the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Comparing detrital age spectra, and other geological distributions, using the Wasserstein distance
Abstract. Distributional data such as detrital age populations or grain size distributions are common in the geological sciences. As analytical techniques become more sophisticated, increasingly large amounts of distributional data are being gathered. These advances require quantitative and objective methods, such as multidimensional scaling (MDS), to analyse large numbers of samples. Crucial to such methods is choosing a sensible measure of dissimilarity between samples. At present, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) statistic is the most widely used of these dissimilarity measures. However, the KS statistic has some limitations. It is very sensitive to differences between the modes of two distributions, and relatively insensitive to differences between their tails. Here we introduce the Wasserstein-2 distance (W2) as an alternative to address this issue. Whereas the KS-distance is defined as the maximum vertical distance between two empirical cumulative distribution functions, the W2-distance is a function of the horizontal distances (i.e., age differences) between individual observations. Using a combination of synthetic examples and a published zircon U-Pb dataset, we show that the W2 distance produces similar MDS results to the KS-distance in most cases, but significantly different results in some cases. Where the results differ, the W2 results are geologically more sensible. For the case study, we find that the MDS map that is produced using W2 can be readily interpreted in terms of the shape and average age of the age spectra. The W2-distance has been added to the R package IsoplotR, for immediate use in detrital geochronology and other applications. The W2 distance can be generalised to multiple dimensions, which opens opportunities beyond distributional data.
-
Notice on discussion status
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
-
Preprint
(0 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-1200', Anonymous Referee #1, 22 Nov 2022
I have left my comments in the attached PDF document because it has R code output.
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC1', Alex Lipp, 30 Jan 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-1200/egusphere-2022-1200-AC3-supplement.pdf
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC1', Alex Lipp, 30 Jan 2023
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-1200', Anonymous Referee #2, 05 Dec 2022
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC2 - Data Access', Alex Lipp, 13 Dec 2022
We thank the reviewer for their helpful feedback. We wonder whether the reviewer would be able to provide access to the (anonymised) data they used in their natural examples. This data would help us best respond to the comments they raise and to improve both the method and manuscript.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-1200-AC1 -
RC3: 'Reply on AC1', Anonymous Referee #2, 13 Dec 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-1200/egusphere-2022-1200-RC3-supplement.zip
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC3', Alex Lipp, 12 Jan 2023
Thank you for providing us with the synthetic data used in the first and final Figures in the manuscript. Would it also be possible to provide us with the (anonymised) samples used to generate Figures 2 - 6. Access to the underlying data will help us better respond to the questions raised by the reviewer.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-1200-AC2
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC3', Alex Lipp, 12 Jan 2023
-
RC3: 'Reply on AC1', Anonymous Referee #2, 13 Dec 2022
-
AC4: 'Reply on RC2', Alex Lipp, 30 Jan 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-1200/egusphere-2022-1200-AC4-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC2 - Data Access', Alex Lipp, 13 Dec 2022
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-1200', Anonymous Referee #1, 22 Nov 2022
I have left my comments in the attached PDF document because it has R code output.
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC1', Alex Lipp, 30 Jan 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-1200/egusphere-2022-1200-AC3-supplement.pdf
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC1', Alex Lipp, 30 Jan 2023
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-1200', Anonymous Referee #2, 05 Dec 2022
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC2 - Data Access', Alex Lipp, 13 Dec 2022
We thank the reviewer for their helpful feedback. We wonder whether the reviewer would be able to provide access to the (anonymised) data they used in their natural examples. This data would help us best respond to the comments they raise and to improve both the method and manuscript.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-1200-AC1 -
RC3: 'Reply on AC1', Anonymous Referee #2, 13 Dec 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-1200/egusphere-2022-1200-RC3-supplement.zip
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC3', Alex Lipp, 12 Jan 2023
Thank you for providing us with the synthetic data used in the first and final Figures in the manuscript. Would it also be possible to provide us with the (anonymised) samples used to generate Figures 2 - 6. Access to the underlying data will help us better respond to the questions raised by the reviewer.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-1200-AC2
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC3', Alex Lipp, 12 Jan 2023
-
RC3: 'Reply on AC1', Anonymous Referee #2, 13 Dec 2022
-
AC4: 'Reply on RC2', Alex Lipp, 30 Jan 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-1200/egusphere-2022-1200-AC4-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC2 - Data Access', Alex Lipp, 13 Dec 2022
Peer review completion
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Viewed
Since the preprint corresponding to this journal article was posted outside of Copernicus Publications, the preprint-related metrics are limited to HTML views.
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
287 | 0 | 0 | 287 | 0 | 0 |
- HTML: 287
- PDF: 0
- XML: 0
- Total: 287
- BibTeX: 0
- EndNote: 0
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Since the preprint corresponding to this journal article was posted outside of Copernicus Publications, the preprint-related metrics are limited to HTML views.
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1
Cited
1 citations as recorded by crossref.
Pieter Vermeesch
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.