4.2 Article

Enhancing the SPDE modeling of spatial point processes with INLA, applied to wildfires. Choosing the best mesh for each database

期刊

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/03610918.2019.1618473

关键词

Bayesian inference; INLA; mesh; spatial point process; SPDE

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Science and Education [MTM2016-78917-R]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Wildfires play a significant role in shaping landscapes and as a source of CO2 and particulate matter, and are often studied as a typical spatial point process. Various methods, such as point pattern analysis or Markov random fields, can be used to model the spatial variability of wildfires. In this study, the size of forest fires in the Valencian Community, Spain was modeled using Stochastic Partial Differential Equation (SPDE) with Integrated Nested Laplace Approximation (INLA).
Wildfires play an important role in shaping landscapes and as a source of CO2 and particulate matter, and are a typical spatial point process studied in many papers. Modeling the spatial variability of a wildfire could be performed in different ways and an important issue is the computational facilities that the new techniques afford us. The most common approaches have been through point pattern analysis or by Markov random fields. These methods have made it possible to build risk maps, but for many forest managers it is very useful to know the size of the fire as well as its location. In this work, we use Stochastic Partial Differential Equation (SPDE) with Integrated Nested Laplace Approximation (INLA) to model the size of the forest fires observed in the Valencian Community, Spain. But the most important element in this paper is the process that needs to be carried out prior to simulating and analyzing the different point patterns, namely, the choice of the most suitable mesh for the database. We describe and take advantage of the Bayesian methodology by including INLA and SPDE in the modeling process in all the scenarios.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据