4.4 Article

Equivalence of measures and asymptotically optimal linear prediction for Gaussian random fields with fractional-order covariance operators

期刊

BERNOULLI
卷 29, 期 2, 页码 1476-1504

出版社

INT STATISTICAL INST
DOI: 10.3150/22-BEJ1507

关键词

Gaussian measures; kriging; elliptic differential operators; Whittle-Matern fields

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We consider two Gaussian measures mu and (mu) over tilde on a separable Hilbert space, with fractional-order covariance operators A(-2 beta) and (A) over tilde (-2 beta), respectively, and derive necessary and sufficient conditions for the equivalence of the measures and the uniform asymptotic optimality of linear predictions. These results hold for Gaussian processes on compact metric spaces, and provide a crucial first step in deriving consistency results for parameter estimation of generalized Whittle-Matern fields.
We consider two Gaussian measures mu, (mu) over tilde on a separable Hilbert space, with fractional-order covariance operators A(-2 beta) and (A) over tilde (-2 beta), respectively, and derive necessary and sufficient conditions on A, (A) over tilde and beta, (beta) over tilde > 0 for I. euivalence of the measures mu and (mu) over tilde, and II. uniform asymptotic optimality of linear predictions for mu based on the misspecified measure (mu) over tilde. These results hold, e.g., for Gaussian processes on compact metric spaces. As an important special case, we consider the class of generalized Whittle-Matern Gaussian random fields, where A and (A) over tilde are elliptic second-order differential operators, formulated on a bounded Euclidean domain D subset of R-d and augmented with homogeneous Dirichlet boundary conditions. Our outcomes explain why the predictive performances of stationary and non-stationary models in spatial statistics often are comparable, and provide a crucial first step in deriving consistency results for parameter estimation of generalized Whittle-Matern fields.

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

4.4
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