  Due to the well-known computational showstopper of the exact Maximum
Likelihood Estimation (MLE) for large geospatial observations, a variety of
approximation methods have been proposed in the literature, which usually
require tuning certain inputs. For example, the recently developed Tile
Low-Rank approximation (TLR) method involves many tuning parameters, including
numerical accuracy. To properly choose the tuning parameters, it is crucial to
adopt a meaningful criterion for the assessment of the prediction efficiency
with different inputs, which the most commonly-used Mean Square Prediction
Error (MSPE) criterion and the Kullback-Leibler Divergence criterion cannot
fully describe. In this paper, we present three other criteria, the Mean Loss
of Efficiency (MLOE), Mean Misspecification of the Mean Square Error (MMOM),
and Root mean square MOM (RMOM), and show numerically that, in comparison with
the common MSPE criterion and the Kullback-Leibler Divergence criterion, our
criteria are more informative, and thus more adequate to assess the loss of the
prediction efficiency by using the approximated or misspecified covariance
models. Hence, our suggested criteria are more useful for the determination of
tuning parameters for sophisticated approximation methods of spatial model
fitting. To illustrate this, we investigate the trade-off between the execution
time, estimation accuracy, and prediction efficiency for the TLR method with
extensive simulation studies and suggest proper settings of the TLR tuning
parameters. We then apply the TLR method to a large spatial dataset of soil
moisture in the area of the Mississippi River basin, and compare the TLR with
the Gaussian predictive process and the composite likelihood method, showing
that our suggested criteria can successfully be used to choose the tuning
parameters that can keep the estimation or the prediction accuracy in
applications.
