Thank you Luis. When calibrating the adaptive model, using adapt=t in the bandwidth selection created the proportion you speak of, which then allowed me to create a bandwidth matrix using gwr.adapt. However, this has not worked for me with holdout samples. Have you had success in this regard?
I do not know the intended influence of these "fit.points". I would think that new localized regressions are not calculated, as we're testing the model and previous data points' ability to predict for these new ones, but I could be wrong. My current method, however, is producing much poorer results with the holdouts, which I am fairly sure is related to my inability to incorporate the new points necessary bandwidths. I will keep your input in mind and touch back with what I glean. Thank you much for your time. On Aug 29, 2013 8:56 PM, "Luis Guerra" <luispelay...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Paul, > > I am dealing with this kind of problems right now, and if I am not wrong, > when you want to apply an adaptative bandwidth, you should introduce a > value for the "adapt" parameter instead of for the "bandwidth" parameter. > This value will be between 0 and 1 and indicates the proportion of cases > around your regression point that should be included to estimate each local > model. So depending on the amount of points around each case, the model > will use a different bandwidth for each point to be fitted. > > Related to your question, do you know what is the influence of the data > introduced in the "data" parameter to the data to be fitted (introduced in > the "fit.points" parameter)? I mean, you have to obtain new local models > (one for each point to be fitted), so I do not understand whether the > "data" parameter is used somehow... > > Best regards, > > Luis > > > On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1:26 AM, Paul Bidanset <pbidan...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Hi Folks, >> >> I was curious if anyone has had experience applying an SPGWR model with an >> adaptive bandwidth matrix to a holdout or validation sample. I am using >> the >> "fit.points" command, which does not seem to allow for a new bandwidth >> calibrated around the holdout samples XY coordinates. Any direction would >> be greatly appreciated. I am also open to other viable methods. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Paul >> >> [[alternative HTML version deleted]] >> >> _______________________________________________ >> R-sig-Geo mailing list >> R-sig-Geo@r-project.org >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-geo >> > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] _______________________________________________ R-sig-Geo mailing list R-sig-Geo@r-project.org https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-geo
