Hi Isobel, Could you explain why it would be a better estimate of the variance when independance is considered? I'd rather think that we consider the dependance when the overall variance are to be estimated-- if there actually is dependance between values.
Or are you talking about modeling sill value by the stablizing tail on the experimental variogram, instead of modeling by the calculated overall variance? Or, are we talking about variance of different definitions? I'd be concerned if I missed some point of the original definition for variances, like, the variance should be defined with no dependance beween values or something like that. Frankly, I don't think I took the definition of variance too serious when I was learning stats. Meng-ying > Digby > > I see where you are coming from on this, but in fact > the sill is composed of those pairs of samples which > are independent of one another - or, at least, have > reached some background correlation. This is why the > sill makes a better estimate of the variance than the > conventional statistical measures, since it is based > on independent sampling. > > Isobel
* By using the ai-geostats mailing list you agree to follow its rules ( see http://www.ai-geostats.org/help_ai-geostats.htm ) * To unsubscribe to ai-geostats, send the following in the subject or in the body (plain text format) of an email message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Signoff ai-geostats
