Mathematical Geology

, Volume 32, Issue 6, pp 683–700 | Cite as

Understanding Anisotropy Computations

  • Marian Eriksson
  • Peter P. Siska


Most descriptions of anisotropy make reference to reduced distances and conversion of anisotropic models to isotropic counterparts and equations are presented for a certain class of range-anisotropic models. Many descriptions state that sill anisotropy is modelled using a range-anisotropic structure having a very elongated ellipse. The presentations typically have few or no intervening steps. Students and applied researchers rarely follow these presentations and subsequently regard the programs that compute anisotropic variograms as black-boxes, the contents of which are too complex to try to understand. We provide the geometry necessary to clarify those computations. In so doing, we provide a general way to model any type of anisotropy (range, sill, power, slope, nugget) on an ellipse. We note cases in the literature in which the printed descriptions of anisotropy on an ellipse do not match the stated or coded models. An example is provided in which both range- and sill-anisotropic structures are fitted to the experimental variogram values from an elevation data set using the provided equations and weighted nonlinear regression. The original variogram values are plotted with the fitted surfaces to view the fit and anisotropic structure in many directions at once.

ellipse nested structures range sill slope variogram 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Clark, I., 1980, Part 2: The semivarigram, in Royle, A., Clark, I., Brooker, P. I., Parker, H., Journel, A., Rendu, J. M., Sandefur, R., Grant, D. C., and Mousset Jones, P., Geostatistics: McGraw Hill, New York, p. 29–40.Google Scholar
  2. Cressie, N. A. C., 1985, Fitting variogram models by weighted least squares: Math. Geology, v. 17, no. 5, p. 563–586.Google Scholar
  3. Cressie, N. A. C., 1989, Geostatistics: Am. Statistician, v. 43, no. 4, p. 197–202.Google Scholar
  4. Cressie, N. A. C., 1991, Statistics for Spatial Data: John Wiley & Sons, New York, 900 p.Google Scholar
  5. Deutsch, C. V., and Journel, A. G., 1998, GSLIB: geostatistical software library and user's guide: 2nd Ed.: Oxford University Press, New York, 369 p.Google Scholar
  6. Goovaerts, P., 1997, Geostatistics for natural resources evaluation: Oxford University Press, New York, 483 p.Google Scholar
  7. Isaaks, E. H., and Srivastava, R. M., 1989, An introduction to applied statistics: Oxford University Press, New York, 561 p.Google Scholar
  8. Journel, A. G., and Huijbregts, C. J., 1978, Mining geostatistics: Academic Press, New York, 600 p.Google Scholar
  9. McBratney, A. B., and Webster, R., 1986, Choosing functions for semi-variograms of soil properties and fitting them to sampling estimates: Jour. Soil Sci., v. 37, no. 4, p. 617–639.Google Scholar
  10. Myers, J. C., 1997, Geostatistical error management: Quantifying uncertainty for environmental sampling and mapping: Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 571 p.Google Scholar
  11. Pannatier, Y., 1996, VARIOWIN software for spatial data analysis in 2D: Springer-Verlag, New York, 91 p.Google Scholar
  12. Vecchia, A. V., 1988, Estimation and model identification for continuous spatial processes: Jour. Royal Stat. Assoc., Series B, v. 50, no. 2, p. 297–312.Google Scholar
  13. Zimmerman, D. L., 1993, Another look at anisotropy in geostatistcs: Math. Geology, v. 25, no. 4, p. 453–470.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Association for Mathematical Geology 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marian Eriksson
    • 1
  • Peter P. Siska
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Forest ScienceTexas A&M UniversityCollege Station
  2. 2.Department of Forest ScienceTexas A&M UniversityCollege Station

Personalised recommendations