Hello Donald, Thank you for your feedback. In the case considered, that is of nuclear monitoring networks, a number of European countries have networks with stations separated by 15-20 km. This is very dense (in the perspective of people working in civil protection and for detecting potential atmospheric releases). The fact that these stations can report measurements every 10 minutes explains the need for good visualisation tools to easily and quickly better highlight anomalies (for early warning). TIN does the job very well, hence my question about the need for more advanced algorithms.
Best wishes, Gregoire -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 January 2005 17:45 To: Gregoire Dubois Subject: Re: [ai-geostats] TIN, one thought One thought The first question I would ask is the purpose of the proposed maps, i.e., what will they be used for and for how long? A map presumably would be spatial, that means you need data collected a many spatial locations. More typically automatic networks will collect data at manz time points but relatively few spatial points, therein lies the problem and may make it sensitive to the interpolation method. Donald E. Myers Quoting Gregoire Dubois <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Dear list, > > I would appreciate feedback on an issue that is closely related to > SIC2004 > > Let us consider a variable (air pollutants, radioactivity) that is > measured at regular time intervals by an automatic monitoring network > that is structured like a regular grid. In the case one needs maps to > be generated on a regular basis, I was wondering what arguments would > be against the use of Triangulated Irregular Networks (or any simple > linear interpolation algorithm)? As a matter of fact, if TIN cannot > be used to assess uncertainties, it can be easily automated and it is > an exact interpolator (no risk to smooth out critical values). I thus > understand TIN is the most reasonable approach in the case one has a > network that is dense enough. Obviously, the "dense enough" obviously > needs to be defined properly as I expect it to be the main parameter > that will define the need for more advanced interpolation techniques. > But with the exception of density, are there any non obvious issues I > am missing here? > > Thank you in advance for any feedback. > > Best regards, > > Gregoire > >
* By using the ai-geostats mailing list you agree to follow its rules ( see http://www.ai-geostats.org/help_ai-geostats.htm ) * To unsubscribe to ai-geostats, send the following in the subject or in the body (plain text format) of an email message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Signoff ai-geostats
