LGCPs - Plot sampling
David Borchers and Finn Lindgren
Generated on 2025-06-16
Source:vignettes/articles/2d_lgcp_plotsampling.Rmd
2d_lgcp_plotsampling.Rmd
Introduction
This practical demonstrates use of the samplers
argument
in lgcp
, which you need to use when you have observed
points from only a sample of plots in the survey region.
Get the data
data(gorillas_sf, package = "inlabru")
This dataset is a list (see help(gorillas_sf)
for
details. Extract the the objects you need from the list, for
convenience:
nests <- gorillas_sf$nests
mesh <- gorillas_sf$mesh
boundary <- gorillas_sf$boundary
gcov <- gorillas_sf_gcov()
#> Loading required namespace: terra
The gorillas_sf
data also contains a plot sample subset
which covers 60% of the survey region.
sample <- gorillas_sf$plotsample
plotdets <- ggplot() +
gg(boundary) +
gg(sample$plots) +
gg(sample$nests, pch = "+", cex = 4, color = "red") +
geom_text(aes(
label = sample$counts$count,
x = sf::st_coordinates(sample$counts)[, 1],
y = sf::st_coordinates(sample$counts)[, 2]
)) +
labs(x = "Easting", y = "Northing")
plot(plotdets)
On this plot survey, only points within the rectangles are detected, but it is also informative to plot all the points here (which if it was a real plot survey you could not do, because you would not have seen them all).
plotwithall <- ggplot() +
gg(boundary) +
gg(sample$plots) +
gg(nests, pch = "+", cex = 4, color = "blue") +
geom_text(aes(
label = sample$counts$count,
x = sf::st_coordinates(sample$counts)[, 1],
y = sf::st_coordinates(sample$counts)[, 2]
)) +
gg(sample$nests, pch = "+", cex = 4, color = "red") +
labs(x = "Easting", y = "Northing")
plot(plotwithall)
Inference
The observed nest locations are in the sf
sample$nests
, and the plots are in the sf
sample$plots
. Again, we are using the following SPDE
setup:
matern <- inla.spde2.pcmatern(mesh,
prior.sigma = c(0.1, 0.01),
prior.range = c(0.05, 0.01)
)
Fit an LGCP model with SPDE only to these data by using the
samplers=
argument of the function
lgcp( )
:
cmp <- geometry ~ my.spde(geometry, model = matern)
fit <- lgcp(cmp,
sample$nests,
samplers = sample$plots,
domain = list(geometry = mesh)
)
Plot the density surface from your fitted model
pxl <- fm_pixels(mesh, mask = boundary)
lambda.sample <- predict(fit, pxl, ~ exp(my.spde + Intercept))
lambda.sample.plot <- ggplot() +
gg(lambda.sample, geom = "tile") +
gg(sample$plots, alpha = 0) +
gg(boundary, col = "yellow", alpha = 0)
lambda.sample.plot
Estimate the integrated intensity lambda. We compute both the overall integrated intensity, representative of an imagined new realisation of the point process, and the conditional expectation that takes the actually observed nests into account, by recognising that we have complete information in the surveyed plots.
Lambda <- predict(
fit,
fm_int(mesh, boundary),
~ sum(weight * exp(my.spde + Intercept))
)
Lambda.empirical <- predict(
fit,
rbind(
cbind(fm_int(mesh, boundary), data.frame(all = TRUE)),
cbind(fm_int(mesh, sample$plots), data.frame(all = FALSE))
),
~ (sum(weight * exp(my.spde + Intercept) * all) -
sum(weight * exp(my.spde + Intercept) * !all) +
nrow(sample$nests))
)
rbind(
Lambda,
Lambda.empirical
)
Fit the same model to the full dataset (the points in
gorillas_sf$nests
), or get your previous fit, if you kept
it. Plot the intensity surface and estimate the integrated intensity
fit.all <- lgcp(cmp, nests,
samplers = boundary,
domain = list(geometry = mesh)
)
lambda.all <- predict(fit.all, pxl, ~ exp(my.spde + Intercept))
Lambda.all <- predict(
fit.all,
fm_int(mesh, boundary),
~ sum(weight * exp(my.spde + Intercept))
)
Your plot should look like this:
The values Lambda.empirical
, Lambda
, and
Lambda.all
should be close to each other if the plot
samples gave sufficient information for the overall prediction:
rbind(
Plots = Lambda,
PlotsEmp = Lambda.empirical,
All = Lambda.all,
AllEmp = c(
nrow(gorillas_sf$nests),
0,
rep(nrow(gorillas_sf$nests), 3),
rep(NA, 3)
)
)
#> mean sd q0.025 q0.5 q0.975 median sd.mc_std_err
#> Plots 656.3640 59.42197 548.3281 654.8737 763.9415 654.8737 5.171820
#> PlotsEmp 642.6092 38.32410 578.9110 644.7476 719.6881 644.7476 2.323733
#> All 675.7708 25.65538 632.8818 676.1423 714.5690 676.1423 1.742837
#> AllEmp 647.0000 0.00000 647.0000 647.0000 647.0000 NA NA
#> mean.mc_std_err
#> Plots 6.976561
#> PlotsEmp 4.297156
#> All 2.914106
#> AllEmp NA
Now, let’s compare the results
library(patchwork)
lambda.sample.plot + lambda.all.plot +
plot_layout(guides = "collect") &
theme(legend.position = "left") &
scale_fill_continuous(limits = range(c(0, 340)))
Do you understand the reason for the differences in the posteriors of the abundance estimates?