Cokriging and multivariate kriging methods based on data of a functional random field
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kriging and cokriging and their several related versions are techniques widely known and used in spatial data analysis. However, when the spatial data are functions a bridge between functional data analysis and geostatistics has to be built. I give an overview to cokriging analysis and multivariable spatial prediction to the case where the observations at each sampling location consist of samples of random functions. I extend multivariable geostatistical methods to the functional context. Our cokriging method predicts one variable at a time as in a classical multivariable sense, but considering as auxiliary information curves instead of vectors. I also give an extension of multivariable kriging to the functional context where is defined a predictor of a whole curve based on samples of curves located at a neighborhood of the prediction site. In both cases a non-parametric approach based on basis function expansion is used to estimate the parameters, and I prove that both proposals coincide when using such an approach. A linear model of coregionalization is used to define the spatial dependence among the coefficients of the basis functions, and therefore for estimating the functional parameters. As an illustration the methodological proposals are applied to analyze two real data sets corresponding to average daily temperatures measured at 35 weather stations located in the Canadian Maritime Provinces, and penetration resistance data collected at 32 sampling sites of an experimental plot.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".