International Workshop on Laser Ranging, 13-18 October 2008, Poznań (Poland) Quality assessment of the ILRS EOP „Daily” Product G. Bianco Agenzia Spaziale.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Data Mining Methodology 1. Why have a Methodology  Don’t want to learn things that aren’t true May not represent any underlying reality ○ Spurious correlation.
Advertisements

3. Geocentre and scale Comparison of weekly and daily IGS reference frames: the first year Peter J Clarke, School of Civil Engineering and Geosciences,
On the alternative approaches to ITRF formulation. A theoretical comparison. Department of Geodesy and Surveying Aristotle University of Thessaloniki Athanasios.
16 October th International Workshop on Laser Ranging 1 Implementing the Consolidated laser Ranging Data (CRD) Format throughout the ILRS Network.
ILRS 2008 Poznan, Poland October 2008 Development of quality control tools for the MLRO G. Bianco, V. Luceri, D. Iacovone.
DoD Information Technology Security Certification and Accreditation Process (DITSCAP) Phase III – Validation Thomas Howard Chris Pierce.
DFG-Research Unit “Earth rotation and Global Dynamic processes” Poznan, 13 – 17 October 2008 N. Panafidina, M. Rothacher, D. Thaller Comparison and Combination.
International Terrestrial Reference Frame - Latest Developments Horst Müller 16th International Workshop on Laser Ranging, Poznan, Poland, October
ESOC Navigation Support Office ILRS Workshop 2008 Poznan, Poland ESOC IGS, IDS, ILRS (Re-) processing T. Springer, M. Otten, I. Romero, J. Dow.
Assessment of SLR observation performance using LAGEOS data Gang ZHAO, You ZHAO, Mingguo Sun, Huanhuan YU Changchun Observatory, NAOC, CAS, China 16 th.
Localized Techniques for Power Minimization and Information Gathering in Sensor Networks EE249 Final Presentation David Tong Nguyen Abhijit Davare Mentor:
EPN LAC Workshop 2008 Frankfurt Main, Germany, October, 2008 ASI Local Analysis Center Report C. Ferraro, Telespazio/CGS Matera R. Pacione, e-GEOS/CGS.
ILRS Workshop, Poznan, Poland, October Status of ITRF Development and SLR Contribution Zuheir Altamimi Xavier Collilieux David Coulot IGN France.
Supervised classification performance (prediction) assessment Dr. Huiru Zheng Dr. Franscisco Azuaje School of Computing and Mathematics Faculty of Engineering.
Analysis Working Group Report ILRS General Assembly Meeting Poznań, Poland, Oct. 16, 2008 Erricos C. Pavlis Analysis Coordinator.
Attempts to separate apparent observational range bias from true geodetic signals Graham Appleby, Philip Gibbs, Matthew Wilkinson, Vicki Smith Space Geodesy.
GEODETIC CONTROL SURVEYS
Laser Ranging Contributions to Earth Rotation Studies Richard S. Gross Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Pasadena, CA 91109–8099,
OECD Short-Term Economic Statistics Working PartyJune Analysis of revisions for short-term economic statistics Richard McKenzie OECD OECD Short.
MICS Survey Design Workshop Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys Survey Design Workshop Interpreting Field Check Tables.
Mission Planning and SP1. Outline of Session n Standards n Errors n Planning n Network Design n Adjustment.
1 North American Reference Frame (NAREF) Working Group Mike Craymer Geodetic Survey Division, Natural Resources Canada 2nd SNARF Workshop Montreal, May.
PHYSICS WORKSHOP Demystifying 9188/4 Yours truly T.V Madziva or
NGS GPS ORBIT DETERMINATION Positioning America for the Future NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION National Ocean Service National Geodetic.
E. C. Pavlis Geoscience Australia Seminar Canberra, Australia 29 August, 2005 Implications of SLR Network Variations On Geodetic and Geophysical Products.
1/17 REFAG Symposium 6 October 2010 – Marne-la-Vallée, France Recent Results from the IGS Terrestrial Frame Combinations __________________________________________________________________________________________________.
IGS Analysis Center Workshop, 2-6 June 2008, Florida, USA GPS in the ITRF Combination D. Angermann, H. Drewes, M. Krügel, B. Meisel Deutsches Geodätisches.
ANTs PI Meeting, Nov. 29, 2000W. Zhang, Washington University1 Flexible Methods for Multi-agent distributed resource Allocation by Exploiting Phase Transitions.
The IGS contribution to ITRF2013 – Preliminary results from the IGS repro2 SINEX combinations Paul Rebischung, Bruno Garayt, Xavier Collilieux, Zuheir.
Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue | Cambridge MA V F
01/0000 HEO and Daylight Ranging “Reality and Wishes” Ramesh Govind ILRS Fall Workshop, 4 th October 2005.
Honeywell Technology Solutions Inc AWG Meeting, Washington DC, Oct 3-4, 2002 Comparison of ILRS Station Positions (“AA” & “A” Series, i.e. 1999) Van Husson.
Digital Terrain Models by M. Varshosaz 1 DTM tasks: generation  Buy global or national data set  Collect data.
AGU Fall meeting Quality assessment of GPS reprocessed Terrestrial Reference Frame 1 IGN/LAREG and GRGS 2 University of Luxembourg X Collilieux.
P. Wielgosz and A. Krankowski IGS AC Workshop Miami Beach, June 2-6, 2008 University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Poland
Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue | Cambridge MA V F
Colorado Center for Astrodynamics Research The University of Colorado 1 STATISTICAL ORBIT DETERMINATION ASEN 5070 LECTURE 11 9/16,18/09.
Screen 1 of 20 Vulnerability Vulnerability Assessment LEARNING OBJECTIVES Define the purpose and scope of vulnerability assessment. Understand how vulnerability.
Recommendation 1 The IGS shall develop a standard protocol for exchanging information about IGS stations. The associated machine-readable database should.
Responsiveness to Instruction RtI Tier III. Before beginning Tier III Review Tier I & Tier II for … oClear beginning & ending dates oIntervention design.
Geocenter Variations Derived from GRACE Data Z. Kang, B. Tapley, J. Chen, J. Ries, S. Bettadpur Joint International GSTM and SPP Symposium GFZ Potsdam,
ILRS WorkshopEastbourne, UK October 3 - 7, 2005 Resolutions ILRS General Assembly Eastbourne, UK October 4, Recognizing the degradation of SLR products.
Chapter 6 CASE Tools Software Engineering Chapter 6-- CASE TOOLS
Honeywell Technology Solutions Inc AWG Meeting, Washington DC, Oct 3-4, 2002 Benchmarking #1 Software Benchmarking Results V. Husson.
May 4, Evaluations 6 sections: Section I General performance standard Section II Core values Section III Goals (last years’) Section IV Goals (next.
View on GPS and Galileo ‘From across the Atlantic…’ Ruth E. Neilan International GNSS Service (IGS) Central Bureau Jet Propulsion Laboratory/California.
Onsite Quarterly Meeting SIPP PIPs June 13, 2012 Presenter: Christy Hormann, LMSW, CPHQ Project Leader-PIP Team.
Principles of the Global Positioning System Lecture 09 Prof. Thomas Herring Room A;
Kenneth Johnston US Naval Observatory Presented by Jules McNeff International Committee on GNSS Provider’s Forum Bangalore, India 4 September 2007 GPS.
Workshop, Miami, June 2008 IGS Contribution to ITRF Zuheir Altamimi & Xavier Collilieux IGN, France.
1/16 35th IGS Governing Board Meeting December 13, 2009 – San Francisco TRANSITION OF THE IGS REFERENCE FRAME COORDINATION FROM NRCAN TO IGN - STATUS AND.
NAPEOS: The ESA/ESOC Tool for Space Geodesy
Jason-1 POD reprocessing at CNES Current status and further developments L. Cerri, S. Houry, P. Perrachon, F. Mercier. J.P. Berthias with entries from.
Introduction to Software Engineering Muhammad Nasir Agile Software Development(2)
Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue | Cambridge MA V F
IERS Combination WG and CPP Meeting, April 27, 2005, TU of Vienna, Austria Status and Future of the IERS Combination Efforts Markus Rothacher GeoForschungsZentrum.
Astronomical Institute University of Bern 1 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern, Switzerland * now at PosiTim, Germany 5th International GOCE User.
IERS Combination WG and CPP Meeting, April 27, 2005, TU of Vienna, Austria Strategies for Weekly Routine Generation of Combined IERS Products Markus Rothacher.
IERS Directing Board Meeting No.39, BIPM Paris, September 23, 2004 IERS2005: Plan “Integrated Earth orientation parameters, Radio sources, and Site coordinates.
IMS Implementation Project
ACC/GPSR Splinter Summary
WGARM Appraisal Decision Assistance Phase 1, Dec. 2002
Unified Analysis Workshop, July 2017, Paris
Reference Frame Working Group
Techniques for Data Analysis Event Study
X SERBIAN-BULGARIAN ASTRONOMICAL CONFERENCE 30 MAY - 3 JUNE, 2016, BELGRADE, SERBIA EARTH ORIENTATION PARAMETERS AND GRAVITY VARIATIONS DETERMINED FROM.
WHY DOES THE IGS CARE ABOUT EOPs?
EAST GRADE course 2019 Introduction to Meta-Analysis
CNES-CLS Dynamical modelling of GPS orbits
A handbook on validation methodology. Metrics.
Presentation transcript:

