Abstract
The best unbiased estimates of unknown parameters in linear models have the smallest expected mean-squared errors as long as the residuals are weighted with their true variance–covariance matrix. As this condition is rarely met in real applications, the least-squares (LS) estimator is less trustworthy and the parameter precision is often overoptimistic, particularly when correlations are neglected. A careful description of the physical and mathematical relationships between the observations is, thus, necessary to reach a realistic solution and unbiased test statistics. Global Navigation Satellite Systems and terrestrial laser scanners (TLS) measurements show similarities and can be both processed in LS adjustments, either for positioning or deformation analysis. Thus, a parallel between stochastic models for Global Navigation Satellite Systems observations proposed previously in the case of correlations and functions for TLS range measurements based on intensity values can be drawn. This comparison paves the way for a simplified way to account for correlations for a use in LS adjustment.
Appendix I
The first order Gauss Markov process is often used to model the correlations of physical processes. The smoothness of the process is 1/2, i. e. the correlation function is not mean-square differentiable at the origin [58], so that the function decreases rapidly at the origin with time (or distance). It is, thus, a short memory process. The cofactor matrix reads:
An explicit inverse
This greatly simplifies the computation of the equivalence matrix, since the sum of the elements can be computed directly, leading to:
References
[1] Alkhatib H, Kutterer H. Estimation of Measurement Uncertainty of kinematic TLS Observation Process by means of Monte-Carlo Methods. Journal of Applied Geodesy 2013, 7, 2, 125–134.10.1515/jag-2013-0044Search in Google Scholar
[2] Alkhatib H, Neumann I, Kutterer H. Uncertainty modeling of random and systematic errors by means of Monte Carlo and fuzzy techniques. J Appl Geodesy 2009, 3, 67–79.10.1515/JAG.2009.008Search in Google Scholar
[3] Alkhatib H, Paffenholz J-A, Kutterer H. Sequential Monte Carlo filtering for nonlinear GNSS trajectories. In: Sneeuw N, Novák P, Crespi M und Sansò F (Hg.) VII Hotine-Marussi Symposium on Mathematical Geodesy. Proceedings of the Symposium in Rome 2009, International Association of Geodesy (IAG). 1st Edition. Springer Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg (International Association of Geodesy Symposia, 137:81–86).10.1007/978-3-642-22078-4_12Search in Google Scholar
[4] Amiri-Simkooei AR, Teunissen PJG, Tiberius C. Application of Least-Squares variance component estimation to GPS observables. J Surv Eng 2009, 135, 4, 149–160.10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9453(2009)135:4(149)Search in Google Scholar
[5] Andrews LC, Phillips RL. Laser beam propagation through random media. Second Edition. SPIE – The international society for optical engineering, Washington, USA, 2005.10.1117/3.626196Search in Google Scholar
[6] Bass M, Decusatis C, Enoch JM. Handbook of Optics, Volume I: Geometrical and Physical Optics, Polarized Light, Components and Instruments. Third Edition. McGraw Hill Book Co, 2009.Search in Google Scholar
[7] Bischoff W, Heck B, Howind J, Teusch A. A procedure for testing the assumption of homoscedasticity in Least-Squares residuals: a case study of GPS carrier-phase observations. J Geodesy 2005, 78, 7–8, 397–404.10.1007/s00190-004-0390-5Search in Google Scholar
[8] Blaskow R, Schneider D. Analysis and correction of the dependency between laser scanner intensity values and range. ISPRS Archives 2014, 40, 5, 107–112.10.5194/isprsarchives-XL-5-107-2014Search in Google Scholar
[9] Elosegui P, Davis JL, Jaldehag RTK, Johansson JM, Niell AE, Shapiro II. Geodesy using the Global Positioning System: The effects of signal scattering on estimates of site position. JGR 1995, 100, B7, 9921–9934.10.1029/95JB00868Search in Google Scholar
