on the alternative approaches to itrf formulation. a theoretical comparison

82
the alternative approaches to ITRF formulati the alternative approaches to ITRF formulati A theoretical comparison. A theoretical comparison. Department of Geodesy and Surveying Aristotle University of Thessaloniki Athanasios Dermanis

Upload: ilario

Post on 10-Jan-2016

33 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

DESCRIPTION

On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison. Athanasios Dermanis. Department of Geodesy and Surveying Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. The ITRF Formulation Problem. Given: - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation.On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation.A theoretical comparison.A theoretical comparison.

Department of Geodesy and SurveyingAristotle University of Thessaloniki

Athanasios Dermanis

Page 2: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Given:

Time series of coordinates xT(tk) & EOPS cT(tk) from each space technique T

Find:

The optimal coordinate transformation parameters pT(tk) (rotations, translation, scale)which transform the above time series xT(tk), cT(tk) into new ones xITRF(tk), cITRF(tk)

best fitting the linear-in-time ITRF model for each network station i

with constant initial coordinates x0i and velocities vi

The ITRF Formulation Problem

0 0( ) ( )i k i k it t t x x v

This procedure is called “stacking”

Page 3: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

The basic stacking model:

, , ,

0 0 ,

( ) ( ), ( ) ( )

( ) , ( ) ( )

xT i k ITRF i k ITRF T k T i k

xi k i ITRF T k T i k

t t t t

t t t t

x f x p e

f x v p e

.( ) ( ), ( ) ( )cT k ITRF k ITRF T k T i kt t t t c g c p e

Data from a set of 4 non-overlapping networks (VLBI, SLR, GPS, DORIS)

connected through surveying observations between nearby stations

at collocation sites

Coordinates:

Earth Orientation

Parameters (EOPs):

The ITRF Formulation Problem

Page 4: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

, , ,

00 ,

( ) ( ), ( ) ( )

( ) , ( ) ( )

xT i k ITRF i k ITRF T k T i k

xk ITRF T k T ki i i

t t t t

t t t t

x f x

v px

p e

f e

.( ) , ( ) ( )( ) cT k ITRFITRF k T k T i kt t tt c g c p e

Data from a set of 4 non-overlapping networks (VLBI, SLR, GPS, DORIS)

connected through surveying observations between nearby stations

at collocation sites

Coordinates:

Earth Orientation

Parameters (EOPs):

0 , , ( )i i ITRF ktx v cITRF parameters (initial coordinates, velocities, EOPs):

The ITRF Formulation Problem

The basic stacking model:

Page 5: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

, , ,

0 0 ,

( ) ( ), ( ) ( )

()( ) , )(

xT i k ITR

ITRF T k

F i k ITRF T k T i k

xi k i T i k

t

t

t t t

t t t

x f x

v p

p e

f x e

.( ) ( ( )( )), ITRFc

T k ITRF k T i kT ktt t t c g epc

Data from a set of 4 non-overlapping networks (VLBI, SLR, GPS, DORIS)

connected through surveying observations between nearby stations

at collocation sites

Coordinates:

Earth Orientation

Parameters (EOPs):

( )ITRF T ktpTransformation parameters from the ITRF reference system

to the reference system of each epoch within each technique:

The ITRF Formulation Problem

The basic stacking model:

Page 6: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

, , ,

0 0 ,

( ) ( ), ( ) ( )

(( ) )) , (

xT i k ITRF i k ITRF T k T i k

i k i ITRF T kxT i k

t t t t

t t t t

x f x

f x v p e

p e

.( ) ( ), ( ) ( )T k ITRF k ITRF T kcT i kt tt t c g c ep

Data from a set of 4 non-overlapping networks (VLBI, SLR, GPS, DORIS)

connected through surveying observations between nearby stations

at collocation sites

Coordinates:

Earth Orientation

Parameters (EOPs):

, .( ), ( )x cT i k T i kt te e

Observation noise - Assumed zero-mean and with known covariance cofactor matrices

(single unknown reference variance 2):

The ITRF Formulation Problem

The basic stacking model:

Page 7: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Simplifications of the Problem

4 non-overlapping networks

connected through cross observations

True ITRF formulation problemfor VLBI, SLR, GPS, DORIS:

Page 8: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Simplifications of the Problem

4 non-overlapping networks

connected through cross observations

2 non-overlapping networks

connected through cross observations

Page 9: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Simplifications of the Problem

4 non-overlapping networks

connected through cross observations

2 non-overlapping networks

connected through cross observations

2 overlapping networks

Page 10: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Simplifications of the Problem

4 non-overlapping networks

connected through cross observations

2 non-overlapping networks

connected through cross observations

2 overlapping networks

2 identical networks

Page 11: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Simplifications of the Problem

4 non-overlapping networks

connected through cross observations

2 non-overlapping networks

connected through cross observations

2 overlapping networks

2 identical networks Despite the simplificationsthe fundamental problemcharacteristics are preserved

The simplified cases deservea study in their own

Page 12: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Simplifications of the Problem

4 non-overlapping networks

connected through cross observations

2 non-overlapping networks

connected through cross observations

2 overlapping networks

2 identical networks

We will restrict to 2 networksin order to keep equationswithin manageable complexity

No loss of generality

Page 13: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

TWO STEP APPROACH

(1) Adjustment of data from each technique separately for the estimation of per technique ITRF parameters (stacking per technique)

(2) Combination of the ITRF estimates from each technique into final ITRF estimates

The two alternative approaches

ONE STEP APPROACH

Simultaneous adjustment of data from all techniquesfor the estimation of the ITRF parameters(multi-technique approach – simultaneous stacking)

Page 14: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

TWO STEP APPROACH

(1) Adjustment of data from each technique separately for the estimation of per technique ITRF parameters (stacking per technique)

(2) Combination of the ITRF estimates from each technique into final ITRF estimates

