A new spatial-attribute weighting function for geographically weighted regression
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, geographically weighted regression (GWR) has become popular for modeling spatial heterogeneity in a regression context. However, the current weighting function used in GWR only considers the geographical distances of trees in a stand, while the attributes (e.g., tree diameter) of the neighboring trees are totally ignored. In this study, we proposed a new weighting function that combines the "geographical space" and "attribute space" between the subject tree and its neighbors, such that (1) neighbors with greater geographical distances from the subject tree are assigned smaller weights, and (2) at a given geographical distance, neighboring trees with sizes that are similar to that of the subject tree are assigned larger weights. The results indicate that the GWR model with the new spatial-attribute weighting function performs better than the one with the spatial weighting function in terms of model residuals and predictions for different spatial patterns of tree locations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it