Skip to main content
Log in

Flow autocorrelation: a dyadic approach

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
The Annals of Regional Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper proposes and investigates a new index of flow autocorrelation, based upon a generalization of Moran’s I, and made of two ingredients. The first one consists of a family of spatial weights matrix, the exchange matrix, possessing a freely adjustable parameter interpretable as the age of the network, and controlling for the distance decay range. The second one is a matrix of chi-square dissimilarities between outgoing or incoming flows. Flows have to be adjusted, that is their diagonal part must first be calibrated from their off-diagonal part, thanks to a new iterative procedure procedure aimed at making flows as independent as possible. Commuter flows in Western Switzerland as well as migration flows in Western US illustrate the statistical testing of flow autocorrelation, as well as the computation, mapping and interpretation of local indicators of flow autocorrelation. We prove the present dyadic formalism to be equivalent to the “origin-based” tetradic formalism found in alternative studies of flow autocorrelation.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Other possible choices such as \(\delta _i=(WB)_{ii}/\varDelta \), where B is the matrix of scalar products associated to D, will be discussed in a forthcoming publication.

  2. Data available at https://github.com/christiankaiser/flowdata.

  3. Data available at https://www.census.gov/topics/population/migration/guidance/county-to-county-migration-flows.html.

References

  • Anselin L (1995) Local indicators of spatial association—LISA. Geogr Anal 27:93–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bavaud F (1998) Models for Spatial Weights: A Systematic Look. Geographical Analysis 30:153–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bavaud F (2013) Testing spatial autocorrelation in weighted networks: the modes permutation test. J Geogr Syst 15:233–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bavaud F (2014) “Spatial weights: constructing weight-compatible exchange matrices from proximity matrices”. In: Duckham M. et al. (Eds.): GIScience 2014, LNCS 8728, pp. 81–96. Springer

  • Behrens K, Ertur C, Koch W (2012) Dual gravity: using spatial econometrics to control for multilateral resistance. J Appl Econom 27:773–794

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger J, Snell JL (1957) On the concept of equal exchange. Behav Sci 2:111–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berglund S, Karlström A (1999) Identifying local spatial association in flow data. J Geogr Syst 1:219–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bishop YM, Fienberg SE, Holland PW (1975) Discrete multivariate analysis: theory and practice. The MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Bivand RS, Pebesma EJ, Gómez-Rubio V, Pebesma EJ (2008) Applied spatial data analysis with R. Springer, New York

  • Black WR (1992) Network autocorrelation in transportation network and flow systems. Geogr Anal 24:207–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black WR, Thomas I (1998) Accidents on Belgiums motorways: a network autocorrelation analysis. J Trans Geogr 6:23–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolduc D, Laferriere R, Santarossa G (1995) Spatial autoregressive error components in travel flow models: an application to aggregate mode choice. In: Anselin L, Florax RJ (eds) New directions in spatial econometrics. Springer, Berlin, pp 96–108

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Brandsma AS, Ketellapper RH (1979) A biparametric approach to spatial autocorrelation. Environ Plan A 11:51–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung FRK (1997) Spectral graph theory. AMS, Providence

    Google Scholar 

  • Cover T, Thomas J (1991) Elements of information theory. Wiley, Hoboken

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cliff AD, Ord JK (1981) Spatial processes. Pion, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer MM, Griffith DA (2008) Modeling spatial autocorrelation in spatial interaction data: an application to patent citation in the European Union. J Reg Sci 48(5):969–989

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillberry R, Hummels D (2008) Trade responses to geographic frictions: a decomposition using micro-data. Eur Econ Rev 52:527–550

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kondor RI, Lafferty J (2002) Diffusion kernels on graphs and other discrete input spaces. In: ICML, vol 2, pp 315–322

  • LeSage J, Pace RK (2008) Spatial econometric modeling of origin-destination flows. J Reg Sci 48:941–967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LeSage J, Polasek W (2008) Incorporating transportation network structure in spatial econometric models of commodity flows. Spatial Econ Anal 3:225–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Llano-Verduras C, Minondo A, RequenaSilvente F (2011) Is the border effect an artefact of geographical aggregation? World Econ 34:1771–1787

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polasek W, Sellner R (2010) Spatial Chow–Lin methods for data completion in econometric flow models (No. 255). Reihe Ökonomie/Economics Series, Institut für Höhere Studien (IHS)

  • Tiefelsdorf M, Braun G (1999) Network autocorrelation in poisson regression residuals: inter-district migration patterns and trends within Berlin. In: paper presented at the 11th European colloquium on quantitative and theoretical geography, Durham City, England, September 3–7

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F. Bavaud.

