Paper detail

Residuals and goodness-of-fit tests for stationary marked Gibbs point processes

The inspection of residuals is a fundamental step to investigate the quality of adjustment of a parametric model to data. For spatial point processes, the concept of residuals has been recently proposed by Baddeley et al. (2005) as an empirical counterpart of the {\it Campbell equilibrium} equation for marked Gibbs point processes. The present paper focuses on stationary marked Gibbs point processes and deals with asymptotic properties of residuals for such processes. In particular, the consistency and the asymptotic normality are obtained for a wide class of residuals including the classical ones (raw residuals, inverse residuals, Pearson residuals). Based on these asymptotic results, we define goodness-of-fit tests with Type-I error theoretically controlled. One of these tests constitutes an extension of the quadrat counting test widely used to test the null hypothesis of a homogeneous Poisson point process.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.