Skip to main content
Cross Validated

Return to Answer

added 58 characters in body
Source Link
NamelessGods
NamelessGods
  • 535
  • 4
  • 13

I may have come up with a solution to this problem and want some opinion on the validity.

After fitting the model, I can simulate a batch of point patterns from the fitted model. Then I can calculate an average PCF from these simulated point patterns and compare this to the PCF of the real data. ThisThe ratio of PCF from real data to that of simulated data should in principle give me an adjusted PCF. Since, before, I am fitting a PCF with respect to a unit rate Poisson process but now I am fitting a PCF with respect to a point process that has a density of the fitted model.

Does this make sense?

I may have come up with a solution to this problem and want some opinion on the validity.

After fitting the model, I can simulate a batch of point patterns from the fitted model. Then I can calculate an average PCF from these simulated point patterns and compare this to the PCF of the real data. This should in principle give me an adjusted PCF. Since, before, I am fitting a PCF with respect to a unit rate Poisson process but now I am fitting a PCF with respect to a point process that has a density of the fitted model.

Does this make sense?

I may have come up with a solution to this problem and want some opinion on the validity.

After fitting the model, I can simulate a batch of point patterns from the fitted model. Then I can calculate an average PCF from these simulated point patterns and compare this to the PCF of the real data. The ratio of PCF from real data to that of simulated data should in principle give me an adjusted PCF. Since, before, I am fitting a PCF with respect to a unit rate Poisson process but now I am fitting a PCF with respect to a point process that has a density of the fitted model.

Does this make sense?

Source Link
NamelessGods
NamelessGods
  • 535
  • 4
  • 13

I may have come up with a solution to this problem and want some opinion on the validity.

After fitting the model, I can simulate a batch of point patterns from the fitted model. Then I can calculate an average PCF from these simulated point patterns and compare this to the PCF of the real data. This should in principle give me an adjusted PCF. Since, before, I am fitting a PCF with respect to a unit rate Poisson process but now I am fitting a PCF with respect to a point process that has a density of the fitted model.

Does this make sense?