[10] Boehler W, Marbs A. 3D Scanning instruments. In: Proc. of the CIPA WG6 Int. Workshop on scanning for cultural heritage recording 2002. http://www.isprs.org/commission5/workshop/.Search in Google Scholar
[11] Bona P. Precision, cross correlation, and time correlation of GPS phase and code observations. GPS Sol 2000, 4, 2, 3–13.10.1007/PL00012839Search in Google Scholar
[12] Bureick J, Alkhatib H, Neumann I. Robust spatial approximation of laser scanner points clouds by means of free-form curve approaches in deformation analysis. J Appl Geodesy 2016, 10, 1, 27–35.10.1515/jag-2015-0020Search in Google Scholar
[13] Carrea D, Abellan A, Humair F, Matasci B, Derron MH, Jaboyedoff M. Correction of terrestrial LiDAR intensity channel using Oren–Nayar reflectance model: An application to lithological differentiation. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 2016, 113, 17–29.10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2015.12.004Search in Google Scholar
[14] Coren F, Sterzai P. Radiometric correction in laser scanning. Int. J. Remote Sens., 2006, 27, 15, 3097–3104.10.1080/01431160500217277Search in Google Scholar
[15] Craymer MR, Wells DF, Vanicek P, Davlin RL. Specifications for urban GPS surveys. Surveying and Land Information Science 1990, 50, 4, 251–259.Search in Google Scholar
[16] Dach R, Lutz S, Walser P, Fridez P. Bernese GNSS Software Version 5.2. User manual, Astronomical Institute, University of Bern, Bern Open Publishing. doi:10.7892/boris.72297, ISBN: 978-3-906813-05-9. 2015.Search in Google Scholar
[17] El-Rabbany AE-S. The effect of Physical Correlations on the Ambiguity Resolution and Accuracy Estimation. PhD thesis, Department of Geodesy and Geomatics Engineering, University of New Brunswick, Canada, 1994.Search in Google Scholar
[18] Euler HJ, Goad CC. On optimal filtering of GPS dual frequency observations without using orbit information. Bulletin Geodesique 1991, 65, 2, 130–143.10.1007/BF00806368Search in Google Scholar
[19] Hug C, Wehr A. Detecting and identifying topographic objects in imaging laser altimeter data. Int. Archives Photogramm. Remote Sens. 1997, 32, 19–26.Search in Google Scholar
[20] Goad CC. Precise positioning with the GPS. Applied Geodesy, Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences 1987, 12, 17–30.10.1007/BFb0010108Search in Google Scholar
[21] Griffiths DJ, Introduction to electrodynamics. 3e éd. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ [u. a.], 1999.Search in Google Scholar
[22] Hebert M, Krotkov E. 3D measurements from imaging laser radars: how good are they? Image and Vision Computing 1992, 10, 3, 170–178.10.1016/0262-8856(92)90068-ESearch in Google Scholar
[23] Heinz E, Mettenleiter M, Kuhlmann H, Holst C. Strategy for Determining the Stochastic Distance Characteristics of the 2D Laser Scanner Z+F Profiler 9012A with Special Focus on the Close Range. Sensors 2018, 18, 2253.10.3390/s18072253Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[24] Hofmann-Wellenhof B, Lichtenegger H, Collins J. GPS Theory and Practice. Fifth revised edition. Springer, Wien, New York, 2001.Search in Google Scholar
[25] Holst C, Kuhlmann H. Challenges and Present Fields of Action at Laser Scanner Based Deformation Analysis. J Appl Geodesy 2016, 10, 1, 17–25.10.1515/jag-2015-0025Search in Google Scholar
[26] Höfle B, Pfeifer N. Correction of laser scanning intensity data: Data and model driven approaches. ISPRS 2007, 62, 6, 415–433.10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2007.05.008Search in Google Scholar
[27] Ishimaru A. Wave propagation and scattering in random media. IEEE Press and Oxford University Press, New York, 1994.Search in Google Scholar
[28] Jelalian AV. Laser Radar Systems. Artech House Inc, 1992.Search in Google Scholar
[29] Joseph A. What is the difference between SNR and CN0. Inside GNSS November December 2010, 20–25.Search in Google Scholar
