Cross Validated Asked by Zheyuan Li on January 7, 2022

Using `grf`

function from R package `geoR`

, I simulated 6 replicates (each with 1000 samples) of a Gaussian random field on `[0, 1] x [0, 1]`

, with zero mean, zero nugget, and an exponential spatial covariance $$gamma(h) = expleft(frac{h}{phi}right)sigma^2,$$ with $sigma^2 = 1$ and $phi = 0.5$. In the following figure, the blue solid curve gives the semi-variogram of this true model and the blue dashed line gives the sill (which is $sigma^2 = 1$). Then for each replicate, I

- compute an empirical semi-variogram with function
`variog`

(black solid dots); - compute a monte-carlo envelope for the empirical semi-variogram (gray shaded polygon);
- fit an exponential spatial covariance model (black solid curve) to the empirical semi-variogram for $hat{sigma}^2$ and $hat{phi}$ (printed in the tile).

However, I find it difficult to understand the results / behavior as illustrated by the figure.

- I simulated data from a true model and fit that true model, why does the fitted semi-variogram differ from the true one so much? Or, why does $(hat{sigma}^2, hat{phi})$ differ from $(sigma^2, phi)$ so much? On some replicate the difference is drastic.
- How can the empirical semi-variogram (black solid dots), as well as the fitted variogram (black solid curve), breach sample variance (black dashed line)? Isn’t sample variance the sill?
- Why does the black dashed line so much away from the blue dashed line? (the answer is maybe as same as that to question 1)

Is a spatial process expected to behave like this? If I examine an AR(1) process by simulating a time series and fitting it using Yule-Walker method, I can get back to the truth, i.e., true autocorrelation coefficient and variance. This is not possible for a spatial process?

**Reproducible R code**

```
set.seed(0)
phi <- 0.5
sigmasq <- 1
## unconditional simulation of Gaussian random field with exponential covariance
EXP_GRF <- grf(1000, cov.pars = c(sigmasq, phi), cov.model = "exponential",
nsim = 6)
## estimation of semi-variogram
semi_variog <- variog(EXP_GRF)
semi_variog_i <- semi_variog
semi_variog_i$v <- NULL
par(mfrow = c(2, 3), mar = c(2.5, 2.5, 1, 1))
for (i in 1:6) {
## the i-th empirocal semi-variogram
semi_variog_i$v <- semi_variog$v[, i]
## mc envelops
env <- variog.mc.env(coords = EXP_GRF$coords, data = EXP_GRF$data[, i],
obj.variog = semi_variog_i, nsim = 99, messages = FALSE)
## plotting range
MAX <- max(env$v.lower, env$v.upper, semi_variog_i$v, sigmasq)
with(semi_variog_i, plot(u, v, ylim = c(0, MAX), type = "n"))
## empirical semi-variogram
polygon(c(semi_variog_i$u, rev(semi_variog_i$u)),
c(env$v.lower, rev(env$v.upper)), col = 8, border = NA)
with(semi_variog_i, points(u, v, pch = 19))
## variance of the data
var_data <- semi_variog$var.mark[i]
abline(h = var_data, lty = 2)
## semi-variogram of the true model
lines.variomodel(EXP_GRF, col = 4, lwd = 2)
abline(h = sigmasq, lwd = 2, col = 4, lty = 2)
## fit an variogram for parameter estimation
model <- variofit(semi_variog_i, c(var_data, phi), "exponential",
fix.nugget = TRUE, nugget = 0, message = FALSE)
## fitted variogram
lines.variomodel(model)
## add estimated `sigmasq` and `phi` as title
title(sprintf("sigmasq = %.2f, phi = %.2f", model[[2]][1], model[[2]][2]))
}
```

I didn't have a chance to look carefully into the code, but I can already guess what you are experiencing. It may have to due with the fact that you are simulating random fields on finite domains (in a computer).

Try to increase the domain to a larger box `[0,10]x[0,10]`

or try to decrease the range of the variogram to something that is at least smaller than half of your domain size, say `0.1`

. Then plot the variograms up to a lag that is at most half of your domain. Everything that is separated by a lag that is equal or larger to half of your domain is not useful in empirical variogram calculations (too few samples, and hence spurious oscillations).

Geostatistics theory is more general than AR models, and there are theorems related to the issue you are experiencing, but I have no time at the moment to write down a more detailed answer.

Answered by juliohm on January 7, 2022

0 Asked on October 15, 2020 by learning-stats-by-example

count data exponential poisson distribution r stochastic processes

2 Asked on October 13, 2020 by kyle

1 Asked on October 10, 2020 by kyrhee

difference in difference econometrics panel data regression coefficients treatment effect

0 Asked on October 4, 2020 by nada-al-iskandaraniyyah

0 Asked on October 2, 2020 by anonymous

0 Asked on September 30, 2020 by katie-fenton

0 Asked on September 24, 2020 by rkhan8

4 Asked on September 24, 2020 by navige

1 Asked on September 22, 2020

0 Asked on September 22, 2020 by s_am

3 Asked on September 20, 2020 by learner

1 Asked on September 20, 2020 by seydou-goro

0 Asked on September 19, 2020 by user293111

2 Asked on September 15, 2020 by mustapha-hakkou-asz

0 Asked on September 14, 2020 by alhayer

1 Asked on September 13, 2020 by prolix

1 Asked on September 9, 2020

Get help from others!

Recent Answers

- haakon.io on Why fry rice before boiling?
- Jon Church on Why fry rice before boiling?
- Joshua Engel on Why fry rice before boiling?
- Peter Machado on Why fry rice before boiling?
- Lex on Does Google Analytics track 404 page responses as valid page views?

Recent Questions

- How Do I Get The Ifruit App Off Of Gta 5 / Grand Theft Auto 5
- Iv’e designed a space elevator using a series of lasers. do you know anybody i could submit the designs too that could manufacture the concept and put it to use
- Need help finding a book. Female OP protagonist, magic
- Why is the WWF pending games (“Your turn”) area replaced w/ a column of “Bonus & Reward”gift boxes?
- Does Google Analytics track 404 page responses as valid page views?

© 2023 AnswerBun.com. All rights reserved. Sites we Love: PCI Database, UKBizDB, Menu Kuliner, Sharing RPP