Abstract

The estimation of the sampling variance of point estimators under two-dimensional systematic sampling designs remains a challenge, and several alternative variance estimators have been proposed in the past few decades. In this work, we compared six alternative variance estimators under Horvitz-Thompson (HT) and post-stratification (PS) point estimation regimes. We subsampled a multitude of species-specific forest attributes from a large, spatially balanced national forest inventory to compare the variance estimators. A variance estimator that assumes a simple random sampling design exhibited positive relative bias under both HT and PS point estimation regimes ranging between 1.23 to 1.88 and 1.11 to 1.78 for HT and PS, respectively. Alternative estimators reduced this positive bias with relative biases ranging between 1.01 to 1.66 and 0.90 to 1.64 for HT and PS, respectively. The alternative estimators generally obtained improved efficiencies under both HT and PS, with relative efficiency values ranging between 0.68 to 1.28 and 0.68 to 1.39, respectively. We identified two estimators as promising alternatives that provide clear improvements over the simple random sampling estimator for a wide variety of attributes and under HT and PS estimation regimes.

Highlights

  • Environmental sample surveys utilize systematic or quasi-systematic sampling designs to estimate parameters of interest

  • Our results indicated that VSO, VDC,1, and VMAT,par demonstrated reliable reductions with respect to these measures under both HT and PS point estimation regimes and are leading candidates for robust alternative variance estimators

  • On the other hand, subsampling of field plots does not remove potential large-scale trends in the attributes, which alone can affect the performance of variance estimators [6,22]. This begs the question; how will the variance estimators behave in actual applications? We demonstrate that several alternative variance estimators exhibit improvements of the standard estimator for a wide array of attributes and domains in this spatially discontinuous population

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Environmental sample surveys utilize systematic or quasi-systematic sampling designs to estimate parameters of interest. The FIA program implements a complex survey that provides estimates of multiple forest attributes across a wide range of spatial scales. These estimates are used in a variety of applications, including forest health monitoring, reporting on the current status and change of forested environments, and landscape-level forest management planning. The FIA program implements a spatially balanced, quasi-systematic sampling design [1]. While these sampling designs have been shown to provide more precise estimates than simple random sampling designs in many contexts, estimating the precision of these estimators remains a challenge. Confidence intervals produced using these estimators will have coverage probabilities that likely exceed the nominal rate

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call