Appendix: Computational details of diagonal flow adjustment

Appendix: Computational details of diagonal flow adjustment

Define a family of independent flows by the model distribution \(p^{ \text{ theo }}_{ij}=\beta _i\gamma _j\) where \(\beta \) and \(\gamma \) are unknown distributions. The free parameters are estimated so as the relative complete flows p, of the form (7) \(p_{ij}=\sigma _i\, \delta _{ij}+\mu \, a_{ij}\), is as close as possible from independent relative flows \(p^{ \text{ theo }}\), in the sense that the Kullback–Leibler divergence or relative entropy

$$\begin{aligned} K(p||p^{ \text{ theo }})=\sum _{ij}p_{ij}\ln \frac{p_{ij}}{\beta _i\gamma _j}=\sum _i \sigma _i\ln \frac{\sigma _i}{\beta _i\gamma _i}+ \sum _{ij}\mu \, a_{ij}\ln \frac{\mu \, a_{ij}}{\beta _i\gamma _j} \end{aligned}$$

must be minimum, under the constraints

$$\begin{aligned} \mu =1-\sigma _{\bullet }\ge 0\qquad \qquad \sigma _i,\beta _i,\gamma _j\ge 0 \qquad \qquad \sum _i \beta _i =\sum _j \gamma _j=1. \end{aligned}$$

Setting to 0 the derivative by \(\sigma _i\) yields with \(\mu =1-\sigma _{\bullet }\) :

$$\begin{aligned}&\ln \frac{\sigma _i}{\beta _i\gamma _i}+1-\sum _{ij}a_{ij}\ln \frac{\mu \, a_{ij}}{\beta _i\gamma _j} -\sum _{ij}a_{ij} =\ln \frac{\sigma _i}{\beta _i\gamma _i}-\ln \mu -K(a || \beta \gamma )=0 \end{aligned}$$

where \(K(a || \beta \gamma ):=\sum _{ij}a_{ij}\ln \frac{a_{ij}}{\beta _i\gamma _j}\) is the “movers” relative entropy, which, incidentally, also appears in the likelihood ratio of the so-called quasi-independence models (e.g., Bishop et al. 1975). Derivating w.r.t. \(\beta _i\) under the constraint \(\sum _i \beta _i=1\) (and multiplier \(\lambda \)) yields

$$\begin{aligned} -\frac{\sigma _i}{\beta _i}-\mu \frac{a_{i\bullet }}{\beta _i}=-\lambda \qquad \qquad \beta _i\lambda =\sigma _i +\mu a_{i\bullet } \quad \Rightarrow \quad \lambda =1 \end{aligned}$$

in view of \(\sigma _{\bullet }+\mu =1\). Hence \(\beta _i=\sigma _i+\mu a_{i\bullet }\). Similarily, \(\gamma _j=\sigma _j+\mu a_{\bullet j}\). Finally,

figure a

where \(a_{ij}=m_{ij}/m_{\bullet \bullet }\) is the known proportion of movers from i to j Sect. 2.4, from which the unknown \(\sigma ,\mu , \beta ,\gamma \) are to be estimated.

Equations (11) is iteratively solved from some initial solution such as \(\beta ^0_i=a_{i\bullet }\), \(\gamma ^0_j=a_{\bullet j}\) and \(\sigma _i^0=a_{i\bullet }a_{\bullet i}\) until convergence, which occurs provided \(a_{i\bullet }>0\) and \(a_{\bullet j}>0\) for all origins i and destinations j. If needed, the latter conditions can be insured by considering augmented flows \(t_{ij}+1\) instead of \(t_{ij}\), a choice adopted for convenience in the case studies of Sect. 3, and justifiable in a Bayesian framework (Laplace rule of succession).

More generally, \(a_{i\bullet }+a_{\bullet i}=0\) makes i irrelevant (a “non-region”). \(a_{i\bullet }=0\) and \(a_{\bullet i}>0\) makes \(\beta _i=\sigma _i=0\) (absorbing destination). Similarly, \(a_{i\bullet }>0\) and \(a_{\bullet i}=0\) makes \(\gamma _i=\sigma _i=0\) (transient origin). Finally, \(a_{i\bullet }+a_{\bullet i}>0\) and \(a_{i\bullet }a_{\bullet i}=0\) for all i splits the regions between two non-intersecting sets, namely transient origins and absorbing destinations, with \(\sigma _{\bullet }=0\) and \(\mu =1\), characterizing incommensurate, “rectangular” flows.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bavaud, F., Kordi, M. & Kaiser, C. Flow autocorrelation: a dyadic approach. Ann Reg Sci 61, 95–111 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-018-0860-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-018-0860-y

JEL Classification

Navigation