Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T19:14:44.126Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Markov properties of cluster processes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2016

A. J. Baddeley*
Affiliation:
University of Western Australia and University of Leiden
M. N. M. Van Lieshout*
Affiliation:
University of Warwick
J. Møller*
Affiliation:
University of Aarhus
*
Postal address: Department of Mathematics, University of Western Australia, Nedlands WA 6009, Australia.
∗∗ Postal address: Department of Statistics, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, U.K.
∗∗∗ Postal address: Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Aalborg, F. Bajers Vej 7E, DK-9220 Aalborg Ø, Denmark.

Abstract

We show that a Poisson cluster point process is a nearest-neighbour Markov point process [2] if the clusters have uniformly bounded diameter. It is typically not a finite-range Markov point process in the sense of Ripley and Kelly [12]. Furthermore, when the parent Poisson process is replaced by a Markov or nearest-neighbour Markov point process, the resulting cluster process is also nearest-neighbour Markov, provided all clusters are non-empty. In particular, the nearest-neighbour Markov property is preserved when points of the process are independently randomly translated, but not when they are randomly thinned.

Type
Stochastic Geometry and Statistical Applications
Copyright
Copyright © Applied Probability Trust 1996 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1] Baddeley, A. J. and Van Lieshout, M. N. M. (1996) A nonparametric measure of spatial interaction in point patterns. Statist. Neerland. To appear.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2] Baddeley, A. J. and Møller, J. (1989) Nearest-neighbour Markov point processes and random sets. Int. Statist. Rev. 57, 89121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3] Carter, D. S. and Prenter, P. M. (1972) Exponential spaces and counting processes. Z. Wahrscheinlichkeitsth. 21, 119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4] Diggle, P. J., Fiksel, T., Ogata, Y., Stoyan, D. and Tanemura, M. (1994) On parameter estimation for pairwise interaction processes. Int. Statist. Rev. 62, 99117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5] Kendall, W. S. (1990) A spatial Markov property for nearest-neighbour Markov point processes. J. Appl. Prob. 28, 767778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6] Kingman, J. F. C. (1977) Remarks on the spatial distribution of a reproducing population. J. Appl. Prob. 14, 577583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7] Møller, J. (1994) Discussion contribution. Scand. J. Statist. 21, 346349.Google Scholar
[8] Møller, J. (1994) Markov chain Monte Carlo and spatial point processes. Research Report 293. Department of Theoretical Statistics, University of Aarhus. To appear in Proc. Seminaire Européen de Statistique Toulouse 1996 ‘Stochastic Geometry: Theory and Applications’. ed. Barndorff-Nielsen, O., Kendall, W. S., Letac, G. and van Lieshout, M. N. M. Chapman and Hall, London.Google Scholar
[9] Preston, C. J. (1976) Random Fields. Springer, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10] Ripley, B. D. (1988) Statistical Inference for Spatial Processes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11] Ripley, B. D. (1989). Gibbsian interaction models. In Spatial Statistics: Past, Present and Future. pp. 119. ed. Griffiths, D. A. Image, New York.Google Scholar
[12] Ripley, B. D. and Kelly, F. P. (1977) Markov point processes. J. London Math. Soc. 15, 188192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13] Ruelle, D. (1969) Statistical Mechanics. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar