Search

The development of "route maps" for spatial analytical methods is a pursuit with important ramifications. Comber et al. propose a route map to guide applications of geographically weighted regression consisting of a three‐step primary pathway and a series of secondary arterials. This comment first highlights some concerns about the underlying "map" (i.e., experimental setup and assumptions) and then with the proposed "route" (i.e., core decisions and evaluation criteria). It closes by suggesting a more general focus on identifying modeling issues with the highest impact and facilitating consensus‐building, which could improve the future production of route maps for navigating the methodological landscape in spatial analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PySAL is a library for geocomputation and spatial data science. Written in Python, the library has a long history of supporting novel scholarship and broadening methodological impacts far afield of academic work. Recently, many new techniques, methods of analyses, and development modes have been implemented, making the library much larger and more encompassing than that previously discussed in the literature. As such, we provide an introduction to the library as it stands now, as well as the scientific and conceptual underpinnings of its core set of components. Finally, we provide a prospective look at the library's future evolution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Spatial interaction and spatial structure are foundational geographical abstractions, though there is often variation in how they are conceptualized and deployed in quantitative models. In particular, the last five decades have produced an exceptional diversity regarding the role of spatial structure within spatial interaction models. This is explored by outlining the initiation and development of the notion of spatial structure within spatial interaction modeling and critically reviewing four methodological approaches that emerged from ongoing debate about the topic. The outcome is a comprehensive coverage of the past and a sketch of one potential path forward for advancing this long-standing inquiry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Geographically weighted regression (GWR) is a technique that explores spatial nonstationarity in data‐generating processes by allowing regression coefficients to vary spatially. It is a widely applied technique across domains because it is intuitive and conforms to the well‐understood framework of regression. An alternative method to GWR that has been suggested is spatial filtering, which it has been argued provides a superior alternative to GWR by producing spatially varying regression coefficients that are not correlated with each other and which display less spatial autocorrelation. It is, therefore, worthwhile to examine these claims by comparing the output from both methods. We do this by using simulated data that represent two sets of spatially varying processes and examining how well both techniques replicate the known local parameter values. The article finds no support that spatial filtering produces local parameter estimates with superior properties. The results indicate that the original spatial filtering specification is prone to overfitting and is generally inferior to GWR, while an alternative specification that minimizes the mean square error (MSE) of coefficient estimates produces results that are similar to GWR. However, since we generally do not know the true coefficients, the MSE minimizing specification is impractical for applied research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]