Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [ai-geostats] Re: Frightened of Spatial Autocorrelation

Expand Messages
  • Steven Citron-Pousty
    You might look at the following series of papers: http://www.nceas.ucsb.edu/~liebhold/ecography/ While the papers are written with an ecological focus,
    Message 1 of 10 , Sep 2, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      You might look at the following series of papers:
      http://www.nceas.ucsb.edu/~liebhold/ecography/
      While the papers are written with an ecological focus, settling is
      settling is settling.
      Hope they help...
      Steve

      Isobel Clark wrote:

      >Kevin
      >
      >Sounds like an ideal case for Geographically Weighted
      >Regression.
      >
      >You could use semi-variograms or spatial
      >auto-correlation to determine exactly how proximity
      >defines relationship. My only current beef with GWR is
      >the seemingly pre-defined distance weighting
      >functions. Not had much time to get into this yet, so
      >don't dump on me all you experts out there.
      >
      >I would be interested in any published results on this
      >as one of my business partners is doing similar work
      >on bronze age denmark.
      >
      >Isobel
      >http://uk.geocities.com/drisobelclark
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
      >
      >
      >
      >------------------------------------------------------------------------
      >
      >* By using the ai-geostats mailing list you agree to follow its rules
      >( see http://www.ai-geostats.org/help_ai-geostats.htm )
      >
      >* To unsubscribe to ai-geostats, send the following in the subject or in the body (plain text format) of an email message to sympa@...
      >
      >Signoff ai-geostats
      >
    • Beatrice Mare-Jones
      Hello Kevin You may like to speak to David Hansen a GIS Specialist/ Soil Scientist at the USGS in Sacramento - dhansen@mp.usbr.gov He has a good paper
      Message 2 of 10 , Sep 2, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello Kevin

        You may like to speak to David Hansen a GIS Specialist/ Soil Scientist at
        the USGS in Sacramento - dhansen@...

        He has a good paper "Describing GIS Applications: Spatial Statistics and
        Weights of Evidence Extension to ArcView in the Analysis of the
        distribution of Archaeological Sites in Landscape. You may know this one -
        if not you can view it at www.goscafe.com?technical_papers/Papers/paper054

        Kind regards


        Beatrice





        "Kevin M. Curtin" <curtin@...>
        03/09/2004 07:43


        To: <ai-geostats@...>
        cc:
        Subject: [ai-geostats] Frightened of Spatial Autocorrelation


        Hello All,
        I'm not sure if this is the correct forum for this?but a colleague has
        asked a question I'd like to address.

        This fellow wants to predict the location of archaeological sites based on
        factors such as soil type, proximity to a water source, slope, AND
        proximity to other archaeological sites.

        On proposing such a predictive model he has been challenged with, "How are
        you going to deal with Spatial Autocorrelation". We're not sure why SA
        should be a problem since we are suggesting that spatial proximity is a
        factor in settlement location.

        So, do we need to test for SA and why?

        Thanks in advance,
        Kevin
        * By using the ai-geostats mailing list you agree to follow its rules
        ( see http://www.ai-geostats.org/help_ai-geostats.htm )

        * To unsubscribe to ai-geostats, send the following in the subject or in
        the body (plain text format) of an email message to sympa@...

        Signoff ai-geostats
      • sebastiano
        I think that a fuzzy logic system approach is well suited for you task Some book where you can find something Principle of Geographical information Systems
        Message 3 of 10 , Sep 3, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          I think that a fuzzy logic system approach is well suited for you task
          Some book where you can find something "Principle of Geographical information Systems" Burrough and MCdonnel
          and "Fuzzy Logic in Geology", Demicco (2004)
          Bye
          Sebastiano trevisani
           At 21.43 02/09/2004, you wrote:
          Hello All,
          I’m not sure if this is the correct forum for this…but a colleague has asked a question I’d like to address.
           
          This fellow wants to predict the location of archaeological sites based on factors such as soil type, proximity to a water source, slope, AND proximity to other archaeological sites.
           