[30] Jurek T, Kuhlmann H, Host C. Impact of spatial correlations on the surface estimation based on terrestrial laser scanning. J Appl Geodesy 2017, 11, 3, 143–155.10.1515/jag-2017-0006Search in Google Scholar
[31] Kauker S, Holst C, Schwieger V, Kuhlmann H, Schön S. Spatio-temporal correlations of terrestrial laser scanning. AVN 2016, 6, 170–182.Search in Google Scholar
[32] Kauker S, Schwieger V. A synthetic covariance matrix for monitoring by terrestrial laser scanning. J Appl Geodesy 2017, 11, 2, 77–87.10.1515/jag-2016-0026Search in Google Scholar
[33] Kermarrec G, Schön S. On the Matérn covariance family: a proposal for modelling temporal correlations based on turbulence theory. J Geodesy 2014, 88, 11, 1061–1079.10.1007/s00190-014-0743-7Search in Google Scholar
[34] Kermarrec G, Schön S. Taking correlation into account with a diagonal covariance matrix. J Geodesy 2016, 90, 9, 793–805.10.1007/s00190-016-0911-zSearch in Google Scholar
[35] Kermarrec G, Schön S. Apriori fully populated covariance matrices in Least-Squares adjustment – case study: GPS relative positioning. J Geodesy 2017a, 91, 5, 465–484.10.1007/s00190-016-0976-8Search in Google Scholar
[36] Kermarrec G, Schön S. Fully populated VCM or the hidden parameter. Journal of Geodetic Science 2017b, 7, 1, 151–161.10.1515/jogs-2017-0016Search in Google Scholar
[37] Kermarrec G, Schön S, Kreinovich V. Possible explanation of empirical values of the Matérn smoothness parameter for the temporal covariance of GPS measurements. Applied Mathematical Science 2017c, 11, 35, 1733–1737.10.12988/ams.2017.75186Search in Google Scholar
[38] Kermarrec G, Schön S. Taking correlations into account: a diagonal correlation model. GPS sol 2018, 21, 4, 1895–1906.10.1007/s10291-017-0665-ySearch in Google Scholar
[39] Kermarrec G, Alkhatib H, Neumann I. On the Sensitivity of the Parameters of the Intensity-Based Stochastic Model for Terrestrial Laser Scanner. Case Study: B-Spline Approximation. Sensors, 2018, 18, 9, 2964.10.3390/s18092964Search in Google Scholar
[40] Koch KR. Parameter estimation and hypothesis testing in linear models. Springer, Berlin, 1999.10.1007/978-3-662-03976-2Search in Google Scholar
[41] Koivunen AC, Kostinski AB. The feasibility of Data Whitening to Improve Performance of Weather Radar. AMS 1999, 38, 6, 741–749.10.1175/1520-0450(1999)038<0741:TFODWT>2.0.CO;2Search in Google Scholar
[42] Lambertus T, Belton D, Helmholz P. Empirical Investigation of a stochastic model based on intensity values for terrestrial laser scanning. AVN 2018, 125, 43–48.Search in Google Scholar
[43] Langley R. GPS receiver system noise. GPS World 1997, 8, 40–45.Search in Google Scholar
[44] Luati A, Proietti T. On the equivalence of the weighted Least-Squares and the generalised Least-Squares estimators, with applications to kernel smoothing. Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics 2011, 63, 4, 673–686.10.1007/s10463-009-0267-8Search in Google Scholar
[45] Luo X, Mayer M, Heck B. Analysing Time Series of GNSS Residuals by Means of ARIMA Processes. In: Sneeuw N, Novák P, Crespi M, Sansò F (eds.) VII Hotine-Marussi Symposium on Mathematical Geodesy, International Association of Geodesy Symposia, vol. 137. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012.10.1007/978-3-642-22078-4_19Search in Google Scholar
[46] Luo X, Mayer M, Heck B, Awange JL. A realistic and easy-to-implement weighting model for GNSS phase observations. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 2014, 52, 10, 6110–6118.10.1109/TGRS.2013.2294946Search in Google Scholar
[47] Misra P, Enge P. Global Positioning System. Revised Second Edition. Ganga-Jamuna Press, 2012.Search in Google Scholar
[48] Ozendi M, Akca D, Topan H. A generic point error model for TLS derived point clouds. In: Proc. SPIE 10332, Videometrics, Range Imaging and Applications XIV, 2017, doi:10.1117/12.2269373.Search in Google Scholar
[49] Pelzer H. Zur Analyse geodatischer Deformations-messungen. Verlag der Bayer Akad. d. Wiss, Munchen, Munchen, 410 1971. 164, 1971.Search in Google Scholar
