| Literature DB >> 35452466 |
Yang Li1, Zhong Baorong2, Xu Xiaohong1, Liang Zijun3.
Abstract
The Ordinary Kriging method is a common spatial interpolation algorithm in geostatistics. Because the semivariogram required for kriging interpolation greatly influences this process, optimal fitting of the semivariogram is of major significance for improving the theoretical accuracy of spatial interpolation. A deep neural network is a machine learning algorithm that can, in principle, be applied to any function, including a semivariogram. Accordingly, a novel spatial interpolation method based on a deep neural network and Ordinary Kriging was proposed in this research, and elevation data were used as a case study. Compared with the semivariogram fitted by the traditional exponential model, spherical model, and Gaussian model, the kriging variance in the proposed method is smaller, which means that the interpolation results are closer to the theoretical results of Ordinary Kriging interpolation. At the same time, this research can simplify processes for a variety of semivariogram analyses.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35452466 PMCID: PMC9032399 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0266942
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.752
Fig 1Semivariogram fitting of the DNN model with different training times.
Fig 2Relationship between training times and fully connected layers.
Fig 3Comparison of fitting results obtained using different semivariogram models.
Fig 4Validation of sample normal distribution in the four areas.
Fig 5The results of different semivariogram functions in the four areas.
R2 obtained by fitting the semivariogram with different methods with the 80% of data set in the four areas.
| Area 1 | Area 2 | Area 3 | Area 4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DNN model | 0.9922 | 0.9828 | 0.9845 | 0.9863 |
| Gaussian model | 0.8822 | 0.9635 | 0.9588 | 0.9259 |
| Exponential model | 0.9624 | 0.9697 | 0.9763 | 0.9602 |
R2 obtained by bringing the 20% of data set as test set into different semivariograms in the four areas.
| Area 1 | Area 2 | Area 3 | Area 4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DNN model | 0.9842 | 0.9515 | 0.9445 | 0.8594 |
| Gaussian model | 0.8223 | 0.9103 | 0.8042 | 0.4519 |
| Exponential model | 0.9376 | 0.9457 | 0.9382 | 0.8455 |
Comparison of the mean of the kriging variance in the four areas.
| The kriging variance | Area 1 | Area 2 | Area 3 | Area 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DNN-0K | 52.52 | 75.22 | 131.69 | 73.53 |
| Gaussian-0K | 90.87 | 84.95 | 140.46 | 85.60 |
| Exponential-0K | 92.42 | 90.37 | 144.56 | 87.01 |
MAE between the interpolation results and the original data in the four areas.
| MAE | Area 1 | Area 2 | Area 3 | Area 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DNN-0K and original data | 6.0270 | 10.6652 | 7.7237 | 5.5069 |
| Gaussian-0K and original data | 8.1987 | 12.2126 | 8.9987 | 5.7938 |
| Exponential-0K and original data | 6.1087 | 10.8412 | 7.7573 | 5.6161 |
RMSE between the interpolation results and the original data in the four areas.
| RMSE | Area 1 | Area 2 | Area 3 | Area 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DNN-0K and original data | 9.3568 | 14.8999 | 12.8717 | 7.8355 |
| Gaussian-0K and original data | 14.1523 | 17.1283 | 16.4379 | 8.0862 |
| Exponential-0K and original data | 9.1970 | 14.9906 | 12.9399 | 7.8406 |
Fig 6Comparison of fitting results obtained using the different models in the four areas.