          On proposing such a predictive model he has been challenged with, “How are you going to deal with Spatial Autocorrelation”. We’re not sure why SA should be a problem since we are suggesting that spatial proximity is a factor in settlement location.
           
          So, do we need to test for SA and why?
           
          Thanks in advance,
          Kevin
           
          * By using the ai-geostats mailing list you agree to follow its rules
          ( see http://www.ai-geostats.org/help_ai-geostats.htm )

          * To unsubscribe to ai-geostats, send the following in the subject or in the body (plain text format) of an email message to sympa@...

          Signoff ai-geostats

        • Viktoras Didziulis
          Hello, Kevin ! Predictive interpolation is a very interesting field. You may be interested in GIS applications based on Dempster-Shafer Theory. There are some
          Message 4 of 10 , Sep 3, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            Hello, Kevin !

            Predictive interpolation is a very interesting field.

            You may be interested in GIS applications based on Dempster-Shafer Theory.
            There are some online material also linked to archeology and prediction of
            archaeological sites at http://gis.esri
            com/library/userconf/proc99/proceed/papers/pap295/p295.htm
            and http://websrv5.sdu.dk/ejstrud/forskning.html

            Also IDRISI GIS has a collection of useful modeling tools for multicriteria
            analysis. It is described in manual which can be downloaded from IDRISI web
            site...

            Another subject of interest might be various AI techniques. I personally am
            experimenting with Case Based Reasoning (spatial predictions of community
            structure). There are some references and an experimental module online at
            http://www.alleco.fi/allmaps
            Currently I am rewriting the code (for the third time already :)). Still, at
            least for me it looks promising. Although currently I came to a decision
            that these 'explicit' GIS modeling techniques must be suplemented with the
            implicit' ones based on cellular automation, nearest neighbourhood or
            variograms and krigging. The reason to think so is that those 'inteligent'
            methods predict ecological niches. But in real world those niches may remain
            unoccupied. So we need an interaction of explicit top-down influence in form
            of 'niches' and implicit bottom-up influence in the form of 'growth from a
            seed'.

            Best regards
            Viktoras

            -------Original Message-------

            From: Kevin M. Curtin
            Date: 2004 m. rugs�jis 02 d. 12:44:03
            To: ai-geostats@...
            Subject: [ai-geostats] Frightened of Spatial Autocorrelation

            Hello All,
            I�m not sure if this is the correct forum for this�but a colleague has asked
            a question I�d like to address.

            This fellow wants to predict the location of archaeological sites based on
            factors such as soil type, proximity to a water source, slope, AND proximity
            to other archaeological sites.

            On proposing such a predictive model he has been challenged with, �How are
            you going to deal with Spatial Autocorrelation�. We�re not sure why SA
            should be a problem since we are suggesting that spatial proximity is a
            factor in settlement location.

            So, do we need to test for SA and why?

            Thanks in advance,
            Kevin
          • Niels Chr. Nielsen
            Isobel, Kevin and others I would be very interested as well, since my collegue (an archaeologist) and myself (geographer) are doing work on Bronze Age Denmark,
            Message 5 of 10 , Sep 3, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              Isobel, Kevin and others

              I would be very interested as well, since my collegue (an archaeologist) and myself (geographer) are doing work on Bronze Age Denmark, in the landscape of Vendsyssel. See web site http://websrv5.sdu.dk/ejstrud/forskning.html
              with paper http://websrv5.sdu.dk/ejstrud/forskning/GIS/ejstrud_wunsdorf_2001.pdf
              and http://www.humaniora.sdu.dk/kulturmiljoe (mostly in Danish)

              Niels


              Isobel Clark wrote:
              Kevin
              
              Sounds like an ideal case for Geographically Weighted
              Regression. 
              
              You could use semi-variograms or spatial
              auto-correlation to determine exactly how proximity
              defines relationship. My only current beef with GWR is
              the seemingly pre-defined distance weighting
              functions. Not had much time to get into this yet, so
              don't dump on me all you experts out there.
              
              I would be interested in any published results on this
              as one of my business partners is doing similar work
              on bronze age denmark.
              