The two alternative approaches

ONE STEP APPROACH – EQUIVALENT TWO-STEP FORMULATION

(1) Separate solutions

(2) Combination of separate solutions with addition of normal equations Final parameter estimates as weighted mean of separate estimates

Page 15: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

TWO STEP APPROACH

(1) Adjustment of data from each technique separately for the estimation of per technique ITRF parameters (stacking per technique)

(2) Combination of the ITRF estimates from each technique into final ITRF estimates

The two alternative approaches

ONE STEP APPROACH – EQUIVALENT TWO-STEP FORMULATION

(1) Separate solutions

(2) Combination of separate solutions with addition of normal equations Final parameter estimates as weighted mean of separate estimates

same

Page 16: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

TWO STEP APPROACH

(1) Adjustment of data from each technique separately for the estimation of per technique ITRF parameters (stacking per technique)

(2) Combination of the ITRF estimates from each technique into final ITRF estimates

The two alternative approaches

ONE STEP APPROACH – EQUIVALENT TWO-STEP FORMULATION

(1) Separate solutions

(2) Combination of separate solutions with addition of normal equations Final parameter estimates as weighted mean of separate estimates

Difference only in

second steps

Page 17: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

TWO STEP APPROACH

(1) Adjustment of data from each technique separately for the estimation of per technique ITRF parameters (stacking per technique)

(2) Combination of the ITRF estimates from each technique into final ITRF estimates

The two alternative approaches

ONE STEP APPROACH – EQUIVALENT TWO-STEP FORMULATION

(1) Separate solutions

(2) Combination of separate solutions with addition of normal equations Final parameter estimates as weighted mean of separate estimates

Separate solutions produce singular covariance matrices !

Page 18: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Models with rank defect due to lack of reference system definition

b Ax v 2 1( , ) v 0 P rank( )n m

r m n

A

Page 19: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Variation of parameters under change of reference system

Models with rank defect due to lack of reference system definition

b Ax v 2 1( , ) v 0 P rank( )n m

r m n

A

x x Ep p = transformation parameters (rotations, displacement, scale)

Page 20: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Variation of parameters under change of reference system

Models with rank defect due to lack of reference system definition

b Ax v 2 1( , ) v 0 P rank( )n m

r m n

A

Invariance of observables y = Ax and estimable parameters (functions of y)

x x Ep p = transformation parameters (rotations, displacement, scale)

T AE 0y Ax Ax Ax AEp A P E NEA 0

Page 21: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Variation of parameters under change of reference system

Models with rank defect due to lack of reference system definition

b Ax v 2 1( , ) v 0 P rank( )n m

r m n

A

T E x 0

Invariance of observables y = Ax and estimable parameters (functions of y)

x x Ep p = transformation parameters (rotations, displacement, scale)

T AE 0y Ax Ax Ax AEp A P E NEA 0

(total) inner constraints for reference system choice(usually partial inner constraints or other minimal constraints are employed)

Page 22: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two identical networks

This case does not apply to the ITRF formulation problem

but has an interest of its own for other network applications

Page 23: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two identical networks – One step solution

a a a

b b b

b A vx

b A v

12

1,a a

b b

v P 00

v 0 P

( )T T T Ta a a b b b a a a b b b A P A A P A x A P b A P b

( )a b a b N N x u u

ˆ a a x x e

ˆb b bN x uˆa a aN x u

T C x 0 x̂

Identical to separate solutions

and combination using of the model

ˆ b b x x e

2( , )a a e 0 N2( , )a a e 0 N

with weight matrices

,a bN Nˆ ˆ( )a b a a b b N N x N x N x

Page 24: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

a aN x u Ta C x 0 2

|ˆ ˆ ( , )aa a aCx x x Q

b bN x u Tb C x 0 2

|ˆ ˆ ( , )bb b bCx x x Q

Step 1: Separate solutions

Normalequations

ˆ a a a x x Ep e

ˆ b b b x x Ep e

2( , )a ae 0 Q2( , )b be 0 Q

ˆ

ˆa a

ab b

b

xx eI E 0

px eI 0 E

p

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a b a b a a b bT T T

a a a a aT T T

b b b b b

W W W E W E x W x W x

E W E W E 0 p E W x

E W 0 E W E p E W x

?a

b

W 0

0 W

Step 2: Combination

Weightmatrix

Minimalconstraints

Two identical networks – Two step solution

Page 25: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two step solution(equivalent to) one step solution

ˆ

ˆa a

ab b

b

xx eI E 0

px eI 0 E

p

ˆ

ˆa a

b b

x eIx

x eI

ˆ ˆ( )a b a a b b N N x N x N x

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a b a bT T

a a aT T

b b b

a a b bT

a aT

b b

W W W E W E x

E W E W E 0 p

E W 0 E W E p

W x W x

E W x

E W x

Normal equationsWeight matrices Na, Nb Weight matrices Wa, Wb

Two identical networks

“wrong” model !Ignores that partial and final solutions

are in different reference systems

correct model !Treats partial and final solutions

in different reference systems

Page 26: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

ˆ ˆ( )a b a a b b N N x N x N x

Two step solution(equivalent to) one step solution

ˆ

ˆa a

ab b

b

xx eI E 0

px eI 0 E

p

ˆ

ˆa a

b b

x eIx

x eI

Normal equationsWeight matrices Na, Nb Weight matrices Wa, Wb

T Ta b a a a b b b u u A P b A P b

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a b a bT T

a a aT T

b b b

a a b bT

a aT

b b

W W W E W E x

E W E W E 0 p

E W 0 E W E p

W x W x

E W x

E W x

Weight matrices “kill” the dependence of the partial solutions

on different reference systems !

