• PNAS Physics Portal
  • Science Sessions: The PNAS Podcast Program

Combining disparate data sources for improved poverty prediction and mapping

  1. Damien Christophe Jacquesb1
  1. aComputer Science and Engineering, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY 14221;
  2. bEarth and Life Institute–Environment, Université Catholique de Louvain, 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
  1. Edited by Anthony J. Bebbington, Clark University, Worcester, MA, and approved September 26, 2017 (received for review January 9, 2017)

  1. Fig. 2.

    Quantiles of predicted (Left) and actual (Right) MPI at the commune level. The urban centers are depicted by small circles on the map. The communes in the Dakar and Thiès regions are shown enlarged.

  2. Fig. S6.

    Residual vs. fit plots to predict incidence of poverty (H) using CDR (Top) and environmental (Bottom) data. (Left) Linear (elastic net regression). (Right) Nonlinear (GPR). Linear model fits indicate nonlinearity in the data. The residuals for GPR are normally distributed. Shapiro–Wilk test statistic: CDR, 0.97 (P value <mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mo><</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn>10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>?</mml:mo><mml:mn>9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math><10?9); environmental, 0.95 (P-value <mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mo><</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn>10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>?</mml:mo><mml:mn>9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math><10?9).

  3. Fig. 3.

    Predictive power of the Gaussian process model. Left denotes the comparison of actual and predicted MPI values for all communes and urban areas of Senegal. The rural and urban areas are differentiated using blue and red colors, respectively. The size of the circle denotes the variance of the MPI prediction for that commune. Top Right shows how the actual and predicted values compare for asset ownership, while Bottom Right shows the comparison for years of schooling.

  4. Fig. S5.

    Relationship between precision of estimates of poverty and the population density of each commune.

  5. Fig. S1.

    Spearman correlation matrix between individual deprivations, H (headcount of poverty), A (intensity of poverty), and MPI at the commune level.

  6. Fig. S2.

    Visualization of selected features using elastic net regularization on environmental data for prediction of selected deprivations. The rows represent the features, which are ranked according to their weights from positive (marked green) to negative (marked red). Different features groups are color-coded. Features related to food availability are given in black color, whereas those related to food accessibility are colored green. The land cover features are colored yellow, and the features detailing economic activity are in red color. Finally, features depicting access to services are shown in blue. The cells in white were given 0 weights by our model.

  7. Fig. S3.

    Visualization of selected features using elastic net regularization on CDR data for prediction of selected deprivations. The rows represent features, which are ranked according to their weights from positive (marked green) to negative (marked red). The columns are the various deprivations. The feature groups are color-coded. Features related to diversity features are colored blue. Those related to spatial aspects are colored yellow. The features related to active behavior are marked in black. The features related to basic phone use are in red, and those related to regularity are in green. The cells in white were given 0 weights by our model. Legend in parentheses corresponds to the different variation in weights. H and A weights vary between 1.85 and <mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mo>?</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.85</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math>?1.85, and for others the weights vary between 5.5 and <mml:math><mml:mrow><mml:mo>?</mml:mo><mml:mn>5.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math>?5.5.

  8. Fig. 4.

    The uncertainty associated with each dataset evidenced by the most accurate one (denoted as CDR and ENV) for the average intensity of poverty (A) (Left) and prediction of the headcountof poverty (H) (Right).

  9. Fig. S4.

    The highest deprivation by commune as predicted by our model for each dimension of global MPI (from top to bottom: education, health, and standard of living).

Online Impact

                                    1. 99132880 2018-01-23
                                    2. 802899879 2018-01-23
                                    3. 295573878 2018-01-23
                                    4. 352668877 2018-01-23
                                    5. 984633876 2018-01-23
                                    6. 545928875 2018-01-23
                                    7. 976569874 2018-01-23
                                    8. 871324873 2018-01-23
                                    9. 263462872 2018-01-23
                                    10. 577161871 2018-01-23
                                    11. 255603870 2018-01-23
                                    12. 117346869 2018-01-23
                                    13. 90982868 2018-01-23
                                    14. 663415867 2018-01-23
                                    15. 793874866 2018-01-23
                                    16. 843582865 2018-01-23
                                    17. 864971864 2018-01-22
                                    18. 258841863 2018-01-22
                                    19. 957295862 2018-01-22
                                    20. 553518861 2018-01-22