Assesing covariate significance in geographically weighted logistic regression?What are the most efficient...
How to limit Drive Letters Windows assigns to new removable USB drives
A strange hotel
If a planet has 3 moons, is it possible to have triple Full/New Moons at once?
Why was the Spitfire's elliptical wing almost uncopied by other aircraft of World War 2?
How does Captain America channel this power?
Can I grease a crank spindle/bracket without disassembling the crank set?
How to write a column outside the braces in a matrix?
How can I practically buy stocks?
Function pointer with named arguments?
Re-entry to Germany after vacation using blue card
555 timer FM transmitter
bldc motor, esc and battery draw, nominal vs peak
How to have a sharp product image?
Can we say “you can pay when the order gets ready”?
can anyone help me with this awful query plan?
Get consecutive integer number ranges from list of int
Can I criticise the more senior developers around me for not writing clean code?
A Note on N!
Minor Revision with suggestion of an alternative proof by reviewer
Why does nature favour the Laplacian?
Implications of cigar-shaped bodies having rings?
How to stop co-workers from teasing me because I know Russian?
Check if a string is entirely made of the same substring
How to fry ground beef so it is well-browned
Assesing covariate significance in geographically weighted logistic regression?
What are the most efficient Geographic Weighted Regression packages?Geographically weighted regression for GPS tracking dataIdentifying the best OLS regression modelExploratory Spatial Regression: How to limit 60 variable candidates?What to do with the intercept output from regression analsyis?Geographically weighted regression with QGIS / R / etc?Using R to do logistic geographically weighted regression(GWR) predictionSmall sample size for geographically weighted regression; limitationsGeographically Weighted Regression with overlapping polygonsHow to include duplicate samples (same locations, different temporal sampling) in Geographically Weighted Logistic Regression?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
In a logistic regression the significance (p) of each covariate can be calculated.
For the case of a geographically weighted logistic regression (GWLR), I currently am working on a model for event prediction. This means I do not have one global model, but a different model (i.e. different Betas) at each geographical location.
In order to choose what covariates are included in the models I need to be able to assess each covariate for its contribution to the models. Doing so by making use of a p-value seems like the obvious choice.
I am able to calculate the p-values for each covariate for each individual model. Interapolating this to a raster can result in some locations having a high p-value (covariate is not good at explaining here) and low p-value (covariate is good in explaining here). But this only marginally helps me in deciding what covariates to include in the models. For the sake of simplicity I want all the models to include the same covariates.
How can a global p-value (or some other statistic) be calculated per covariate to determine whether a covariate should, or should not, be included in the models?
Since local P-values are calculated with the covariance matrix, and the covariance matrix is based on the logit of the model (which is geographically weighted), calculation of a global p-value (if at all possible) should include a geographic weighting as well.
arcgis-desktop arcgis-10.3 spatial-statistics regression geographically-weighted-regression
asked May 30 '17 at 8:46
LMBLMB
844321
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 14 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
add a comment |
In a logistic regression the significance (p) of each covariate can be calculated.
For the case of a geographically weighted logistic regression (GWLR), I currently am working on a model for event prediction. This means I do not have one global model, but a different model (i.e. different Betas) at each geographical location.
In order to choose what covariates are included in the models I need to be able to assess each covariate for its contribution to the models. Doing so by making use of a p-value seems like the obvious choice.
I am able to calculate the p-values for each covariate for each individual model. Interapolating this to a raster can result in some locations having a high p-value (covariate is not good at explaining here) and low p-value (covariate is good in explaining here). But this only marginally helps me in deciding what covariates to include in the models. For the sake of simplicity I want all the models to include the same covariates.
How can a global p-value (or some other statistic) be calculated per covariate to determine whether a covariate should, or should not, be included in the models?
Since local P-values are calculated with the covariance matrix, and the covariance matrix is based on the logit of the model (which is geographically weighted), calculation of a global p-value (if at all possible) should include a geographic weighting as well.
arcgis-desktop arcgis-10.3 spatial-statistics regression geographically-weighted-regression
asked May 30 '17 at 8:46
LMBLMB
844321
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 14 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
2
Parameter space should not change given a local fit. The parameters are fixed for the model and not locally variable. Unfortunately, with evaluation of significance and fit, you are hinting at one of the many issues with GWR.
– Jeffrey Evans
May 31 '17 at 13:35
add a comment |
In a logistic regression the significance (p) of each covariate can be calculated.
For the case of a geographically weighted logistic regression (GWLR), I currently am working on a model for event prediction. This means I do not have one global model, but a different model (i.e. different Betas) at each geographical location.
In order to choose what covariates are included in the models I need to be able to assess each covariate for its contribution to the models. Doing so by making use of a p-value seems like the obvious choice.
I am able to calculate the p-values for each covariate for each individual model. Interapolating this to a raster can result in some locations having a high p-value (covariate is not good at explaining here) and low p-value (covariate is good in explaining here). But this only marginally helps me in deciding what covariates to include in the models. For the sake of simplicity I want all the models to include the same covariates.
How can a global p-value (or some other statistic) be calculated per covariate to determine whether a covariate should, or should not, be included in the models?
