Residual Analysis for Spatial Point Processes (with Discussion)
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
Summary We define residuals for point process models fitted to spatial point pattern data, and we propose diagnostic plots based on them. The residuals apply to any point process model that has a conditional intensity; the model may exhibit spatial heterogeneity, interpoint interaction and dependence on spatial covariates. Some existing ad hoc methods for model checking (quadrat counts, scan statistic, kernel smoothed intensity and Berman's diagnostic) are recovered as special cases. Diagnostic tools are developed systematically, by using an analogy between our spatial residuals and the usual residuals for (non-spatial) generalized linear models. The conditional intensity λ plays the role of the mean response. This makes it possible to adapt existing knowledge about model validation for generalized linear models to the spatial point process context, giving recommendations for diagnostic plots. A plot of smoothed residuals against spatial location, or against a spatial covariate, is effective in diagnosing spatial trend or co-variate effects. Q–Q-plots of the residuals are effective in diagnosing interpoint interaction.
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 | 0.003 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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