIBUTION; GALAXY CLUSTERS; STATISTICAL-ANALYSIS; INTERSTELLAR CLOUDS;
D O I
10.1002/asna.201011484
中图分类号
P1 [天文学];
学科分类号
0704 ;
摘要
Star clusters are often hard to find, as they may lie in a dense field of background objects or, because in the case of embedded clusters, they are surrounded by a more dispersed population of young stars. This paper discusses four algorithms that have been developed to identify clusters as stellar density enhancements in a field, namely stellar density maps from star counts, the nearest neighbour method and the Voronoi tessellation, and the separation of minimum spanning trees. These methods are tested and compared to each other by applying them to artificial clusters of different sizes and morphologies. While distinct centrally concentrated clusters are detected by all methods, clusters with low overdensity or highly hierarchical structure are only reliably detected by methods with inherent smoothing (star counts and nearest neighbour method). Furthermore, the algorithms differ strongly in computation time and additional parameters they provide. Therefore, the method to choose primarily depends on the size and character of the investigated area and the purpose of the study. (C) 2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
引用
收藏
页码:172 / 184
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT ALGORITHMS FOR CYLINDRICITY EVALUATION
    MURTHY, TSR
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MACHINE TOOLS & MANUFACTURE, 1982, 22 (04): : 283 - 292
  • [42] Comparison of visual field progression algorithms
    Lee, AC
    Sample, PA
    Blumenthal, EZ
    Zangwill, L
    Weinreb, RN
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 1999, 40 (04) : S68 - S68
  • [43] A COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT ALGORITHMS FOR CIRCULARITY EVALUATION
    MURTHY, TSR
    PRECISION ENGINEERING-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR PRECISION ENGINEERING, 1986, 8 (01): : 19 - 23
  • [44] Performance Comparison of Different Optimization Algorithms
    Toptas, Buket
    Karadeniz, Esra
    Karci, Ali
    2018 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND DATA PROCESSING (IDAP), 2018,
  • [45] A COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT CONTACT ALGORITHMS WITH APPLICATIONS
    BOHM, J
    COMPUTERS & STRUCTURES, 1987, 26 (1-2) : 207 - 221
  • [46] COMPARISON OF 2 DIFFERENT TREE ALGORITHMS
    MAKINO, J
    JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL PHYSICS, 1990, 88 (02) : 393 - 408
  • [47] Comparison of Different Dichotomous Classification Algorithms
    Zhuravlev, Yu, I
    Ryazanov, V. Vl
    Ryazanov, Vl V.
    Aslanyan, L. H.
    Sahakyan, H. A.
    PATTERN RECOGNITION AND IMAGE ANALYSIS, 2020, 30 (03) : 303 - 314
  • [48] Comparison of different phase retrieval algorithms
    Kaufmann, Rolf
    Plamondon, Mathieu
    Hofmann, Jurgen
    Neels, Antonia
    DEVELOPMENTS IN X-RAY TOMOGRAPHY XI, 2017, 10391
  • [49] Evaluation and comparison of different segmentation algorithms
    Zhang, YJ
    PATTERN RECOGNITION LETTERS, 1997, 18 (10) : 963 - 974
  • [50] Comparison of Different Dichotomous Classification Algorithms
    Yu. I. Zhuravlev
    V. Vl. Ryazanov
    Vl. V. Ryazanov
    L. H. Aslanyan
    H. A. Sahakyan
    Pattern Recognition and Image Analysis, 2020, 30 : 303 - 314