Two identical networks

“wrong” model !Ignores that partial and final solutions

are in different reference systems

correct model !Treats partial and final solutions

in different reference systems

Page 27: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two step solution(equivalent to) one step solution

ˆ

ˆa a

ab b

b

xx eI E 0

px eI 0 E

p

ˆ

ˆa a

b b

x eIx

x eI

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a b a bT T

a a aT T

b b b

a a b bT

a aT

b b

N N N E N E x

E N E N E 0 p

E N 0 E N E p

N x N x

E N x

E N x

Normal equations with same weight matricesWeight matrices Na, Nb Weight matrices Na, Nb

ˆ ˆ( )a b a a b b N N x N x N x

Two identical networks

“wrong” model !Ignores that partial and final solutions

are in different reference systems

correct model !Treats partial and final solutions

in different reference systems

Page 28: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two step solution(equivalent to) one step solution

ˆ

ˆa a

ab b

b

xx eI E 0

px eI 0 E

p

ˆ

ˆa a

b b

x eIx

x eI

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a b a bT T

a a aT T

b b b

a a b bT

a aT

b b

N N N E N E x

E N E N E 0 p

E N 0 E N E p

N x N x

E N x

E N x

Normal equations with same weight matricesWeight matrices Na, Nb Weight matrices Na, Nb

ˆ ˆ( )a b a a b b N N x N x N x

Recall that

a a

b b

A E 0 N E 0

A E 0 N E 0

Two identical networks

“wrong” model !Ignores that partial and final solutions

are in different reference systems

correct model !Treats partial and final solutions

in different reference systems

Page 29: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two step solution(equivalent to) one step solution

ˆ

ˆa a

ab b

b

xx eI E 0

px eI 0 E

p

ˆ

ˆa a

b b

x eIx

x eI

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a bT T

a aT T

b b

T

a b

a

b

a a b b

a

b

aT

b

N E N E

E N E N E

E

N N

N

x

0 p

0 E N E

E

p

N x N x

x

x

N

E N

Normal equations with same weight matricesWeight matrices Na, Nb Weight matrices Na, Nb

ˆ ˆ( )a b a a b b N N x N x N x

Vanishing terms

Two identical networks

“wrong” model !Ignores that partial and final solutions

are in different reference systems

correct model !Treats partial and final solutions

in different reference systems

Page 30: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two step solution(equivalent to) one step solution

ˆ

ˆa a

ab b

b

xx eI E 0

px eI 0 E

p

ˆ

ˆa a

b b

x eIx

x eI

ˆ ˆa b a a b b

a

b

N N 0 0 x N x N x

0 0 0 p 0

0 0 0 p 0

Normal equations with same weight matricesWeight matrices Na, Nb Weight matrices Na, Nb

ˆ ˆ( )a b a a b b N N x N x N x

Two identical networks

“wrong” model !Ignores that partial and final solutions

are in different reference systems

correct model !Treats partial and final solutions

in different reference systems

Page 31: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

“wrong” model !Ignores that partial and final solutions

are in different reference systems

correct model !Treats partial and final solutions

in different reference systems

Two step solution(equivalent to) one step solution

ˆ

ˆa a

ab b

b

xx eI E 0

px eI 0 E

p

ˆ

ˆa a

b b

x eIx

x eI

Normal equations with same weight matricesWeight matrices Na, Nb Weight matrices Na, Nb

ˆ ˆ( )a b a a b b N N x N x N x ˆ ˆ( )a b a a b b N N x N x N x

0 0

0 0Same results for IERS parameters x !

Transformation parameters pa, pb undetermined !

Two identical networks

Page 32: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two overlapping networks

This case would apply to the ITRF formulation problem

if perfect connections were available at collocation sites

Page 33: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two overlapping networks

1 31

3a a a a a a a

xb v A x

xA A v 2 1( , )a a v 0 P

2 1( , )b b v 0 P 2 32

3b b b b b b b

xb v A x

xA A v

x3 = parameters of common points

x1 , x2 = parameters of non-common points

Page 34: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two overlapping networks – Separate solutions

22 232 2 2 3

23 333 2 3 3

T Tb bT b b b b b b

b b b b TT Tb bb b b b b b

N NA P A A P AN A P A

N NA P A A P A

ˆa a aN x u

11 3

3a a a a a a a

xb A A v A x v

x

22 3

3b b b b b b b

xb A A v A x v

x

11 131 1 1 3

13 333 3 3

T Ta aT a a a a a a

a a a a TT Ta aa a a a a a

N NA P A A P AN A P A

N NA P A A P A

11

33

TaT a a a

a a a a Taa a a

uA P bu A P b

uA P b

ˆb b bN x u

22

33

TbT b b b

b b b b Tbb b b

uA P bu A P b

uA P b

normal equations

Network (b) solution:

Network (a) solution:

normal equations

Page 35: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two overlapping networks – One step solution

11 13 1 11 1 13 3

22 23 2 22 2 23 3

13 23 33 33 3 13 1 33 3 23 2 33 3

ˆ ˆ ˆ

ˆ ˆ ˆ

ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ

a a a a a a

b b b b b bT T T Ta b a b a a a a b b b b

N 0 N x N x N x

0 N N x N x N x

N N N N x N x N x N x N x

11 3

22 3

3

a a a a

b b b b

xb A 0 A v

xb 0 A A v

x

a

b

P 0

0 P

11 13

13 33

22 23

23 33

a aTa a

b bTb b

N N 0 0

N N 0 0

0 0 N N

0 0 N N

1 1 1 11

3 3 3 32

2 2 2 23

3 3 3 3

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a a a

a a a

b b b

b b b

x x e eI 0 0x

x x e e0 0 Ix

x x e e0 I 0x

x x e e0 0 I

11 13 1 1

22 23 2 2

13 23 33 33 3 3 3

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a a a

b b bT Ta b a b a b

N 0 N x u

0 N N x u

N N N N x u u

Identical with solution based on separate solutions with model

normalequations

weightmatrix

weightmatrix

Page 36: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two overlapping networks – Two step solution

