Assessing the performance of spatial cross-validation approaches for models of spatially structured data
read the original abstract
Evaluating models fit to data with internal spatial structure requires specific cross-validation (CV) approaches, because randomly selecting assessment data may produce assessment sets that are not truly independent of data used to train the model. Many spatial CV methodologies have been proposed to address this by forcing models to extrapolate spatially when predicting the assessment set. However, to date there exists little guidance on which methods yield the most accurate estimates of model performance. We conducted simulations to compare model performance estimates produced by five common CV methods fit to spatially structured data. We found spatial CV approaches generally improved upon resubstitution and V-fold CV estimates, particularly when approaches which combined assessment sets of spatially conjunct observations with spatial exclusion buffers. To facilitate use of these techniques, we introduce the `spatialsample` package which provides tooling for performing spatial CV as part of the broader tidymodels modeling framework.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
One country, multiple portraits: representativeness in GPS-based mobility data is source-specific and spatially dependent
Coverage bias in GPS mobility data is source-specific and spatially dependent, with Facebook showing more even coverage than multi-app data and different dominant drivers for each.
-
Moving beyond spatial and random cross-validation in environmental modelling: a call for prediction-domain adaptive evaluation
Prediction-domain adaptive cross-validation is proposed as a flexible alternative to fixed random or spatial methods for reliably estimating accuracy in environmental maps.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.