International Workshop on Laser Ranging, October 2008, Poznań (Poland) Quality assessment of the ILRS EOP „Daily” Product G. Bianco Agenzia Spaziale Italiana, CGS - Matera C. Sciarretta, V. Luceri Telespazio S.p.A., CGS - Matera

Since 2004, ILRS has been providing, routinely, the weekly combined SSC/EOP solutions to support IERS for the EOP computation and the SLR community for the data reduction. For each weekly solution - daily estimated ITRF-framed and loose constrained EOP values (x-pole, y-pole, LOD) - a set of loose constrained coordinates for the acquisition network - several quality evaluation indicators are provided in 3 different files available at CDDIS and EDC: ilrs.pos+eop.yymmdd.vnn.snx ilrs.pos+eop.yymmdd.vnn.sum ilrs.eop.yymmdd.vnn.snx ILRS Weekly Solution

At present, 8 ACs contribute to the weekly ILRS combined solution: ASI BKG DGFI GA GFZ GRGS JCET NSGF Each Wednesday, the official ILRS combined solutions (ILRSA, official; ILRSB, backup) are issued along the same timeline: the SLR data acquired (Lageos1/2, Etalon1/2) during a 7-day period (Sunday- Saturday) are processed by the ACs and made available to the CCs within Tuesday. Data arc7 days Generation frequency1/week EOP estimates age4-10 days ILRS Weekly Solution

The ASI-CGS combination procedure is based on the direct combination of loose constrained solutions (“Methodology for global geodetic time series estimation: A new tool for geodynamics”, Davies and Blewitt, 2000). ILRSA combination approach Site Coordinates Site Velocities E.O.P. E.O.P. Rates X 1dot (t 1 ) Y 1dot (t 1j ) X 0dot (t 0 ) Y 0dot (t 0j ) X 0dot (t 0 ) Y 0dot (t 0j ) The combination is performed along the lines of the iterative Weighted Least Square technique: each contributing solution plays the role of an ‘observation’ whose residuals with respect to the combined solution must be minimized.

