Aligning Validation with Deployment in Spatial Prediction: Target-Weighted Cross-Validation
Abstract. Reliable estimation of predictive performance is essential for spatial environmental modeling, where machine-learning models are commonly used to generate spatially continuous maps from unevenly distributed observations. Standard cross-validation (CV) procedures implicitly assume that validation data are representative of prediction conditions across the target domain. In practice, this assumption is often violated due to preferential or clustered sampling designs, leading to biased estimates of predictive performance and associated uncertainty.
We introduce a deployment-oriented validation framework for spatial prediction based on weighted CV, which aims to align validation tasks with the distribution of prediction tasks across a specified target domain. The framework encompasses importance-weighted cross-validation (IWCV) as a general solution, and a calibration-based formulation, Target-Weighted Cross-Validation (TWCV), that leverages spatially meaningful task descriptors, including environmental covariates and prediction distance.
Through controlled simulation experiments, we show that conventional non-spatial and spatial CV strategies can exhibit substantial bias under realistic sampling designs, whereas the proposed weighted CV approaches with spatial task descriptors nearly eliminate or substantially reduce this bias when validation tasks adequately cover the deployment-task space. A case study on mapping nitrogen dioxide (NO2) concentrations across Germany demonstrates that standard CV approaches can overestimate prediction error due to sampling biases, while weighted CV yields estimates that are more consistent with deployment conditions.
The proposed framework separates validation task generation from risk estimation and can provide approximately unbiased estimators of deployment risk under appropriate coverage and weighting conditions. It provides a practical approach for improving the reliability of performance assessment in environmental mapping applications where sample distributions differ from prediction domains.
Dear authors,
Unfortunately, after checking your manuscript, it has come to our attention that it does not comply with our "Code and Data Policy".
https://www.geoscientific-model-development.net/policies/code_and_data_policy.html
The repository that you have shared in the Code and Data Availability statement of your manuscript does not seem to contain the original data used to perform the work presented. The policy of the journal states that all the code and data necessary to replicate a manuscript must be published openly and freely to anyone at the submission time in a repository that complies with the listed rules.
Therefore, you need to address this situation as soon as possible, as we can not accept under Discussions submissions that do not comply with the policy of the journal. You have to reply to this comment in a prompt manner with the information for a repository containing the original data that you use to produce and replicate your manuscript. The reply must include the link and permanent identifier (e.g. DOI). Also, any future version of your manuscript must include the modified section with the new information.
Note that if you do not fix the mentioned problem, we can not continue considering your manuscript for peer review or publication in the journal.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor