Kriging and Gaussian Process Regression are statistical methods that allow predicting the outcome of a random process or a random field by using a sample of correlated observations. In other words, the random process or random field is partially observed, and by using a sample a prediction is made, pointwise or as a whole, where the latter can be thought as a reconstruction. In addition, the techniques permit to give a measure of uncertainty of the prediction. The methods have different origins. Kriging comes from geostatistics, a field which started to develop around 1950 oriented to mining valuation problems, whereas Gaussian Process Regression has gained popularity in the area of machine learning in the last decade of the previous century. In the literature, the methods are usually presented as being the same technique. However, beyond this affirmation, the techniques have yet not been compared on a thorough mathematical basis and neither explained why and under which conditions this affirmation holds. Furthermore, Kriging has many variants and this affirmation should be precised. In this paper, this gap is filled. It is shown, step by step how both methods are deduced from the first principles -- with a major focus on Kriging, the mathematical connection between them, and which Kriging variant corresponds to which Gaussian Process Regression set up. The three most widely used versions of Kriging are considered: Simple Kriging, Ordinary Kriging and Universal Kriging. It is found, that despite their closeness, the techniques are different in their approach and assumptions, in a similar way the Least Square method, the Best Linear Unbiased Estimator method and the Likelihood method in regression do. I hope this work deepen the understanding of the relation between Kriging and Gaussian Process Regression, and serves as a cohesive introductory resource for researchers.
翻译:克里金法和高斯过程回归是两种统计方法,它们允许通过使用一组相关观测样本来预测随机过程或随机场的结果。换言之,当随机过程或随机场被部分观测时,可以利用样本进行逐点或整体的预测,后者可视为一种重建。此外,这些技术还能提供预测不确定性的度量。这两种方法起源不同:克里金法源于地质统计学,该领域始于20世纪50年代左右,主要面向矿业估值问题;而高斯过程回归则在上世纪最后十年在机器学习领域逐渐流行。在文献中,这两种方法常被表述为同一技术。然而,除了这一论断之外,这些方法尚未在严谨的数学基础上进行比较,也未阐明为何以及在何种条件下该论断成立。此外,克里金法存在多种变体,这一论断需要进一步明确。本文填补了这一空白。文章逐步展示了两种方法如何从基本原理推导而来——重点聚焦于克里金法,阐明它们之间的数学联系,并指出哪种克里金变体对应于何种高斯过程回归设置。本文考虑了三种最常用的克里金版本:简单克里金法、普通克里金法和通用克里金法。研究发现,尽管两者非常接近,但这些方法在思路和假设上存在差异,类似于回归中的最小二乘法、最佳线性无偏估计法和似然法之间的关系。我希望这项工作能深化对克里金法与高斯过程回归之间关系的理解,并为研究人员提供一个连贯的入门参考资料。