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

T T T T T Ta a a b b b a a a b b b a a a b b b

T T Ta a a a a a a a a aT T Tb b b b b b b b b b

D W D D W D D W E D W E x D W x D W x

E W D E W E 0 p E W x

E W D 0 E W E p E W x

11 1 1

23 3 3

3

ˆˆ

ˆa a

a a a a a aa a

xx E eI 0 0

x x p D x E p ex E e0 0 I

x

12 2 2

23 3 3

3

ˆˆ

ˆb b

b b b b b bb b

xx E e0 I 0

x x p D x E p ex E e0 0 I

x

ˆ

ˆa a a a

ab b b b

b

xx D E 0 e

px D 0 E e

p

Combination (second) step

1 1 1 1ˆ a a a x x E p e

3 3 3 3ˆ a a a x x E p e

2 2 2 2ˆ b b b x x E p e

3 3 3 3ˆ b b b x x E p e

From network a:

From network b:

Combined a+b:11 13

13 33

22 23

23 33

a aT

a a a

b b bTb b

W W 0 0

W 0 W W 0 0W

0 W 0 0 W W

0 0 W W

normal equations

Page 37: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

T T T T T Ta a a b b b a a a b b b a a a b b b

T T Ta a a a a a a a a aT T Tb b b b b b b b b b

D W D D W D D W E D W E x D W x D W x

E W D E W E 0 p E W x

E W D 0 E W E p E W x

normal equations

a a

b b

W 0 N 0W

0 W 0 N

Use of same weights as in the (equivalent to) one step solution

normal equations

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

T T T T T Ta a a b b b a a a b b b a a a b b b

T T Ta a a a a a a a a aT T Tb b b b b b b b b b

D N D D N D D N E D N E x D N x D N x

E N D E N E 0 p E N x

E N D 0 E N E p E N x

Two overlapping networks – Two step solution

Page 38: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

T T T T T Ta a a b b b a a a b b b a a a b b b

T T Ta a a a a a a a a aT T Tb b b b b b b b b b

D W D D W D D W E D W E x D W x D W x

E W D E W E 0 p E W x

E W D 0 E W E p E W x

normal equations

a a

b b

W 0 N 0W

0 W 0 N

Use of same weights as in the (equivalent to) one step solution

normal equations

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

T T T T T Ta a a b b b a a a b b b a a a b b b

T T Ta a a a a a a a a aT T Tb b b b b b b b b b

D N D D N D D N E D N E x D N x D N x

E N D E N E 0 p E N x

E N D 0 E N E p E N x

Recall that ,a a b b N E 0 N E 0

Two overlapping networks – Two step solution

Page 39: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

T T T T T Ta a a b b b a a a b b b a a a b b b

T T Ta a a a a a a a a aT T Tb b b b b b b b b b

D W D D W D D W E D W E x D W x D W x

E W D E W E 0 p E W x

E W D 0 E W E p E W x

normal equations

a a

b b

W 0 N 0W

0 W 0 N

Use of same weights as in the (equivalent to) one step solution

normal equations

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a a b bT

T T T T T Ta a a b b b a b a a a b b b

aT T

a a a a a a aT

a aT

b b b b bb bT

b b b

N E N E

E N E

D N D D N

N E E N

E N E N

D D D x D N x D N x

D 0 p x

D 0 E N E p x

Vanishing terms

Two overlapping networks – Two step solution

Page 40: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

T T T T T Ta a a b b b a a a b b b a a a b b b

T T Ta a a a a a a a a aT T Tb b b b b b b b b b

D W D D W D D W E D W E x D W x D W x

E W D E W E 0 p E W x

E W D 0 E W E p E W x

normal equations

a a

b b

W 0 N 0W

0 W 0 N

Use of same weights as in the (equivalent to) one step solution

normal equations

ˆ ˆT T T Ta a a b b b a a a b b b

a

b

D N D D N D 0 0 x D N x D N x

0 0 0 p 0

0 0 0 p 0

Two overlapping networks – Two step solution

Page 41: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

T T T T T Ta a a b b b a a a b b b a a a b b b

T T Ta a a a a a a a a aT T Tb b b b b b b b b b

D W D D W D D W E D W E x D W x D W x

E W D E W E 0 p E W x

E W D 0 E W E p E W x

normal equations

a a

b b

W 0 N 0W

0 W 0 N

Use of same weights as in the (equivalent to) one step solution

normal equations

ˆ ˆ( )T T T Ta a a b b b a a a b b b D N D D N D x D N x D N x

0 0

0 0

Transformation parameters pa, pb undetermined !

Two overlapping networks – Two step solution

Page 42: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

normal equations with same weight matrix as in one-step solution

ˆ ˆ( )T T T Ta a a b b b a a a b b b D N D D N D x D N x D N x

11 13 1 11 1 13 2

22 23 2 22 2 23 3

13 23 33 33 3 13 1 33 2 23 2 33 3

ˆ ˆ

ˆ ˆ

ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ

a a a a a a

b b b b b bT T T Ta b a b a a a a b b b b

N 0 N x N x N x

0 N N x N x N x

N N N N x N x N x N x N x

1

2

3 3

a

b

a b

u

u

u u

Same results for parameters x as in the (equivqlent to) one-step solution !

Two overlapping networks – Two step solution

Page 43: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two overlapping networks

Two step solution(equivalent to) one step solution

1 1 1

3 3 3

2 2 2

3 3 3

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a a

a a

b b

b b

x x e

x x e

x x e

x x e

1 1 1 1

3 3 3 3

2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a a a

a a a

b b b

b b b

x x E p e

x x E p e

x x E p e

x x E p e

“wrong” model !Ignores that partial and final solutions

are in different reference systems

correct model !Treats partial and final solutions

in different reference systems

Normal equations with same weight matrices

11 13 1 11 1 13 2 1

22 23 2 22 2 23 3 2

13 23 33 33 3 13 1 33 2 23 2 33 3 3 3

ˆ ˆ

ˆ ˆ

ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ

a a a a a a a

b b b b b b bT T T Ta b a b a a a a b b b b a b

N 0 N x N x N x u

0 N N x N x N x u

N N N N x N x N x N x N x u u

Same results for IERS parameters x !

Transformation parameters pa, pb undetermined !

