<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Kriging on Pi Stack</title>
    <link>https://www.pistack.xyz/tags/kriging/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Kriging on Pi Stack</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://www.pistack.xyz/tags/kriging/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Python Kriging in 2026: GSTools vs PyKrige vs SciKit-GStat Compared</title>
      <link>https://www.pistack.xyz/posts/2026-10-12-python-kriging-libraries-gstools-pykrige-scikit-gstat/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.pistack.xyz/posts/2026-10-12-python-kriging-libraries-gstools-pykrige-scikit-gstat/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;You have 380 soil-moisture readings scattered across a 40-hectare field, and your boss wants a continuous surface, not dots. Inverse-distance weighting is the obvious first try — and it will quietly invent gradients that do not exist, because it has no concept of spatial correlation. Kriging does: it derives the weights from the data&amp;rsquo;s own variogram, returns a variance estimate alongside every prediction, and is the only interpolator in this class that is a best linear unbiased predictor.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
