[R-sig-Geo] sequence of interpolation of spatial attributes
Mark Connolly
mark_connolly at acm.org
Mon Jun 21 19:58:21 CEST 2010
Say I have two related observations that can be combined to derive a third:
c = a + b
and I want interpolations of all three.
I could do something equivalent to
(form 1) c = krige(a) + krige(b)
or
(form 2) c = krige(a + b)
The issue become important when a is a subset of a very large set. In
my case, a is a set of observations at one of five depths on one of 385
dates. b is static throughout.
For each date, I want a and c, so I have to perform krige(a) in any
case. I want krige(b) so that has to be performed once.
After the static krige(b) is complete and a krige(a) has been performed,
the compute time of form 1 is less than a second. If I used form 2, the
compute time of each depth and date doubles. If I want other derived
attributes, I add another computationally expensive step. In real
terms, I have four derived attributes. Form 2 will take 240 hours
versus 60 cpu hours for form 1.
So my question is, are there reasons one form might be better than
another? Intuitively, form 2 is better, but if the original
interpolations are good, I can't think of any reason the second form
would be invalid. I can overlay (randomly selected) observations onto
interpolations and qualitatively compare the two. Sometimes 1 seems
better and sometimes 2 seems better. I am willing to randomly compare
the two methods if that makes sense and if there is a quantitative
comparison I could make.
Anyone have any suggestions?
Thanks!
More information about the R-sig-Geo
mailing list