Dear Pierre, You mentioned that the nugget effect represents measurement errors or small-scale variability in the field. How to differentiate between both of them?
Last year I was studying about factorial kriging. Actually on that time I wanted to use factorial kriging to filter the nugget variance. I assumed that my nugget variance only represented small-scale variability, because I was sure (I already checked) that my data set did not have any measurement errors. I also was surprised when I got the estimation result. Beforehand I guessed that the estimation result will be more precise as I excluded the nugget variance, but actually the result showed the contrary. When I plotted the estimated versus real values, the correlation coefficient was much less (compared to include the nugget variance in estimation). Thank you. Nur Heriawan ------------ Earth Resources Exploration Research Group Institut Teknologi Bandung Indonesia --- Pierre Goovaerts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Niklas, > > This is a very good question; in fact one of the > participants to my last short course > asked the same question since he was using ARCview > with the option > "nugget effect excluded" and was surprised to see > that his observations were > not honored by the kriging predictions. M. Nur Heriawan http://www.mining.itb.ac.id/heriawan __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
* 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
