Variogram versus Covariogram

Article View: aus.stats.s

Article #197

#197

From: Olivier D'hondt
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 10:37

8 lines
1143 bytes

Hello, 
I've read a lot of geostatistical articles where people use the
variogram estimator instead of the sample autocovariance one, for
reasons of unbiasedness. But there exists an unbiased version of
sample autocorrelation that is much faster to compute with fft than
variogram. My (naive) question is : why variogram ?
Best Regards,
Olivier

Technical Details

Message-ID: <b55bc55b.0401220237.e318c03@posting.google.com>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: fa931,6e88d2832694e5c7,start
X-Google-Attributes: gidfa931,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-01-22 02:37:29 PST
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: olivierdhondt@yahoo.fr (Olivier D'hondt)
Newsgroups: aus.stats.s
Subject: Variogram versus Covariogram
Date: 22 Jan 2004 02:37:28 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <b55bc55b.0401220237.e318c03@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.20.82.109
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1074767849 24383 127.0.0.1 (22 Jan 2004 10:37:29 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 10:37:29 +0000 (UTC)