Python的距离反距离加权(IDW)插值 [英] Inverse Distance Weighted (IDW) Interpolation with Python
问题描述
问题: 对于点位置，用Python计算逆距离加权(IDW)插值的最佳方法是什么?
The Question: What is the best way to calculate inverse distance weighted (IDW) interpolation in Python, for point locations?
某些背景: 目前，我正在使用RPy2与R及其gstat模块进行接口.不幸的是，gstat模块与arcgisscripting冲突，我通过在一个单独的过程中运行基于RPy2的分析来解决这个问题.即使此问题在最新版本或将来的版本中已得到解决，并且可以提高效率，我仍然希望消除对安装R的依赖.
Some Background: Currently I'm using RPy2 to interface with R and its gstat module. Unfortunately, the gstat module conflicts with arcgisscripting which I got around by running RPy2 based analysis in a separate process. Even if this issue is resolved in a recent/future release, and efficiency can be improved, I'd still like to remove my dependency on installing R.
gstat网站确实提供了一个独立的可执行文件，该文件更容易与我的python脚本一起打包，但是我仍然希望有一个Python解决方案，该解决方案不需要多次写入磁盘并启动外部进程.在我正在执行的处理中，分别由一组点和值组成的插值函数的调用次数可能接近20,000.
The gstat website does provide a stand alone executable, which is easier to package with my python script, but I still hope for a Python solution which doesn't require multiple writes to disk and launching external processes. The number of calls to the interpolation function, of separate sets of points and values, can approach 20,000 in the processing I'm performing.
我特别需要对点进行插值，因此就性能而言，使用ArcGIS中的IDW函数生成栅格声音甚至比使用R更差.需要.即使进行了此修改，我也不希望性能如此出色.我将研究此选项作为另一种选择.更新:这里的问题是您与所使用的像元大小有关.如果减小像元大小以获得更好的精度，则处理将花费很长时间.如果需要特定点的值，还需要通过按点提取.....所有丑陋的方法来进行跟进.
I specifically need to interpolate for points, so using the IDW function in ArcGIS to generate rasters sounds even worse than using R, in terms of performance.....unless there is a way to efficiently mask out only the points I need. Even with this modification, I wouldn't expect performance to be all that great. I will look into this option as another alternative. UPDATE: The problem here is you are tied to the cell size you are using. If you reduce the cell-size to get better accuracy, processing takes a long time. You also need to follow up by extracting by points.....over all an ugly method if you want values for specific points.
我看过 scipy文档，但是看起来不像有一种直接计算IDW的方法.
I have looked at the scipy documentation, but it doesn't look like there is a straight forward way to calculate IDW.
我正在考虑滚动自己的实现，可能会使用某些scipy功能来定位最接近的点并计算距离.
I'm thinking of rolling my own implementation, possibly using some of the scipy functionality to locate the closest points and calculate distances.
我缺少明显的东西吗?有没有我没有看到过的python模块，正是我想要的吗?借助scipy创建自己的实现是明智的选择吗?
Am I missing something obvious? Is there a python module I haven't seen that does exactly what I want? Is creating my own implementation with the aid of scipy a wise choice?
推荐答案
已更改10月20日:此类Invdisttree结合了反距离权重和
scipy.spatial.KDTree .
忘记原始的蛮力答案；
这是分散数据插值的首选方法.
changed 20 Oct: this class Invdisttree combines inverse-distance weighting and
scipy.spatial.KDTree.
Forget the original brute-force answer;
this is imho the method of choice for scattered-data interpolation.
""" invdisttree.py: inverse-distance-weighted interpolation using KDTree
fast, solid, local
"""
from __future__ import division
import numpy as np
from scipy.spatial import cKDTree as KDTree
# http://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/spatial.html
__date__ = "2010-11-09 Nov" # weights, doc
#...............................................................................
class Invdisttree:
""" inverse-distance-weighted interpolation using KDTree:
invdisttree = Invdisttree( X, z ) -- data points, values
interpol = invdisttree( q, nnear=3, eps=0, p=1, weights=None, stat=0 )
interpolates z from the 3 points nearest each query point q;
For example, interpol[ a query point q ]
finds the 3 data points nearest q, at distances d1 d2 d3
and returns the IDW average of the values z1 z2 z3
(z1/d1 + z2/d2 + z3/d3)
/ (1/d1 + 1/d2 + 1/d3)
= .55 z1 + .27 z2 + .18 z3 for distances 1 2 3
q may be one point, or a batch of points.
eps: approximate nearest, dist <= (1 + eps) * true nearest
p: use 1 / distance**p
weights: optional multipliers for 1 / distance**p, of the same shape as q
stat: accumulate wsum, wn for average weights
How many nearest neighbors should one take ?
a) start with 8 11 14 .. 28 in 2d 3d 4d .. 10d; see Wendel's formula
b) make 3 runs with nnear= e.g. 6 8 10, and look at the results --
|interpol 6 - interpol 8| etc., or |f - interpol*| if you have f(q).
