Advertisement

Springer Nature is making Coronavirus research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

A variance of geostatisticians

  • 114 Accesses

  • 49 Citations

Abstract

Different individuals will take different approaches to the analysis and interpretation of data. This study attempted to quantify the effect of such individual differences on the quality of geostatistical spatial estimates. Identical spatial data sets were sent to 12 investigators, who independently analyzed the data and produced spatial interpolations. The results varied considerably. Differences in the interpolations could be attributed to differences in choice of methodology, differences in data interpretation, and, in a few cases, errors in procedure. The potential differences in economic and societal costs between decisions based on “good” vs. “bad” interpolations warrant a systematic approach to the identification and testing of interpolation methods.

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

References

  1. Brooker, P. I., 1978, Geostatistical calculations using true and estimated values from a simulated deposit: Proc. Australas. Inst. Min. Metall., no. 268, p. 63–69.

  2. Browm, K. W., Mullins, J. W., Richitt, E. P., Jr., Flatman, G. T., Black, S. C., and Simon, S. J., 1985, Assessing soil lead contamination in Dallas, Texas: Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, v. 5, p. 137–154.

  3. Dahlberg, E. C., 1972, Aspects of unbiased and biased contouring of geological data by human and machine operators: Geol. Soc. Amer. Abstracts, v. 4, p. 482–483.

  4. Englund, E. J., and Sparks, A. R., 1988, Geo-EAS (Geostatistical Environmental Assessment Software) user's guide: EPA/600/4-88/033, U.S. EPA Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas, 170 p.

  5. Hewlett, R. F., 1964, Comparison of the triangular, polygonal, and a statistical method of computing grade and tonnage of ore for the Silver Bell oxide prophyry copper deposit: U.S. Bureau of Mines Report of Investigations 7331.

  6. Journel, A. G., and Huijbregts, Ch. J., 1978, Mining geostatistics: Academic Press, London, 600 p.

  7. Knudsen, H. P., Kim, Y. C., and Mueller, E., 1978, Comparative study of the geostatistical ore reserve method over the conventional methods: Mining Engineering, Jan. 1978, p. 54–58.

  8. Matheron, G., 1963, Principles of geostatistics: Economic Geology, v. 58, p. 1246–1266.

  9. Raymond, G. F., 1979, Ore estimation problems in an erratically mineralized orebody: CIM Bulletin, Jun. 1969, p. 90–98.

  10. Raymond, G. F., 1982, Geostatistical production grade estimation in Mount Isa's copper orebodies: Proc. Australas. Inst. Min. Metall., no. 284, p. 17–39.

  11. Srivastava, R. M., 1988, A non-ergodic framework for variograms and covariance functions: SIMS Technical Report No. 114.

Download references

Author information

Additional information

Although the research described in this article has been supported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, it has not been subjected to Agency review and no official endorsement should be inferred.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Englund, E.J. A variance of geostatisticians. Math Geol 22, 417–455 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00890328

Download citation

Key words

  • Geostatistics
  • kriging
  • interpolation