Page 44: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two non-overlapping networks connected by observations

This case applies to the ITRF formulation problem

(with error-affected connecting observations at collocation sites)

Page 45: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two non-overlapping networks connected by observations

Network b

11 2

2a a a a a a a

xb A A v A x v

x

33 4

4b b b b b b b

xb A A v A x v

x

2 2 4 4c c c c b A x A x v Connecting observations

observations of network a

observations of network b

Network a

Page 46: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two non-overlapping networks connected by observations

11 2

2a a a a a a a

xb A A v A x v

x

33 4

4b b b b b b b

xb A A v A x v

x

2 2 4 4c c c c b A x A x v

Network b

observations of network a

observations of network b

Connecting observations

Network a

x3

x2x1x4

Page 47: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two non-overlapping networks connected by observations

11 2

2a a a a a a a

xb A A v A x v

x

33 4

4b b b b b b b

xb A A v A x v

x

2 2 4 4c c c c b A x A x v

Network bNetwork a

x3

x2x1x4

Collocation sites

2 1( , )a a v 0 P

2 1( , )b b v 0 P

2 1( , )c c v 0 P

Page 48: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two connected non-overlapping networks – Separate solutions

a a a a b A x v

b b b b b A x v

aP

bP

Normal equations & separate solutions

33

44

Tbb b b

b Tbb b b

uA P bu

uA P b

a a aN x u

11

22

Taa a a

a Taa a a

uA P bu

uA P b

33 343 3 3 4

34 444 3 4 4

T Tb bb b b b b b

b TT Tb bb b b b b b

N NA P A A P AN

N NA P A A P A

11 121 1 1 2

12 222 1 2 2

T Ta aa a a a a a

a TT Ta aa a a a a a

N NA P A A P AN

N NA P A A P A

b b bN x u

weightmatrices

Ta a C x 0

Tb b C x 0

1|

2

ˆˆ ˆ

ˆaa C a

xx x

x

3|

4

ˆˆ ˆ

ˆbb C b

xx x

x

+ minimal constraints

+ minimal constraints

Separate solutions = input to: (a) combination step of two step solution(b) 2nd step of equivalent to one step solution

Page 49: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two connected non-overlapping networks – One step solution

Joint treatment of observations fromnetwork anetwork b

& connecting observations

Page 50: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

a

b

c

P 0 0

P 0 P 0

0 0 P

Normal equations

Two connected non-overlapping networks – One step solution

11 2

23 4

32 4

4

a a a a

b b b b

c c c c

xb A A 0 0 v

xb 0 0 A A v

xb 0 A 0 A v

x

11

2 22 2

33

4 44 4

Taa a aTT T

a c c ca a a c c cT

bb b bTT T

b c c cb b b c c c

uA P b

u A P bA P b A P bu

uA P b

u A P bA P b A P b

Weightmatrix

ˆ Nx u

11 12

12 22 2 2 2 4

33 34

4 2 34 44 4 4

a aT T Ta a c c c c c c

b bT T Tc c c b b c c c

N N 0 0

N N A P A 0 A P AN

0 0 N N

0 A P A N N A P A

1

2

3

4

ˆ

ˆˆ

ˆ

ˆ

x

xx

x

x

Page 51: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

11 12

12 22

33 34

34 44

a aTa a

b bTb b

c

N N 0 0 0

N N 0 0 0

0 0 N N 0

0 0 N N 0

0 0 0 0 P

One step solution = Identical to separate solutions and combination with the model

Two connected non-overlapping networks – One step solution

1 1 1 11

2 2 2 22

3 3 3 33

4 4 4 44

2 2 4 4 2 4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

c c c c c c c

x x e I 0 0 0 ex

x x e 0 I 0 0 ex

x x e 0 0 I 0 ex

x x e 0 0 0 I ex

b A x A x v 0 A 0 A v

with weight matrix

This is a two-step equivalent of the one-step solution based on the addition of the partial normal equations

Page 52: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

11 12

12 22

33 34

34 44

a aTa a

b bTb b

c

N N 0 0 0

N N 0 0 0

0 0 N N 0

0 0 N N 0

0 0 0 0 P

Two connected non-overlapping networks – One step solution

1 1 1 11

2 2 2 22

3 3 3 33

4 4 4 44

2 2 4 4 2 4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

c c c c c c c

x x e I 0 0 0 ex

x x e 0 I 0 0 ex

x x e 0 0 I 0 ex

x x e 0 0 0 I ex

b A x A x v 0 A 0 A v

with weight matrix

This model ignores the different reference systems (RS)

in partial and final solution

One step solution = Identical to separate solutions and combination with the model

Page 53: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

11 12

12 22

33 34

34 44

a aTa a

b bTb b

c

N N 0 0 0

N N 0 0 0

0 0 N N 0

0 0 N N 0

0 0 0 0 P

Two connected non-overlapping networks – One step solution

1 11

2 22

1

2

3 33

4 44

2 4 2 4

2

3

2

3

4

4

1

4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

c c c c c c c

e I 0 0 0 ex

e 0 I 0 0 ex

e 0 0 I 0 e

x

x

x

x

x

xe 0 0 0 I e

xb A A v 0 Ax 0 A v

x

x

x

x

with weight matrix

RSa

RSb

RSFINAL

This model ignores the different reference systems (RS)

in partial and final solution

One step solution = Identical to separate solutions and combination with the model

Page 54: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two connected non-overlapping networks – Two step solution

We have already treated the first step (separate solutions)

It remains to examine the second combination step

Page 55: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

11 1 1 1 1 1

22 2 2 2 2 2

33 3 3 3 3 3

44 4 4 4 4 4

2 2 4 4 2 4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a

a

b

ba

c c c c c c cb

xx x E p e I 0 0 0 E 0 e

xx x E p e 0 I 0 0 E 0 e

xx x E p e 0 0 I 0 0 E e

xx x E p e 0 0 0 I 0 E e

pb A x A x v 0 A 0 A 0 0 v

p

Two connected non-overlapping networks – Two step solution

11 12

12 22

33 34

34 44

a aTa a

b bTb b

c

W W 0 0 0

W W 0 0 0

0 0 W W 0

0 0 W W 0

0 0 0 0 P

weight matrix

Combination step (second step)