              Isobel
              http://uk.geocities.com/drisobelclark
              
              
              	
              	
              		
              ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!  http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
              
                

              * By using the ai-geostats mailing list you agree to follow its rules ( see http://www.ai-geostats.org/help_ai-geostats.htm ) * To unsubscribe to ai-geostats, send the following in the subject or in the body (plain text format) of an email message to sympa@... Signoff ai-geostats

              -- 
              Niels Chr. Nielsen, M.Sc.
              Skolevej 18, Nordby
              DK-6720 Fanø
              Tlf. (+45)76121216(evening),(+45)65504152(during day)
              mobile (+45)20878568
              e-mail: niels_c_nielsen@...
              
            • Rajive Ganguli
              With ref. to the posting below (AI techniques and predictive work), we have recently done a lot of work comparing kriging and neural network performance. As
              Message 6 of 10 , Sep 3, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                With ref. to the posting below (AI techniques and predictive work), we
                have recently done a lot of work comparing kriging and neural network
                performance. As an example, one of those papers (soon to show up in
                Jo. Exp. Geol) is posted at
                http://www.faculty.uaf.edu/ffrg/papers/nomepap_modi_revise.zip.

                To summarize our findings, I would say there hasn't been much
                difference in prediction performance. One or the other is marginally
                better on any given case. An indication of the absolute performance
                of either methods can be easily obtained from the semi-variogram:
                lower the nugget, better both methods perform, while higher the nugget
                the worse they both perform.

                In the paper that is posted, both methods performed very well with NN
                having a prediction performance (R_sq) upwards of 0.98 with very low
                bias and kriging being 0.95.

                Thanks,


                Rajive Ganguli, Ph.D., P.E., C.O.I
                Associate Professor of Mining Engineering
                University of Alaska Fairbanks
                ================================
                Office: 317 Duckering Building
                Mailing Add: Box 755800, Fairbanks, AK 99775
                ph: 907-474-7631, fax: 907-474-6635
                web: http://www.faculty.uaf.edu/ffrg/
                -------------------------------------------
                "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... for support rather
                than illumination." - Andrew Lang (1844-1912)




                -----Original Message-----
                From: Viktoras Didziulis [mailto:viktoras.didziulis@...]
                Sent: Friday, September 03, 2004 12:12 AM
                To: ai-geostats@...
                Subject: Re: [ai-geostats] Frightened of Spatial Autocorrelation

                Hello, Kevin ! Predictive interpolation is a very interesting field. You
                may be interested in GIS applications based on Dempster-Shafer Theory.
                There are some online material also linked to archeology and prediction of
                archaeological sites at http://gis.esri
                com/library/userconf/proc99/proceed/papers/pap295/p295.htm and
                http://websrv5.sdu.dk/ejstrud/forskning.html Also IDRISI GIS has a
                collection of useful modeling tools for multicriteria
                analysis. It is described in manual which can be downloaded from IDRISI web
                site... Another subject of interest might be various AI techniques. I
                personally am
                experimenting with Case Based Reasoning (spatial predictions of community
                structure). There are some references and an experimental module online at
                http://www.alleco.fi/allmaps Currently I am rewriting the code (for the
                third time already :)). Still, at
                least for me it looks promising. Although currently I came to a decision
                that these 'explicit' GIS modeling techniques must be suplemented with the
                implicit' ones based on cellular automation, nearest neighbourhood or
                variograms and krigging. The reason to think so is that those 'inteligent'
                methods predict ecological niches. But in real world those niches may remain
                unoccupied. So we need an interaction of explicit top-down influence in form
                of 'niches' and implicit bottom-up influence in the form of 'growth from a
                seed'. Best regards Viktoras -------Original Message------- From:
                Kevin M. Curtin Date: 2004 m. rugsëjis 02 d. 12:44:03 To:
                ai-geostats@... Subject: [ai-geostats] Frightened of Spatial
                Autocorrelation Hello All, I'm not sure if this is the correct forum for
                this…but a colleague has asked
                a question I'd like to address. This fellow wants to predict the location
                of archaeological sites based on
                factors such as soil type, proximity to a water source, slope, AND proximity
                to other archaeological sites. On proposing such a predictive model he has
                been challenged with, "How are
                you going to deal with Spatial Autocorrelation". We're not sure why SA
                should be a problem since we are suggesting that spatial proximity is a
                factor in settlement location. So, do we need to test for SA and why?
                Thanks in advance, Kevin
              • Volker Bahn
                Hi Kevin, I work in the field of distribution modeling of birds and somewhat come from the other direction than most geostatistics people here on the list. In
                Message 7 of 10 , Sep 7, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hi Kevin,