ILRSA EOP performance – a sample =-21+/-168  as =48  as =38+/-165  as =47  as

ILRSA EOP performance – a sample =-4+/-41  s =12  s

The consolidated ILRS weekly product has generated the concept of a ‘rolling’ weekly product to be issued daily to provide the minimum latency SLR contribution to the IERS EOP estimation. At day N-1, within midnight UTC, each contributing AC makes available its weekly solution “acx.pos+eop.yymmdd.v100.snx” spanning the period [N-8, N-2]; at day N, CCs generate the combined solution, “ccx.eop.yymmdd.v100.snx”. Data arc7 days Generation frequency1/day EOP estimates age2-8 days A new ILRS product: Daily Solution

ILRSA strategy ASI-CGS CC adapted the ILRSA weekly combination strategy to the daily product; only a slight tuning has been performed to allow the proper handling of the USNO “finals.daily” as reference values (necessity of computing a reference value for the last LOD estimate). A careful revision of the combination procedure has been performed, in order to allow the fully automated generation of the solutions, including the reporting, to avoid (or minimize) the daily intervention of the analyst. Even if not necessary, the SSC/EOP combined, loose SINEX files (“pos+eop”) have been kept available at the archives. Automated ILRSA combination procedure, at present, starts every day at 1:30 AM UTC; the starting time may be modified according to ILRS/IERS recommendations. Daily Solution: the ILRSA strategy

At present, 5 ACs contribute to the daily ILRS combined solution: ASIBKGGFZJCETNSGF 25 Feb solution may be assumed as the true start of the pre-operational phase of the daily ILRSA product: it is the first date when all the 5 ACs submitted fully operational solutions (i.e. several small problems were fixed); after then, only few sporadic cases of missing solutions occurred. If late solutions were submitted, they were not analysed to stress the ILRSA combination procedure under realistic operational conditions. Daily Solution: pre-operational phase 25 FEB

Quality assessment of the Daily Solution The Core station list as agreed after Grasse ILRS AWG (09/07) has been used in the ILRSA daily product. As for the consolidated weekly product, 3d WRMS for all sites is below 10mm, while for the Core sites is slightly above 7mm.

Quality assessment of the Daily Solution A preliminary quality evaluation of the daily solution results at the start of the pre-operational phase has been made through the cross comparison with eop C04 and with ILRSA weekly solutions, focussing on the last day EOP estimate, being that one the most critical from the product latency point of view. The results, based on a month of solutions, indicate an overall precision level ( ) of the last day estimates of the order of 100  as/26  s and an accuracy level (WRMS(res)) of the order of 250  as/70  s.

Quality assessment of the Daily Solution

Further quality assessment The accumulation of solutions allows a deeper insight into the performance of the product vs. the age of the estimated EOP. Up to now, more than 6 months of individual and combined solutions are available: from them, “same age” EOP time series have been constructed and their quality evaluated.

Further quality assessment

Daily solution: quality vs EOP age

An “arc edge” effect is evident for all the contributing solutions and the combination (each one with a specific level of sensitivity), both in the estimate residuals and in the estimates uncertainty. The edge effect, present also in the combined weekly product, is a key feature to be investigated (and mitigated) to provide low latency, accurate EOP estimates.

„Arc edge” effect: remarks Part of the “arc edge” effect, for the ‘last day’ estimates is due to partial lack of observation data: that can be overpassed by pushing some hours later the issue epoch of the contributing solutions to collect more data Discrepant values among contributing solutions raise the uncertainty and accuracy of the final combined values Fine tuning of the analysis strategy should be done at the AC level to mitigate „arc edge” effect in the contributing solutions New contributors will improve the quality of the daily product

ILRS is able to provide routinely a daily EOP product with high quality level: the product is in a pre-operational phase The ILRS daily product allows to provide EOP estimates with constant latency lower than the minimum latency of the ILRS weekly solution The present quality level of the daily product can be further raised by adding contributing solutions, revising the length of the data arc, tuning the analysis strategy Summary