A method for implementing a statistically significant number of data classes in the Jenks algorithm

6th International Conference on Fuzzy Systems and Knowledge Discovery, FSKD 2009

Volumn 1, Issue , 2009, Pages 35-38

  North, Matthew A ^a  

^a WASHINGTON AND JEFFERSON COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA SETS; NUMBER OF DATUM; PSEUDO-CODE; STANDARD METHOD; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE;

ALGORITHMS; CLASSIFICATION (OF INFORMATION); FUZZY SYSTEMS; GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS;

STATISTICAL TESTS;

EID: 76349109695     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/FSKD.2009.319     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (8)

1. C.A. Brewer and L. Pickle (2002). Evaluation of Methods for Classifying Epidemiological Data on Choropleth Maps in Series. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 92(4), pp. 662-681.
2. G.F. Jenks (1977). Optimal data classification for choropleth maps. Occasional paper No. 2. Lawrence, Kansas: University of Kansas, Department of Geography.
3. M. Fariweather and K.G. Fairweather (1984). Choropleth Mapping: The Problems of Classification and Data Presentation. Resources in Education, 1984, pp. 13-27.
4. P. Hurvitz (2004). Classifying Map Displays. Spatial Technology, GIS, and Remote Sensing. Seattle, Washington: University of Washington, College of Natural Resources.
5. R.G. Mcgarvey, E.A. Lehtihet, E.D. Castillo and T. M. Cavalier (2001). On the Frequency and Location of Set Point Adjustments in Sequential Tolerance Control. International Journal of Production Research, 39(12), pp. 2659-2674.
6. R.M. Smith (1986). Comparing Traditional Methods for Selecting Class Intervals on Chloropleth Maps. Professional Geographer, 38(1), pp. 62-67.
7. W.D. Fisher (1958) On Grouping for Maximum Homogeneity. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 53, pp. 789-798.
8. Y. Martin and M. Church (2004). Numerical Modeling of Landscape Evolution: Geomorphological perspectives. Progress in Physical Geography, 28(3), pp. 317-339.