Skip to main content
Log in

Why do we need and how should we implement Bayesian kriging methods

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The spatial prediction methodology that has become known under the heading of kriging is largely based on the assumptions that the underlying random field is Gaussian and the covariance function is exactly known. In practical applications, however, these assumptions will not hold. Beyond Gaussianity of the random field, lognormal kriging, disjunctive kriging, (generalized linear) model-based kriging and trans-Gaussian kriging have been proposed in the literature. The latter approach makes use of the Box–Cox-transform of the data. Still, all the alternatives mentioned do not take into account the uncertainty with respect to the distribution (or transformation) and the estimated covariance function of the data. The Bayesian trans-Gaussian kriging methodology proposed in the present paper is in the spirit of the “Bayesian bootstrap” idea advocated by Rubin (Ann Stat 9:130–134, 1981) and avoids the unusual specification of noninformative priors often made in the literature and is entirely based on the sample distribution of the estimators of the covariance function and of the Box–Cox parameter. After some notes on Bayesian spatial prediction, noninformative priors and developing our new methodology finally we will present an example illustrating our pragmatic approach to Bayesian prediction by means of a simulated data set.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abrahamsen P (1992) Bayesian kriging for seismic depth conversion of a multilayer reservoir. In: Soares A (ed) Geostatistics Troia 92. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 385–398

    Google Scholar 

  • Abramowitz M, Stegun IA (1965) Handbook of mathematical functions. Dover, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee S, Carlin BP, Gelfand AE (2004) Hierarchical modeling and analysis for spatial data. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, Florida

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger JO, De Oliveira V, Sanso B (2001) Objective Bayesian analysis of spatially correlated data. J Am Stat Assoc 96(456):1361–1374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Box GEP, Cox DR (1964) An analysis of transformations with discussion. J Roy Stat Soc Ser B 26:211–252

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown PL, Le ND, Zidek JV (1994),Multivariate spatial interpolation and exposure to air pollutants. Can J Stat 22:489–509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cressie NAC (1985) Fitting variogram models by weighted least squares. Math Geol 17(5)

  • Christensen R (1991) Linear models for multivariate time series and spatial data. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen OF, Diggle PJ, Ribeiro PJ (2001) Analysing positive-valued spatial data: the transformed Gaussian Model. In: Monestiez P, Allard D, Froidevaux R (eds) GeoENV III—geostatistics for environmental applications. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 287–298

    Google Scholar 

  • Cui H, Stein A, Myers DE (1995) Extension of spatial information, Bayesian kriging and updating of prior variogram parameters. Environmetrics, 373–384

  • De Oliveira V, Kedem B, Short DA (1997) Bayesian prediction of transformed Gaussian random fields. J Am Stat Assoc 92(440):1422–1433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diggle JP, Ribeiro JR PJ (2002) Bayesian inference in Gaussian model-based geostatistics. Geogr Environ Model 6(2):129–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diggle PJ, Tawn JA, Moyeed RA (1998) Model-based geostatistics (with discussion). Appl Stat 47:299–350

    Google Scholar 

  • Ecker MD, Gelfand AE (1997) Bayesian variogram modeling for an isotropic spatial process. Technical Report 97–01, Department of Statistics, University of Connecticut

  • Gaudard M, Karson M, Linder E, Sinha D (1999) Bayesian spatial prediction. Environ Ecol Stat 6:147–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Handcock MS, Stein ML (1993) A Bayesian analysis of kriging. Technometrics 35(4):403–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Handcock MS, Wallis JR (1994) An approach to statistical spatio-temporal modeling of meteorological fields, with discussion. J Am Stat Assoc 89:368–378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Journel AJ, Huijbregts CJ (1978) Mining geostatistics. Academic, New York

  • Kitanidis PK (1986) Parameter uncertainty in estimation of spatial functions: Bayesian analysis. Water Resour Res 22:499–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le ND, Zidek JV (1992) Interpolation with uncertain spatial covariance: a Bayesian alternative to kriging. J Multivariate Anal 43:351–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Omre H (1987) Bayesian kriging-merging observations and qualified guess in kriging. Math Geol 19:25–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Omre H, Halvorsen KB (1989) The Bayesian bridge between simple and universal kriging. Math Geol 21(7):767–786

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paulo R (2005) Default priors for Gaussian processes. Ann Stat 33:556–582

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pilz J, Schimek MG, Spöck G (1997) Taking account of uncertainty in spatial covariance estimation. In: Baafi E (ed) Geostatistics proc V int Geost Congr. Kluwer, Dordrecht

  • Rivoirard J (1994) Introduction to disjunctive kriging and non-linear geostatistics. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin DB (1981) The Bayesian bootstrap. Ann Stat 9:130–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stein ML (1999) Interpolation of spatial data: some Theory of Kriging. Springer, New York

  • Spöck G (1997) Die geostatistische Berücksichtigung von a-priori Kenntnissen über die Trendfunktion und die Kovarianzfunktion aus Bayesscher, Minimax und Spektraler Sicht, diploma thesis. University of Klagenfurt

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was partially funded by the European Commission, under the Sixth Framework Programme, by the Contract N. 033811 with DG INFSO, action Line IST-2005-2.5.12 ICT for Environmental Risk Management. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and are not necessarily those of the European Commission.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jürgen Pilz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pilz, J., Spöck, G. Why do we need and how should we implement Bayesian kriging methods. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 22, 621–632 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-007-0165-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-007-0165-7

Keywords

Navigation