  Planned wide-field weak lensing surveys are expected to reduce the
statistical errors on the shear field to unprecedented levels. In contrast,
systematic errors like those induced by the convolution with the point spread
function (PSF) will not benefit from that scaling effect and will require very
accurate modeling and correction. While numerous methods have been devised to
carry out the PSF correction itself, modeling of the PSF shape and its spatial
variations across the instrument field of view has, so far, attracted much less
attention. This step is nevertheless crucial because the PSF is only known at
star positions while the correction has to be performed at any position on the
sky. A reliable interpolation scheme is therefore mandatory and a popular
approach has been to use low-order bivariate polynomials. In the present paper,
we evaluate four other classical spatial interpolation methods based on splines
(B-splines), inverse distance weighting (IDW), radial basis functions (RBF) and
ordinary Kriging (OK). These methods are tested on the Star-challenge part of
the GRavitational lEnsing Accuracy Testing 2010 (GREAT10) simulated data and
are compared with the classical polynomial fitting (Polyfit). We also test all
our interpolation methods independently of the way the PSF is modeled, by
interpolating the GREAT10 star fields themselves (i.e., the PSF parameters are
known exactly at star positions). We find in that case RBF to be the clear
winner, closely followed by the other local methods, IDW and OK. The global
methods, Polyfit and B-splines, are largely behind, especially in fields with
(ground-based) turbulent PSFs. In fields with non-turbulent PSFs, all
interpolators reach a variance on PSF systematics $\sigma_{sys}^2$ better than
the $1\times10^{-7}$ upper bound expected by future space-based surveys, with
the local interpolators performing better than the global ones.
