
handle: 10754/597807
Under a general loss function, we develop a hypothesis test to determine whether a significant difference in the spatial predictions produced by two competing models exists on average across the entire spatial domain of interest. The null hypothesis is that of no difference, and a spatial loss differential is created based on the observed data, the two sets of predictions, and the loss function chosen by the researcher. The test assumes only isotropy and short-range spatial dependence of the loss differential but does allow it to be non-Gaussian, non-zero-mean, and spatially correlated. Constant and nonconstant spatial trends in the loss differential are treated in two separate cases. Monte Carlo simulations illustrate the size and power properties of this test, and an example based on daily average wind speeds in Oklahoma is used for illustration. Supplemental results are available online.
Kriging, Model validation, Loss functions, Wind power, Hypothesis test, Prediction evaluation
Kriging, Model validation, Loss functions, Wind power, Hypothesis test, Prediction evaluation
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 38 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
