Page 160 - Special Topic Session (STS) - Volume 2
P. 160

STS474 Yoshihiro Y.
                  3.  Result
                  Assumption 2  ̃ ,  =   , , ̃ ,  =   , .
                                                           
                                               
                  (1)   ,  → 0  ̃ ,  → ∞   → ∞.
                                                      
                  (2)  log  = (log ( ))   (̃ , , + |log( ⁄ ))| + |log( , ⁄ ))|)/
                                    ,
                                             ,
                                                                ,
                       ,  → 0 as  → ∞.
                  (3)    ≥ 2,  → ∞.

                                                                           −1
                                   −2
                                       2
                  Assumption 3  , ,  ,    −     ℎ ̃ ,   → ∞.
                  Then we have the following asymptotic properties of the estimator.
                                                          ̂
                  Theorem 1 Under Assumption 1 and 2,   converges to  in probability as
                                                           
                                                                            0
                    →  1.
                                                                    1
                                                                       ̂
                  Theorem  2  Under  Assumptions  1-3,  for   ≥  2,  2( −  )  converges  to
                                                                             0
                                                                        
                  (0, 1) in distribution as  → ∞.

                  4.  Discussion and Conclusion
                     This section examines empirical properties of the Gaussian semiparametric
                  estimation (GSE) estimators for the parameter  in comparisons with those of
                  Zhu& Stein (2002), which is a spatial domain method that assumes that   in
                                                                                         0
                  Assumption 1 is a constant. Our interests are in the comparisons between
                  them when   is not a constant.
                               0
                     To conduct the comparisons, we simulate spatial data on lattice points that
                  satisfies Assumption 1 in the following three cases. In Case 1, we considered
                  FBFs with   =  0.5, denoted as  (, ). Case 1 clearly satisfies Assumption 1
                                                  0.5
                  with    being  a  constant.  In  Case  2,  for  iid  noise (, ),  we  generate  FBF
                        0
                  contaminated with the noise, which is given by  (, ) +  (, ). In Case 3,
                                                                  0.5
                  we simulate the moving average of  (, ),given by
                                                      0.5
                                       (1  +  0.3 )(1  +  0.3 ) (, ),
                                                             2
                                                                0.5
                                                 1
                  for  the  backward  shift  operators  defined  by   (, ) =  ( − 1, )  and
                                                                   1
                   (, ) =  (,   −  1).
                   2
                     We simulated 100 sets of Cases 1, 2 and 3, for which we constructed the
                  two kinds of estimators to examine the empirical comparisons between them.
                  The sample paths of cross section over s = 1 for the three cases are shown in
                  Figure  1.  It  should  be  noticed  that  the  each  of  three  sample  paths  is  a
                  realization of ISRF with   =  0.5,
                     We calculated the two kinds of estimators by GSE and Zhu& Stein (2002)
                  for the three cases, where we chose the filter 1 with   =  2 for   =  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
                  to conduct OLS for the latter estimator.










                                                                     149 | I S I   W S C   2 0 1 9
   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165