I find that runtimes don't increase much at all with nnear -- ymmv.
p=1, p=2 ?
p=2 weights nearer points more, farther points less.
In 2d, the circles around query points have areas ~ distance**2,
so p=2 is inverse-area weighting. For example,
(z1/area1 + z2/area2 + z3/area3)
/ (1/area1 + 1/area2 + 1/area3)
= .74 z1 + .18 z2 + .08 z3 for distances 1 2 3
Similarly, in 3d, p=3 is inverse-volume weighting.
Scaling:
if different X coordinates measure different things, Euclidean distance
can be way off. For example, if X0 is in the range 0 to 1
but X1 0 to 1000, the X1 distances will swamp X0;
rescale the data, i.e. make X0.std() ~= X1.std() .
A nice property of IDW is that it's scale-free around query points:
if I have values z1 z2 z3 from 3 points at distances d1 d2 d3,
the IDW average
(z1/d1 + z2/d2 + z3/d3)
/ (1/d1 + 1/d2 + 1/d3)
is the same for distances 1 2 3, or 10 20 30 -- only the ratios matter.
In contrast, the commonly-used Gaussian kernel exp( - (distance/h)**2 )
is exceedingly sensitive to distance and to h.
"""
# anykernel( dj / av dj ) is also scale-free
# error analysis, |f(x) - idw(x)| ? todo: regular grid, nnear ndim+1, 2*ndim
def __init__( self, X, z, leafsize=10, stat=0 ):
assert len(X) == len(z), "len(X) %d != len(z) %d" % (len(X), len(z))
self.tree = KDTree( X, leafsize=leafsize ) # build the tree
self.z = z
self.stat = stat
self.wn = 0
self.wsum = None;
def __call__( self, q, nnear=6, eps=0, p=1, weights=None ):
# nnear nearest neighbours of each query point --
q = np.asarray(q)
qdim = q.ndim
if qdim == 1:
q = np.array([q])
if self.wsum is None:
self.wsum = np.zeros(nnear)
self.distances, self.ix = self.tree.query( q, k=nnear, eps=eps )
interpol = np.zeros( (len(self.distances),) + np.shape(self.z[0]) )
jinterpol = 0
for dist, ix in zip( self.distances, self.ix ):
if nnear == 1:
wz = self.z[ix]
elif dist[0] < 1e-10:
wz = self.z[ix[0]]
else: # weight z s by 1/dist --
w = 1 / dist**p
if weights is not None:
w *= weights[ix] # >= 0
w /= np.sum(w)
wz = np.dot( w, self.z[ix] )
if self.stat:
self.wn += 1
self.wsum += w
interpol[jinterpol] = wz
jinterpol += 1
return interpol if qdim > 1 else interpol[0]
#...............................................................................
if __name__ == "__main__":
import sys
N = 10000
Ndim = 2
Nask = N # N Nask 1e5: 24 sec 2d, 27 sec 3d on mac g4 ppc
Nnear = 8 # 8 2d, 11 3d => 5 % chance one-sided -- Wendel, mathoverflow.com
leafsize = 10
eps = .1 # approximate nearest, dist <= (1 + eps) * true nearest
p = 1 # weights ~ 1 / distance**p
cycle = .25
seed = 1
exec "\n".join( sys.argv[1:] ) # python this.py N= ...
np.random.seed(seed )
np.set_printoptions( 3, threshold=100, suppress=True ) # .3f
print "\nInvdisttree: N %d Ndim %d Nask %d Nnear %d leafsize %d eps %.2g p %.2g" % (
N, Ndim, Nask, Nnear, leafsize, eps, p)
def terrain(x):
""" ~ rolling hills """
return np.sin( (2*np.pi / cycle) * np.mean( x, axis=-1 ))
known = np.random.uniform( size=(N,Ndim) ) ** .5 # 1/(p+1): density x^p
z = terrain( known )
ask = np.random.uniform( size=(Nask,Ndim) )
#...............................................................................
invdisttree = Invdisttree( known, z, leafsize=leafsize, stat=1 )
interpol = invdisttree( ask, nnear=Nnear, eps=eps, p=p )
print "average distances to nearest points: %s" % \
np.mean( invdisttree.distances, axis=0 )
print "average weights: %s" % (invdisttree.wsum / invdisttree.wn)
# see Wikipedia Zipf's law
err = np.abs( terrain(ask) - interpol )
print "average |terrain() - interpolated|: %.2g" % np.mean(err)
# print "interpolate a single point: %.2g" % \
# invdisttree( known[0], nnear=Nnear, eps=eps )
这篇关于Python的距离反距离加权(IDW)插值的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
