POST
|
The image shows part of the study area, as you say there are areas where it would be impossible for houses to be located. I understand how the pattern changes with a smaller or larger area of interest but I can only really use the whole study area, not try to exclude all individual areas of forest/water bodies etc with no houses. Should I still be able to produce a valid analysis?
... View more
12-02-2017
09:40 PM
|
0
|
1
|
532
|
POST
|
12-02-2017
09:33 PM
|
0
|
2
|
532
|
POST
|
The study area includes all communities and households in a district. I created the study area using "aggregate points" for households - although not with a very fine aggregation distance as this created separate study area islands across the district which isn't valid input for Ripley's. The households are gathered in communities and along roads etc - my aim was to calculate the K-function for all households and for case-households to then estimate the difference between the 2 functions to indicate any extra aggregation of cases above the background population.
... View more
12-02-2017
08:25 PM
|
0
|
4
|
532
|
POST
|
I have calculated Ripley’s K function for households and household-events for a district. I get unusual graphs with observed above expected at all distances - 2 almost straight lines. I would expect clustering of households at shorter distances (within communities) and dispersion at larger distances (between communities). I used the aggregate points feature to create the study area polygon. I wondered if my output is likely to be an artefact of households not being possible at all locations (such as forests and water bodies), while for “expected” the assumption is that households can fall anywhere? Appreciate the feedback.
... View more
12-02-2017
03:12 PM
|
0
|
6
|
803
|
Online Status |
Offline
|
Date Last Visited |
11-11-2020
02:24 AM
|