Page 56: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

11 1 1 1 1 1

22 2 2 2 2 2

33 3 3 3 3 3

44 4 4 4 4 4

2 2 4 4 2 4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a

a

b

ba

c c c c c c cb

xx x E p e I 0 0 0 E 0 e

xx x E p e 0 I 0 0 E 0 e

xx x E p e 0 0 I 0 0 E e

xx x E p e 0 0 0 I 0 E e

pb A x A x v 0 A 0 A 0 0 v

p

Two connected non-overlapping networks – Two step solution

11 12

12 22

33 34

34 44

a aTa a

b bTb b

c

W W 0 0 0

W W 0 0 0

0 0 W W 0

0 0 W W 0

0 0 0 0 P

weight matrix

This model takes into account the different reference systems (RS)in partial and final solutions by introducing transformation parameters pa, pb

Combination step (second step)

Page 57: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

11 1 1 1 1 1

22 2 2 2 2 2

33 3 3 3 3 3

44 4 4 4 4 4

2 2 4 4 2 4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a

a

b

ba

c c c c c c cb

xx x E p e I 0 0 0 E 0 e

xx x E p e 0 I 0 0 E 0 e

xx x E p e 0 0 I 0 0 E e

xx x E p e 0 0 0 I 0 E e

pb A x A x v 0 A 0 A 0 0 v

p

Two connected non-overlapping networks – Two step solution

11 12

12 22

33 34

34 44

a aTa a

b bTb b

c

W W 0 0 0

W W 0 0 0

0 0 W W 0

0 0 W W 0

0 0 0 0 P

weight matrix

partition of matricesfor a more compact

notation

Combination step (second step)

Page 58: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

11 1 1 1 1 1

22 2 2 2 2 2

33 3 3 3 3 3

44 4 4 4 4 4

2 2 4 4 2 4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a

a

b

ba

c c c c c c cb

xx x E p e I 0 0 0 E 0 e

xx x E p e 0 I 0 0 E 0 e

xx x E p e 0 0 I 0 0 E e

xx x E p e 0 0 0 I 0 E e

pb A x A x v 0 A 0 A 0 0 v

p

Two connected non-overlapping networks – Two step solution

11 12

12 22

33 34

34 44

a aTa a

b bTb b

c

W W 0 0 0

W W 0 0 0

0 0 W W 0

0 0 W W 0

0 0 0 0 P

weight matrix ˆ

ˆa a a a a a a

b b b b b b a b

c c c b c

x x E p D E 0 x e

x x E p D 0 E p e

b b A 0 0 p b

a

b

c

W 0 0

0 W 0

0 0 P

model in compact notation

Combination step (second step)

Page 59: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two connected non-overlapping networks – Two step solution

weight matrix

ˆ

ˆa a a a a a a

b b b b b b a b

c c c b c

x x E p D E 0 x e

x x E p D 0 E p e

b b A 0 0 p b

a

b

c

W 0 0

0 W 0

0 0 P

Combination step (second step)

Page 60: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two connected non-overlapping networks – Two step solution

weight matrix

ˆ

ˆa a a a a a a

b b b b b b a b

c c c b c

x x E p D E 0 x e

x x E p D 0 E p e

b b A 0 0 p b

a

b

c

W 0 0

0 W 0

0 0 P

Normal equations

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

T T T T T T T Ta a a b b b c c c a a a b b b a a a b b b c c c

T T Ta a a a a a a a a aT T Tb b b b b b b b b b

D W D D W D A P A D W E D W E x D W x D W x A P b

E W D E W E 0 p E W x

E W D 0 E W E p E W x

Combination step (second step)

Page 61: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

special choice:weight matrix

same as in one step

ˆ

ˆa a a a a a a

b b b b b b a b

c c c b c

x x E p D E 0 x e

x x E p D 0 E p e

b b A 0 0 p b

a

b

c

N 0 0

0 N 0

0 0 P

Normal equations

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

T T T T T T T Ta a a b b b c c c a a a b b b a a a b b b c c c

T T Ta a a a a a a a a aT T Tb b b b b b b b b b

D N D D N D A P A D N E D N E x D N x D N x A P b

E N D E N E 0 p E N x

E N D 0 E N E p E N x

Two connected non-overlapping networks – Two step solution

Combination step (second step)

Page 62: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

ˆ

ˆa a a a a a a

b b b b b b a b

c c c b c

x x E p D E 0 x e

x x E p D 0 E p e

b b A 0 0 p b

Normal equations

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

T T T T T T T Ta a a b b b c c c a a a b b b a a a b b b c c c

T T Ta a a a a a a a a aT T Tb b b b b b b b b b

D N D D N D A P A D N E D N E x D N x D N x A P b

E N D E N E 0 p E N x

E N D 0 E N E p E N x

a a N E 0Recall that b b N E 0

Two connected non-overlapping networks – Two step solution

a

b

c

N 0 0

0 N 0

0 0 P

special choice:weight matrix

same as in one step

Combination step (second step)

Page 63: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

ˆ

ˆa a a a a a a

b b b b b b a b

c c c b c

x x E p D E 0 x e

x x E p D 0 E p e

b b A 0 0 p b

Normal equations

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

T T T T T T T Ta a a b b b c c c a b a a a b b b c c c

a

a a b bT T Ta a a a a a aT T Tb

a a

b b bb b b b b b

N E N E

E N

D N D D N D A P A D D x D N x D N x A P b

D 0E N E E N

E N

p x

E N E E ND 0 p x

a a N E 0Recall that b b N E 0

vanishing terms

Two connected non-overlapping networks – Two step solution

a

b

c

N 0 0

0 N 0

0 0 P

special choice:weight matrix

same as in one step

Combination step (second step)

