estimation_variance.Rmd
Now suppose that the series \(s_1\) and \(s_2\) are measured with a certain level of uncertainty, due to
These imprecisions might be different for the two series (change in sampling protocol, improvement in sampling gear between two dates, etc.).
The uncertainty in measures results in a certain amount of uncertainty in the estimate of area between the two curves. This is provided by the function area_uncertainty()
.
Here, with errors in the measures of height (0.1 and 0.3) higher than in the measures of longitudinal coordinates (0.05 and 0.2), and errors more important for series \(s_2\) (0.3 and 0.2) than for \(s_2\) (0.1 and 0.05).
result_area <- area_between(s1,s2,
sigma_z=c(0.1,0.3),
sigma_l=c(0.05,0.2))
The plot_area()
function can provide a visual hint of the uncertainties in \(l\) and \(z\) measures with horizontal and vertical error bars:
plot_area(result_area, show_uncertainty=TRUE)
Here, for instance,
We can check the calculation of error through a simple simulation with 100 series \(s_{1tmp}\) and \(s_{2tmp}\) varying around \(s_1\) and \(s_2\) respectively, with variations corresponding to estimation errors \(\sigma_z\) and \(\sigma_l\):
set.seed(33)
sigma_z=c(0.1,0.3)
sigma_l=c(0.05,0.2)
f=function(i){
s1_tmp <- tibble(l=s1$l+rnorm(nrow(s1),0,sigma_l[1]),
z=s1$z+rnorm(nrow(s1),0,sigma_z[1]))
s2_tmp <- tibble(l=s2$l+rnorm(nrow(s2),0,sigma_l[2]),
z=s2$z+rnorm(nrow(s2),0,sigma_z[2]))
return(area_between(s1_tmp,s2_tmp)$area)
}
area_vals=purrr::map_dbl(1:100,f)
sd(area_vals)
#> [1] 14.62939
res=area_between(s1,s2,
sigma_z=sigma_z, sigma_l=sigma_l)
res$sigma_area
#> [1] 201.8332