                  I work in the field of distribution modeling of birds and somewhat come from
                  the other direction than most geostatistics people here on the list. In
                  ecology, we first only predicted by local conditions and habitat, then were
                  pointed to the problems of spatial autocorrelation in such an approach, then
                  tried to compensate for autocorrelation problems in statistics and only
                  lately recognized that autocorrelation is actually additional information
                  that could improve prediction. Steve already posted the most current papers
                  regarding this issue in Ecography, which helped me much
                  (http://www.nceas.ucsb.edu/~liebhold/ecography/). I would add the following
                  paper to the list:

                  Lichstein J. W., T. R. Simons, S. A. Shriner, and K. E. Franzreb. 2002.
                  Spatial autocorrelation and autoregressive models in ecology. Ecological
                  Monographs 72(3):445-463.

                  For birds it has been well documented that autocorrelation in distributions
                  are caused by autocorrelation in underlying resources. Thus, in theory, if
                  you cover ALL important predictors in your model (let's say a regular
                  regression or any other "non-spatial" method), the spatial structure in the
                  distribution is modeled implicitly by being contained in the predictors.
                  However, if you miss a predictor (which in practice will always be the
                  case), you will miss its spatial structure and the residuals of your
                  analysis will reflect this structure rendering these approaches ineffective
                  and statistically flawed. In addition, I'm trying to show in my research
                  that dispersal of individuals (meaning leaving either the birthplace or the
                  last breeding place permanently to breed elsewhere) also leads to
                  autocorrelation in distributions. This could also be the case for
                  archeological sites as there was undoubtedly some contact and exchange among
                  neighbors and this contact would have been more intense with close neighbors
                  as travel comes at a cost. Thus I would expect autocorrelation in the
                  spatial distribution of archeological sites above and beyond the
                  autocorrelation in the underlying conditions predicting archeological sites.
                  I use conditional autoregressive regression models (CAR) in Splus to model
                  bird distributions.

                  I hope this helps

                  Volker
                  _______________________________
                  Volker Bahn
                  Dept. of Wildlife Ecology - Rm. 210
                  University of Maine
                  5755 Nutting Hall
                  Orono, Maine
                  04469-5755, USA
                  Tel. (207) 581 2799
                  Fax: (207) 581 2858
                  volker.bahn@...
                  http://www.wle.umaine.edu/used_text%20files/Volker%20Bahn/home.htm


                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: Kevin M. Curtin
                  To: ai-geostats@...
                  Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2004 15:43
                  Subject: [ai-geostats] Frightened of Spatial Autocorrelation


                  Hello All,
                  I'm not sure if this is the correct forum for this.but a colleague has asked
                  a question I'd like to address.

                  This fellow wants to predict the location of archaeological sites based on
                  factors such as soil type, proximity to a water source, slope, AND proximity
                  to other archaeological sites.

                  On proposing such a predictive model he has been challenged with, "How are
                  you going to deal with Spatial Autocorrelation". We're not sure why SA
                  should be a problem since we are suggesting that spatial proximity is a
                  factor in settlement location.

                  So, do we need to test for SA and why?

                  Thanks in advance,
                  Kevin




                  * By using the ai-geostats mailing list you agree to follow its rules
                  ( see http://www.ai-geostats.org/help_ai-geostats.htm )

                  * To unsubscribe to ai-geostats, send the following in the subject or in the
                  body (plain text format) of an email message to sympa@...

                  Signoff ai-geostats
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.