Page 64: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

ˆ

ˆa a a a a a a

b b b b b b a b

c c c b c

x x E p D E 0 x e

x x E p D 0 E p e

b b A 0 0 p b

Normal equations

ˆ ˆT T T T T Ta a a b b b c c c a a a b b b c c c

a

b

D N D D N D A P A 0 0 x D N x D N x A P b

0 0 0 p 0

0 0 0 p 0

Two connected non-overlapping networks – Two step solution

a

b

c

N 0 0

0 N 0

0 0 P

special choice:weight matrix

same as in one step

Combination step (second step)

Page 65: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

ˆ

ˆa a a a a a a

b b b b b b a b

c c c b c

x x E p D E 0 x e

x x E p D 0 E p e

b b A 0 0 p b

Normal equations

ˆ ˆ ˆ( )T T T T T Ta a a b b b c c c a a a b b b c c c D N D D N D A P A x D N x D N x A P b

0 0

0 0

Two connected non-overlapping networks – Two step solution

a

b

c

N 0 0

0 N 0

0 0 P

special choice:weight matrix

same as in one step

Combination step (second step)

Page 66: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

ˆ

ˆa a a a a a a

b b b b b b a b

c c c b c

x x E p D E 0 x e

x x E p D 0 E p e

b b A 0 0 p b

Normal equations

ˆ ˆ ˆ( )T T T T T Ta a a b b b c c c a a a b b b c c c D N D D N D A P A x D N x D N x A P b

0 0

0 0

Two connected non-overlapping networks – Two step solution

a

b

c

N 0 0

0 N 0

0 0 P

special choice:weight matrix

same as in one step

Combination step (second step)

No equations containingthe transformationparameters pa, pb

They cannot be determined!

Page 67: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

ˆ

ˆa a a a a a a

b b b b b b a b

c c c b c

x x E p D E 0 x e

x x E p D 0 E p e

b b A 0 0 p b

Normal equations

ˆ ˆ ˆ( )T T T T T Ta a a b b b c c c a a a b b b c c c D N D D N D A P A x D N x D N x A P b

11 12 11 1 12 21

12 22 2 2 2 4 12 1 22 2 22

33 34 33 3 34 43

4 2 34 44 4 4 34 3 44 4 44

ˆ ˆ

ˆ ˆ

ˆ ˆ

ˆ ˆ

a a a a a aT T T T Ta a c c c c c c a a a a c c c

b b b b b bT T T T Tc c c b b c c c b b b b c c c

N N 0 0 N x N xx

N N A P A 0 A P A N x N x A P bx

0 0 N N N x N xx

0 A P A N N A P A N x N x A P bx

Identical to those of the one-step solution

Two connected non-overlapping networks – Two step solution

a

b

c

N 0 0

0 N 0

0 0 P

special choice:weight matrix

same as in one step

Combination step (second step)

Page 68: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two-step solution

combination step model

Two non-overlapping networks connected by observations

One-step solution

1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4

2 2 4 4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a

a

b

b

c c c c

x x E p e

x x E p e

x x E p e

x x E p e

b A x A x v

1 1 1

2 2 2

3 3 3

4 4 4

2 2 4 4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

c c c c

x x e

x x e

x x e

x x e

b A x A x v

equivalent model

same weight matrix from separate solutions

11 12

12 22

33 34

34 44

a aTa a

b bTb b

c

N N 0 0 0

N N 0 0 0

0 0 N N 0

0 0 N N 0

0 0 0 0 P

Identical solution for x1, x2, x3, x4

Page 69: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two-step solution

combination step model

Two non-overlapping networks connected by observations

One-step solution

1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4

2 2 4 4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a

a

b

b

c c c c

x x E p e

x x E p e

x x E p e

x x E p e

b A x A x v

1 1 1

2 2 2

3 3 3

4 4 4

2 2 4 4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

c c c c

x x e

x x e

x x e

x x e

b A x A x v

equivalent model

same weight matrix from separate solutions

11 12

12 22

33 34

34 44

a aTa a

b bTb b

c

N N 0 0 0

N N 0 0 0

0 0 N N 0

0 0 N N 0

0 0 0 0 P

Identical solution for x1, x2, x3, x4

“wrong” modelignores dependence of

separate and final solutions on different

reference systems

Page 70: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two-step solution

combination step model

Two non-overlapping networks connected by observations

One-step solution

1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4

2 2 4 4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a

a

b

b

c c c c

x x E p e

x x E p e

x x E p e

x x E p e

b A x A x v

1 1 1

2 2 2

3 3 3

4 4 4

2 2 4 4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

c c c c

x x e

x x e

x x e

x x e

b A x A x v

equivalent model

same weight matrix from separate solutions

11 12

12 22

33 34

34 44

a aTa a

b bTb b

c

N N 0 0 0

N N 0 0 0

0 0 N N 0

0 0 N N 0

0 0 0 0 P

Identical solution for x1, x2, x3, x4

“wrong” modelignores dependence of

separate and final solutions on different

reference systems

correct modelacknowledges dependence ofseparate and final solutions

on differentreference systems

Page 71: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two-step solution

combination step model

Two non-overlapping networks connected by observations

One-step solution

1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4

2 2 4 4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a

a

b

b

c c c c

x x E p e

x x E p e

x x E p e

x x E p e

b A x A x v

1 1 1

2 2 2

3 3 3

4 4 4

2 2 4 4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

c c c c

x x e

x x e

x x e

x x e

b A x A x v

equivalent model

same weight matrix from separate solutions

11 12

12 22

33 34

34 44

a aTa a

b bTb b

c

N N 0 0 0

N N 0 0 0

0 0 N N 0

0 0 N N 0

0 0 0 0 P

Identical solution for x1, x2, x3, x4

“wrong” modelignores dependence of

separate and final solutions on different

reference systems

correct modelacknowledges dependence ofseparate and final solutions

on differentreference systems

Neverthelesstransformation

Parameters pa, pbcannot be determined!

