模拟1988年北美垂直基准面在邻近美国的误差

IF 0.9 Q4 REMOTE SENSING Journal of Geodetic Science Pub Date : 2018-01-01 DOI:10.1515/jogs-2018-0001
X. Li
{"title":"模拟1988年北美垂直基准面在邻近美国的误差","authors":"X. Li","doi":"10.1515/jogs-2018-0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract A large systematic difference (ranging from −20 cm to +130 cm) was found between NAVD 88 (North AmericanVertical Datum of 1988) and the pure gravimetric geoid models. This difference not only makes it very difficult to augment the local geoid model by directly using the vast NAVD 88 network with state-of-the-art technologies recently developed in geodesy, but also limits the ability of researchers to effectively demonstrate the geoid model improvements on the NAVD 88 network. Here, both conventional regression analyses based on various predefined basis functions such as polynomials, B-splines, and Legendre functions and the Latent Variable Analysis (LVA) such as the Factor Analysis (FA) are used to analyze the systematic difference. Besides giving a mathematical model, the regression results do not reveal a great deal about the physical reasons that caused the large differences in NAVD 88, which may be of interest to various researchers. Furthermore, there is still a significant amount of no-Gaussian signals left in the residuals of the conventional regression models. On the other side, the FA method not only provides a better not of the data, but also offers possible explanations of the error sources. Without requiring extra hypothesis tests on the model coefficients, the results from FA are more efficient in terms of capturing the systematic difference. Furthermore, without using a covariance model, a novel interpolating method based on the relationship between the loading matrix and the factor scores is developed for predictive purposes. The prediction error analysis shows that about 3-7 cm precision is expected in NAVD 88 after removing the systematic difference.","PeriodicalId":44569,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Geodetic Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Modeling the North American vertical datum of 1988 errors in the conterminous United States\",\"authors\":\"X. Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/jogs-2018-0001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract A large systematic difference (ranging from −20 cm to +130 cm) was found between NAVD 88 (North AmericanVertical Datum of 1988) and the pure gravimetric geoid models. This difference not only makes it very difficult to augment the local geoid model by directly using the vast NAVD 88 network with state-of-the-art technologies recently developed in geodesy, but also limits the ability of researchers to effectively demonstrate the geoid model improvements on the NAVD 88 network. Here, both conventional regression analyses based on various predefined basis functions such as polynomials, B-splines, and Legendre functions and the Latent Variable Analysis (LVA) such as the Factor Analysis (FA) are used to analyze the systematic difference. Besides giving a mathematical model, the regression results do not reveal a great deal about the physical reasons that caused the large differences in NAVD 88, which may be of interest to various researchers. Furthermore, there is still a significant amount of no-Gaussian signals left in the residuals of the conventional regression models. On the other side, the FA method not only provides a better not of the data, but also offers possible explanations of the error sources. Without requiring extra hypothesis tests on the model coefficients, the results from FA are more efficient in terms of capturing the systematic difference. Furthermore, without using a covariance model, a novel interpolating method based on the relationship between the loading matrix and the factor scores is developed for predictive purposes. The prediction error analysis shows that about 3-7 cm precision is expected in NAVD 88 after removing the systematic difference.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44569,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Geodetic Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Geodetic Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/jogs-2018-0001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"REMOTE SENSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Geodetic Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jogs-2018-0001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REMOTE SENSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

NAVD 88 (North AmericanVertical Datum of 1988)与纯重力大地水准面模型存在较大的系统差异(- 20 ~ +130 cm)。这种差异不仅使得直接使用庞大的NAVD 88网络与最新的大地测量学技术来增强局部大地水准面模型非常困难,而且也限制了研究人员在NAVD 88网络上有效展示大地水准面模型改进的能力。在这里,基于各种预定义基函数(如多项式、b样条和勒让德函数)的传统回归分析和潜在变量分析(LVA)(如因子分析(FA))都被用于分析系统差异。除了给出一个数学模型外,回归结果并没有揭示导致NAVD 88差异巨大的物理原因,这可能会引起各种研究人员的兴趣。此外,在传统回归模型的残差中仍然存在大量的非高斯信号。另一方面,FA方法不仅提供了更好的数据,而且还提供了对误差来源的可能解释。在不需要对模型系数进行额外的假设检验的情况下,FA的结果在捕获系统差异方面更有效。此外,在不使用协方差模型的情况下,提出了一种基于负荷矩阵与因子得分之间关系的预测插值方法。预测误差分析表明,去除系统差异后,NAVD 88的预测精度约为3 ~ 7cm。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Modeling the North American vertical datum of 1988 errors in the conterminous United States
Abstract A large systematic difference (ranging from −20 cm to +130 cm) was found between NAVD 88 (North AmericanVertical Datum of 1988) and the pure gravimetric geoid models. This difference not only makes it very difficult to augment the local geoid model by directly using the vast NAVD 88 network with state-of-the-art technologies recently developed in geodesy, but also limits the ability of researchers to effectively demonstrate the geoid model improvements on the NAVD 88 network. Here, both conventional regression analyses based on various predefined basis functions such as polynomials, B-splines, and Legendre functions and the Latent Variable Analysis (LVA) such as the Factor Analysis (FA) are used to analyze the systematic difference. Besides giving a mathematical model, the regression results do not reveal a great deal about the physical reasons that caused the large differences in NAVD 88, which may be of interest to various researchers. Furthermore, there is still a significant amount of no-Gaussian signals left in the residuals of the conventional regression models. On the other side, the FA method not only provides a better not of the data, but also offers possible explanations of the error sources. Without requiring extra hypothesis tests on the model coefficients, the results from FA are more efficient in terms of capturing the systematic difference. Furthermore, without using a covariance model, a novel interpolating method based on the relationship between the loading matrix and the factor scores is developed for predictive purposes. The prediction error analysis shows that about 3-7 cm precision is expected in NAVD 88 after removing the systematic difference.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Geodetic Science
Journal of Geodetic Science REMOTE SENSING-
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
3
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Displacement analysis of the October 30, 2020 (M w = 6.9), Samos (Aegean Sea) earthquake A field test of compact active transponders for InSAR geodesy Estimating the slip rate in the North Tabriz Fault using focal mechanism data and GPS velocity field Simulating VLBI observations to BeiDou and Galileo satellites in L-band for frame ties On initial data in adjustments of the geometric levelling networks (on the mean of paired observations)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1