Re: AI-GEOSTATS: Moran scatterplot

2003-11-28 Thread Isobel Clark
Monica

The simplest solution to your problem is to use
probability paper. If you do not have easy access to
this, you can download a free graph paper plotter from
http://perso.easynet.fr/~philimar

There are also simple algorithms to produce your own. 

Two populations show up on a probability plot as a
line with a definite 'kink' in it. Skewed
distributions should be plotted on a logarithmic
scale.

Explanations can be found in my paper ROKE paper (CG
1977) which is computer oriented or in my IMGC paper
(1993). Both downloadable from
http://uk.geocities.com/drisobelclark/resume/Publications.html

Isobel


Download Yahoo! Messenger now for a chance to win Live At Knebworth DVDs
http://www.yahoo.co.uk/robbiewilliams

--
* To post a message to the list, send it to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* As a general service to the users, please remember to post a summary of any useful 
responses to your questions.
* To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with no subject and unsubscribe 
ai-geostats followed by end on the next line in the message body. DO NOT SEND 
Subscribe/Unsubscribe requests to the list
* Support to the list is provided at http://www.ai-geostats.org


RE: AI-GEOSTATS: Moran scatterplot

2003-11-28 Thread Pat Bellamy
Title: RE: AI-GEOSTATS: Moran scatterplot








-Original Message-

From: Pat Bellamy 

Sent: 28 November 2003 13:57

To: 'Monica Palaseanu-Lovejoy'

Subject: RE: AI-GEOSTATS: Moran scatterplot



Dear Monica



I think it would be worth looking at the following papers as it should give a way of estimating the spatial correlation robustly without having to ignore some of the outliers.



Lark, R.M. 2000. A comparison of some robust estimators of the variogram for use in soil survey. European Journal of Soil Science, 51, 137--157. 

Lark, R.M. 2002. Modelling complex soil properties as contaminated regionalized variables. Geoderma. 106, 171--188.


Murray Lark and I have been using these robust estimators on soil contamination data. 



Yours


Pat


Mrs Pat Bellamy B.Sc. M.Sc.

Statistician/Computer Analyst

National Soil Resources Institute (NSRI),

Cranfield University at Silsoe, 

Silsoe,Bedfordshire, 

MK45 4DT,

UK

---

Tel.: +44.(0)1525.863260 (direct)

Fax.: +44.(0)1525.863253

Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.cranfield.ac.uk/nsri/


Conference: Controlling the loss of soil to water

To be held at The Geological Society, London on Jan 21st 2004

For more information please visit:

http://www.silsoe.cranfield.ac.uk/nsri/conference/bgrg

Conference: The role of vegetation in environmental protection: Theory

and best practice

To be held at NSRI, Silsoe between March 24-26th 2004. For more

information please visit:

http://www.silsoe.cranfield.ac.uk/rpm_conference/

The NSRI is a new Institute that provides research, teaching, training

and consultancy in all aspects of the sustainable management of land and

soil resources both in the UK and internationally



-Original Message-

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On

Behalf Of Monica Palaseanu-Lovejoy

Sent: 28 November 2003 11:43

To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Subject: AI-GEOSTATS: Moran scatterplot



Hi everybody,


I want to ask your opinion on some results from Moran scatterplot. 

I am working with soil contamination data, and in my opinion the 

dataset is formed by 2 different distributions, one more diffusive 

which is the majority of the data, and one generated by a point 

source process represented by the outliers in the dataset (about 

18% found out with box-plot). The dataset is strongly positively 

skewed.


If i use the full dataset and i build the moran scatterplot, i have a 

global Moran of about 0.02 - no spatial correlation - even though 

one might expect at least some spatial autocorrelation in the soil 

contamination data. If i am eliminating all outliers i identified with 

the box-plot i get a global Moran of about 0.36 - much much better. 

But if i eliminate only part of the outliers, and not all of them, i get a 

global moran of 0.49!


I would interpret this as: Some outliers (probably the lowest values 

of my upper outliers - no lower outliers detected by box-plot on my 

data) belong to the diffusive process, which has a good spatial 

autocorrelation, while the rest of the data should belong to the point 

source process. That means not all outliers were generated by the 

point source pollution, and some are genuinely generated by the 

diffusive process. Since i am dealing with contamination, of course 

i am interested in what outliers represent, much more if they are 

above the environmental pollution threshold.


Do you think is correct my interpretation? How important is this 

finding from a statistical point of view? (if it is at all).


Thank you so much for your help,


Monica


--

* To post a message to the list, send it to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

* As a general service to the users, please remember to post a summary of any useful responses to your questions.

* To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with no subject and unsubscribe ai-geostats followed by end on the next line in the message body. DO NOT SEND Subscribe/Unsubscribe requests to the list

* Support to the list is provided at http://www.ai-geostats.org





--
* To post a message to the list, send it to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* As a general service to the users, please remember to post a summary of any useful responses to your questions.
* To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with no subject and "unsubscribe ai-geostats" followed by "end" on the next line in the message body. DO NOT SEND Subscribe/Unsubscribe requests to the list
* Support to the list is provided at http://www.ai-geostats.org