Page 72: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two-step solution

combination step model

Two non-overlapping networks connected by observations

One-step solution

1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4

2 2 4 4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a

a

b

b

c c c c

x x E p e

x x E p e

x x E p e

x x E p e

b A x A x v

1 1 1

2 2 2

3 3 3

4 4 4

2 2 4 4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

c c c c

x x e

x x e

x x e

x x e

b A x A x v

equivalent model

Why these twodifferent models

lead to equivalentresults ?

Page 73: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Two-step solution

combination step model

Two non-overlapping networks connected by observations

One-step solution

1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4

2 2 4 4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

a

a

b

b

c c c c

x x E p e

x x E p e

x x E p e

x x E p e

b A x A x v

1 1 1

2 2 2

3 3 3

4 4 4

2 2 4 4

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

c c c c

x x e

x x e

x x e

x x e

b A x A x v

equivalent model

11 12 1

12 22 2

33 34 3

34 4

11 1 12 2

12 1 22 2 2 2

33 3 34 4

34 3 4 44 44 4

ˆ ˆ

ˆ ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ ˆ

ˆ ˆ

ˆa a a a

T T Ta a a a c c c c c

b b b b

a a aTa a a

T Tb b b b c

b b bTb b bc c

N x N x 0

N x N x A P b A P bu

N x N x

N x N x A P b

N

N N x

N N

N x

x

N N x2

1

444

3

2T

Ta a aTa aTb b

c c c

bTb b

c

T Tc c c c c c

a

b

A P b

A0

A P b

A P b

A P b

P bP b A

P b

A

The particular choice of weight matrix “kills” the dependence on the reference systems !

Normal equations depend only on design (A) and observations (b) !

Why these twodifferent models

lead to equivalentresults ?

Page 74: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

The choice of weight problem

In the two step approach, the first step produces singular covariance matrices.Therefore the weight matrices to be used in the second step are not uniquely defined.This fact raises some questions about the choice of weight matrices:

Page 75: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Are the weight matrices used in order to obtain equivalent results with theone step approach the correct ones? (Do they lead to BLUUE estimates?)

The choice of weight problem

In the two step approach, the first step produces singular covariance matrices.Therefore the weight matrices to be used in the second step are not uniquely defined.This fact raises some questions about the choice of weight matrices:

Yes !

Page 76: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Are the weight matrices used in order to obtain equivalent results with theone step approach the correct ones? (Do they lead to BLUUE estimates?)

The choice of weight problem

Are there other correct weight matrices?

In the two step approach, the first step produces singular covariance matrices.Therefore the weight matrices to be used in the second step are not uniquely defined.This fact raises some questions about the choice of weight matrices:

Yes !

Yes !

Page 77: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Are the weight matrices used in order to obtain equivalent results with theone step approach the correct ones? (Do they lead to BLUUE estimates?)

The choice of weight problem

Are there other correct weight matrices?

Do different correct weight matrices lead to the same results?(i.e. to estimates that are connected by a change of the reference system)

Yes !

Yes !

Yes !

In the two step approach, the first step produces singular covariance matrices.Therefore the weight matrices to be used in the second step are not uniquely defined.This fact raises some questions about the choice of weight matrices:

Page 78: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

b Ax v

Rao’s Unified Theory for singular covariance matrix and rank deficient design matrix

The choice of weight problem

rankn m

r m n

A2( , )v 0 Q rankn n

n

Q

Weight matrix to use: ( )T T W W Σ Q AVA

rank rank( )T Q A Q AVAV = symmetric matrix such that:

( )ΣWΣ Σ

Page 79: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

b Ax v

Rao’s Unified Theory for singular covariance matrix and rank deficient design matrix

The choice of weight problem

rankn m

r m n

A2( , )v 0 Q rankn n

n

Q

( )T T W W Σ Q AVA

V = symmetric matrix such that: rank rank( )T Q A Q AVA

a a

b b

c

D E 0

A D 0 E

A 0 0

( )ΣWΣ Σ

1

a b

a a a b

b a b b

T T Ta a a a b c

T Tb b b a

TT Tc c b

x xp xp

xp p p p

xp p p p

V V VQ 0 0 D E 0 D D A

Σ 0 Q 0 D 0 E V V V E 0 0

0 0 P A 0 0 0 E 0V V V

Our case: Combination step

1 1

rank ranka b

a a a b

b a b b

T T Ta a a a a a a b c

T Tb b b b b b a

TT Tc c c c b

x xp xp

xp p p p

xp p p p

V V VD E 0 Q 0 0 Q 0 0 D E 0 D D A

D 0 E 0 Q 0 0 Q 0 D 0 E V V V E 0 0

A 0 0 0 0 P 0 0 P A 0 0 0 E 0V V V

Different weight matrices: from different choices of V and of the generalized inverse

with V satisfying:

Weight matrix to use:

Page 80: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Conclusions

Under the Gauss-Markov assumptions (zero mean noise, single unknown reference variance)

• Both the one-step and the two-step approaches give equivalent results when the used weight matrices are the normal equation matrices from the separate solutions.

• The inclusion of reference frame transformation parameters is meaningless in this case.

• The combination step must be modified to the addition of partial normal equations.

Page 81: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Conclusions

Under the Gauss-Markov assumptions (zero mean noise, single unknown reference variance)

• Both the one-step and the two-step approaches give equivalent results when the used weight matrices are the normal equation matrices from the separate solutions.

• The inclusion of reference frame transformation parameters is meaningless in this case.

• The combination step must be modified to the addition of partial normal equations.

Beyond the Gauss-Markov assumptions (biases, different variance components)

A future study of the effect of biases and the variance component estimationin the two alternative formulations is required.

Different “correct” weight matrices in combination step

A further study of the Rao’s unified theory as applies in our specific problem.Characterization of the whole class weight matrices giving the “same” solution.

Suggestions for further study

Page 82: On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison

Thanks for your attention !

A copy of this presentation can be downloaded from

http://der.topo.auth.gr/