on 16/03/01 2:24, Sara Kustron at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It appears that this technique is computationally inaccessible to us
> non-programmers at this point in time. Could it be argued that though
> theoretically questionable non-ergodic covariance has some practical value
> in that it successfully cleans up variograms? I apologize if this offends
> "purists!"
It will be foolhardy to be a geostatistical "purist" in this day
and age. :) Note that one would most likely assume local stationarity within
a search neigborhood in performing OK estimations, i.e. early lag
behavior only. I would (dangerously) suggest that in this early lag
period, choice of a variogram such as power law, spherical, exponential,
or Gaussian would be nit picking. Unless the variogram clearly shows
such definitive behavior, of course.
Syed
--
* 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
