group_modelling:goodnessoffit
Diferenças
Aqui você vê as diferenças entre duas revisões dessa página.
Ambos lados da revisão anteriorRevisão anterior | Próxima revisãoAmbos lados da revisão seguinte | ||
group_modelling:goodnessoffit [2009/03/27 14:58] – inpeifgi | group_modelling:goodnessoffit [2009/03/27 15:09] – inpeifgi | ||
---|---|---|---|
Linha 32: | Linha 32: | ||
Calibration of cellular automata or agent-based models is not a trivial task as parameters influence is in most cases non-linear and often the number of parameters is high, making comprehensive evaluation of all combinations unfeasible. Simple approaches like by Clarke et al. (1998) generate lots of simulations to be evaluated by the user, they consider interactive visualization as an important tool. Multi-resolution search of the parameter space as described in Candau (2002) may help to detect important parameter combinations and subsequently to adjust them with feasible computational effort. Still users may not find the most influential parameter combinations. This task was addressed by Miller (1998) who used several robust optimization algorithms to investigate the parameter space. Wu (2002) | Calibration of cellular automata or agent-based models is not a trivial task as parameters influence is in most cases non-linear and often the number of parameters is high, making comprehensive evaluation of all combinations unfeasible. Simple approaches like by Clarke et al. (1998) generate lots of simulations to be evaluated by the user, they consider interactive visualization as an important tool. Multi-resolution search of the parameter space as described in Candau (2002) may help to detect important parameter combinations and subsequently to adjust them with feasible computational effort. Still users may not find the most influential parameter combinations. This task was addressed by Miller (1998) who used several robust optimization algorithms to investigate the parameter space. Wu (2002) | ||
- | The diversity of LUCC models may require different calibration and validation methods. An overview over current | + | The diversity of LUCC models may require different calibration and validation methods. An overview over current |
=====Topics of the proposed Thesis and Questions to be answered in each work package===== | =====Topics of the proposed Thesis and Questions to be answered in each work package===== | ||
Linha 95: | Linha 95: | ||
===== References ===== | ===== References ===== | ||
+ | AGARWAL, CH.; GREEN, G. M.; GROVE, J. M.; EVANS, T. P. & SCHWEIK, CH. M. [[http:// | ||
+ | |||
C. M. ALMEIDA, A. M. V. MONTEIRO, G. CAMARA, B. S. SOARES-FILHO, | C. M. ALMEIDA, A. M. V. MONTEIRO, G. CAMARA, B. S. SOARES-FILHO, | ||
group_modelling/goodnessoffit.txt · Última modificação: 2009/06/09 18:00 por inpeifgi