Random Forest Spatial Interpolation

For many decades, kriging and deterministic interpolation techniques, such as inverse distance weighting and nearest neighbour interpolation, have been the most popular spatial interpolation techniques. Kriging with external drift and regression kriging have become basic techniques that benefit both from spatial autocorrelation and covariate information. More recently, machine learning techniques, such as random forest and gradient boosting, have become increasingly popular and are now often used for spatial interpolation. Some attempts have been made to explicitly take the spatial component into account in machine learning, but so far, none of these approaches have taken the natural route of incorporating the nearest observations and their distances to the prediction location as covariates. In this research, we explored the value of including observations at the nearest locations and their distances from the prediction location by introducing Random Forest Spatial Interpolation (RFSI). We compared RFSI with deterministic interpolation methods, ordinary kriging, regression kriging, Random Forest and Random Forest for spatial prediction (RFsp) in three case studies. The first case study made use of synthetic data, i.e., simulations from normally distributed stationary random fields with a known semivariogram, for which ordinary kriging is known to be optimal. The second and third case studies evaluated the performance of the various interpolation methods using daily precipitation data for the 2016–2018 period in Catalonia, Spain, and mean daily temperature for the year 2008 in Croatia. Results of the synthetic case study showed that RFSI outperformed most simple deterministic interpolation techniques and had similar performance as inverse distance weighting and RFsp. As expected, kriging was the most accurate technique in the synthetic case study. In the precipitation and temperature case studies, RFSI mostly outperformed regression kriging, inverse distance weighting, random forest, and RFsp. Moreover, RFSI was substantially faster than RFsp, particularly when the training dataset was large and high-resolution prediction maps were made

Recursive Nearest Neighbor Co-Kriging Models for Big Multiple Fidelity Spatial Data Sets

Big datasets are gathered daily from different remote sensing platforms. Recently, statistical co-kriging models, with the help of scalable techniques, have been able to combine such datasets by using spatially varying bias corrections. The associated Bayesian inference for these models is usually facilitated via Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods which present (sometimes prohibitively) slow mixing and convergence because they require the simulation of high-dimensional random effect vectors from their posteriors given large datasets. To enable fast inference in big data spatial problems, we propose the recursive nearest neighbor co-kriging (RNNC) model. Based on this model, we develop two computationally efficient inferential procedures: a) the collapsed RNNC which reduces the posterior sampling space by integrating out the latent processes, and b) the conjugate RNNC, an MCMC free inference which significantly reduces the computational time without sacrificing prediction accuracy. An important highlight of conjugate RNNC is that it enables fast inference in massive multifidelity data sets by avoiding expensive integration algorithms. The efficient computational and good predictive performances of our proposed algorithms are demonstrated on benchmark examples and the analysis of the High-resolution Infrared Radiation Sounder data gathered from two NOAA polar orbiting satellites in which we managed to reduce the computational time from multiple hours to just a few minutes.Comment: arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:2004.0134

Bayesian joint models with INLA exploring marine mobile predator-prey and competitor species habitat overlap

EPSRC grant Ecowatt 2050 EP/K012851/1 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to thank the associate editor and the anonymous reviewers for their useful and constructive suggestions which led to a considerable improvement of the manuscript. The authors would also like to thank the following people/organizations for making large datasets available for use in this paper: Mark Lewis (Joint Nature Conservation Committee), Philip Hammond (Scottish Oceans Institute, University of St. Andrews), Susan Lusseau (Marine Scotland Science), Darren Stevens (The Sir Alister Hardy Foundation for Ocean Science, PML), and Yuri Artioli (Plymouth Marine Laboratory). This work was supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EcoWatt250; EPSRC EP/K012851/1).Peer reviewedPublisher PD