2011
DOI: 10.1007/s00190-011-0487-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Strategies to mitigate aliasing of loading signals while estimating GPS frame parameters

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
70
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

3
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 99 publications
(78 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
3
70
1
Order By: Relevance
“…3.2. A well-distributed global IGS reference network is required to avoid unfavorable network effects during transformation of the GPS coordinates into global reference frames such as IGS08, especially when also vertical velocities will be derived (e.g., Bergeot et al 2009;Collilieux et al 2012;Legrand and Bruyninx 2009;Legrand et al 2012). But likewise consistent use (both in size and geometry) of such reference networks throughout different time spans of GPS data from the same region is important.…”
Section: Gps Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3.2. A well-distributed global IGS reference network is required to avoid unfavorable network effects during transformation of the GPS coordinates into global reference frames such as IGS08, especially when also vertical velocities will be derived (e.g., Bergeot et al 2009;Collilieux et al 2012;Legrand and Bruyninx 2009;Legrand et al 2012). But likewise consistent use (both in size and geometry) of such reference networks throughout different time spans of GPS data from the same region is important.…”
Section: Gps Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(4). We would do this because, for stations with fairly short time series in particular, not estimating annual oscillations (as part of the trajectory model) can cause them to alias to 'leak into' geodetic estimates of station velocity (Dong et al 2002;Collilieux et al 2012). Adding cycles to all our station trajectory models improves the geometrical consistency of our velocity estimates, but may slightly degrade our post-alignment fits with the predictions of ITRF.…”
Section: Contrasting General Station Trajectory Models With Those Empmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since we are interested in the non-linear coordinate variations, the secular reference frame of the long-term coordinates is arbitrarily defined by means of internal constraints (Altamimi et al 2007). Then, the transformation parameters (translation and rotations) are estimated between each weekly solution and the estimated secular coordinates of the epoch using a subset of well distributed stations in order to minimize aliasing errors (Collilieux et al 2012). Finally, we estimate the coordinate residuals about the long-term trend by additionally removing the transformation parameters.…”
Section: Observed Height Time Seriesmentioning
confidence: 99%