Since local P-values are calculated with the covariance matrix, and the covariance matrix is based on the logit of the model (which is geographically weighted), calculation of a global p-value (if at all possible) should include a geographic weighting as well.
arcgis-desktop arcgis-10.3 spatial-statistics regression geographically-weighted-regression
asked May 30 '17 at 8:46
LMBLMB
844321
In a logistic regression the significance (p) of each covariate can be calculated.
For the case of a geographically weighted logistic regression (GWLR), I currently am working on a model for event prediction. This means I do not have one global model, but a different model (i.e. different Betas) at each geographical location.
In order to choose what covariates are included in the models I need to be able to assess each covariate for its contribution to the models. Doing so by making use of a p-value seems like the obvious choice.
I am able to calculate the p-values for each covariate for each individual model. Interapolating this to a raster can result in some locations having a high p-value (covariate is not good at explaining here) and low p-value (covariate is good in explaining here). But this only marginally helps me in deciding what covariates to include in the models. For the sake of simplicity I want all the models to include the same covariates.
How can a global p-value (or some other statistic) be calculated per covariate to determine whether a covariate should, or should not, be included in the models?
Since local P-values are calculated with the covariance matrix, and the covariance matrix is based on the logit of the model (which is geographically weighted), calculation of a global p-value (if at all possible) should include a geographic weighting as well.
arcgis-desktop arcgis-10.3 spatial-statistics regression geographically-weighted-regression
arcgis-desktop arcgis-10.3 spatial-statistics regression geographically-weighted-regression
asked May 30 '17 at 8:46
LMBLMB
844321
asked May 30 '17 at 8:46
LMBLMB
844321
edited May 31 '17 at 7:50
LMB
asked May 30 '17 at 8:46
LMBLMB
844321
asked May 30 '17 at 8:46
LMBLMB
844321
asked May 30 '17 at 8:46
LMBLMB
844321
844321
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 14 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 14 mins ago
This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
2
Parameter space should not change given a local fit. The parameters are fixed for the model and not locally variable. Unfortunately, with evaluation of significance and fit, you are hinting at one of the many issues with GWR.
– Jeffrey Evans
May 31 '17 at 13:35
add a comment |
2
Parameter space should not change given a local fit. The parameters are fixed for the model and not locally variable. Unfortunately, with evaluation of significance and fit, you are hinting at one of the many issues with GWR.
– Jeffrey Evans
May 31 '17 at 13:35
2
2
Parameter space should not change given a local fit. The parameters are fixed for the model and not locally variable. Unfortunately, with evaluation of significance and fit, you are hinting at one of the many issues with GWR.
– Jeffrey Evans
May 31 '17 at 13:35
Parameter space should not change given a local fit. The parameters are fixed for the model and not locally variable. Unfortunately, with evaluation of significance and fit, you are hinting at one of the many issues with GWR.
– Jeffrey Evans
May 31 '17 at 13:35
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
As commented by @JeffreyEvans:
Parameter space should not change given a local fit. The parameters
are fixed for the model and not locally variable. Unfortunately, with
evaluation of significance and fit, you are hinting at one of the many
issues with GWR.
answered Jul 20 '18 at 3:15
PolyGeo♦PolyGeo
54.1k1782247
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "79"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fgis.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f242110%2fassesing-covariate-significance-in-geographically-weighted-logistic-regression%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
As commented by @JeffreyEvans:
Parameter space should not change given a local fit. The parameters
are fixed for the model and not locally variable. Unfortunately, with
evaluation of significance and fit, you are hinting at one of the many
issues with GWR.
answered Jul 20 '18 at 3:15
PolyGeo♦PolyGeo
54.1k1782247
add a comment |
As commented by @JeffreyEvans:
Parameter space should not change given a local fit. The parameters
are fixed for the model and not locally variable. Unfortunately, with
evaluation of significance and fit, you are hinting at one of the many
issues with GWR.
answered Jul 20 '18 at 3:15
PolyGeo♦PolyGeo
54.1k1782247
add a comment |
As commented by @JeffreyEvans:
Parameter space should not change given a local fit. The parameters
are fixed for the model and not locally variable. Unfortunately, with
evaluation of significance and fit, you are hinting at one of the many
issues with GWR.
answered Jul 20 '18 at 3:15
PolyGeo♦PolyGeo
54.1k1782247
As commented by @JeffreyEvans:
Parameter space should not change given a local fit. The parameters
are fixed for the model and not locally variable. Unfortunately, with
evaluation of significance and fit, you are hinting at one of the many
issues with GWR.
answered Jul 20 '18 at 3:15
PolyGeo♦PolyGeo
54.1k1782247
answered Jul 20 '18 at 3:15
PolyGeo♦PolyGeo
54.1k1782247
answered Jul 20 '18 at 3:15
PolyGeo♦PolyGeo
54.1k1782247
answered Jul 20 '18 at 3:15
PolyGeo♦PolyGeo
54.1k1782247
54.1k1782247
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Geographic Information Systems Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fgis.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f242110%2fassesing-covariate-significance-in-geographically-weighted-logistic-regression%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
Parameter space should not change given a local fit. The parameters are fixed for the model and not locally variable. Unfortunately, with evaluation of significance and fit, you are hinting at one of the many issues with GWR.
– Jeffrey Evans
May 31 '17 at 13:35