4.5 Article

Permutation and Grouping Methods for Sharpening Gaussian Process Approximations

期刊

TECHNOMETRICS
卷 60, 期 4, 页码 415-429

出版社

AMER STATISTICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1080/00401706.2018.1437476

关键词

Conditional simulation; Kriging; Parallel computation; Spatial-temporal data; Vecchia's approximation

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [1613219]
  2. NIH [R01ES027892]
  3. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [1613219] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES [R01ES027892] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Vecchia's approximate likelihood for Gaussian process parameters depends on how the observations are ordered, which has been cited as a deficiency. This article takes the alternative standpoint that the ordering can be tuned to sharpen the approximations. Indeed, the first part of the article includes a systematic study of how ordering affects the accuracy of Vecchia's approximation. We demonstrate the surprising result that random orderings can give dramatically sharper approximations than default coordinate-based orderings. Additional ordering schemes are described and analyzed numerically, including orderings capable of improving on random orderings. The second contribution of this article is a new automatic method for grouping calculations of components of the approximation. The grouping methods simultaneously improve approximation accuracy and reduce computational burden. In common settings, reordering combined with grouping reduces Kullback-Leibler divergence from the target model by more than a factor of 60 compared to ungrouped approximations with default ordering. The claims are supported by theory and numerical results with comparisons to other approximations, including tapered covariances and stochastic partial differential equations. Computational details are provided, including the use of the approximations for prediction and conditional simulation. An application to space-time satellite data is presented.

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

4.5
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