[50] Paffenholz J-A, Bae K-H. Geo-referencing point clouds with transformational and positional uncertainties. Journal of Applied Geodesy 2012, 6, 1, 33–46.10.1515/jag-2011-0010Search in Google Scholar
[51] Pfeifer N, Dorninger P, Haring A, Fan H. Investigating terrestrial laser scanning intensity data: quality and functional relations. In: 8th Conference on Optical 3-D Measurement Techniques, Zürich, Switzerland, 2007, 328.Search in Google Scholar
[52] Rao CR, Toutenburg H. Linear Models, Least-Squares and Alternatives. 2nd ed. Springer, New York, 1999.Search in Google Scholar
[53] Rasmussen CE, Williams C. Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning. The MIT Press, 2006.10.7551/mitpress/3206.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
[54] Rueger JM. Electronic distance measurement. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 1996.10.1007/978-3-642-80233-1Search in Google Scholar
[55] Satirapod C, Wang J. Comparing the quality indicators of GPS carrier phase observations. Geomatics Research Australasia 2000, 73, 75–92.Search in Google Scholar
[56] Schön S, Brunner FK. Atmospheric turbulence theory applied to GPS carrier-phase data. J Geodesy 2008, 1, 47–57.10.1007/s00190-007-0156-ySearch in Google Scholar
[57] Soudarissanane S, Lindenbergh R, Menenti M and Teunissen P. Scanning geometry: influencing factor on the quality of terrestrial laser scanning points. ISPRS 2011, 66, 389–399.10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2011.01.005Search in Google Scholar
[58] Stein ML. Interpolation of spatial data. Some theory for kriging. Springer, New York, 1999.10.1007/978-1-4612-1494-6Search in Google Scholar
[59] Taylor H, Karlin S. An introduction to stochastic modelling. 3rd edition. Academic Press, https://books.google.de/books?id=UtPgVrVthF8C, 1998.Search in Google Scholar
[60] Teunissen PJG, Jonkman NF, Tiberius CCJM. Weighting GPS Dual Frequency Observations: Bearing the Cross of Cross Correlation. GPS Sol 1998, 2, 2, 28–37.10.1007/PL00000033Search in Google Scholar
[61] Tiberius C, Kenselaar F. Variance Component Estimation and Precise GPS Positioning: Case Study. J Surv Eng 2003, 129, 1, 11–18.10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9453(2003)129:1(11)Search in Google Scholar
[62] Vermeer M. The precision of geodetic GPS and one way of improving it. J Geodesy 1997, 71, 4, 240–245.10.1007/s001900050091Search in Google Scholar
[63] Vosselman G and Maas HG. Airborne and Terrestrial Laser Scanning. Whittles Publishing, Dunbeath, Scotland, UK, 2010.Search in Google Scholar
[64] Wang J. Towards deformation monitoring with terrestrial laser scanning based on external calibration and feature matching methods. PhD thesis, Wissenschaftliche Arbeiten der Fachrichtung Geodeäsie and Geoinformatik der Leibniz Universität Hannover, No. 308, 2013.Search in Google Scholar
[65] Wheelon AD. Electromagnetic Scintillation part I Geometrical optics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2001.10.1017/CBO9780511534805Search in Google Scholar
[66] Wieser A, Brunner FK. An extended weight model for GPS phase observations. Earth Planet Space 2000, 52, 10, 777–782.10.1186/BF03352281Search in Google Scholar
[67] Wujanz D, Holst C, Neitzel F, Kuhlmann H, Schwieger V, Niemeier W. Survey configuration for terrestrial laser scanning. AVN 2016, 06.Search in Google Scholar
[68] Wujanz D, Burger M, Mettenleiter M, Neitzel F. An intensity-based stochastic model for terrestrial laser scanners. ISPRS 2017, 125, 146–155.10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2016.12.006Search in Google Scholar
[69] Wujanz D, Burger M, Tschirschwitz F, Nietzschmann T, Neitzel F, and Kersten T. Bestimmung von intensitätsbasierten stochastischen Modellen für terrestrische Laserscanner basierend auf 3DPunktwolken. In: Proc. “17. Oldenburger 3D-Tage Optische 3DMesstechnik-Photogrammetrie-Laserscanning”, Oldenburg (Germany), 2018.Search in Google Scholar
[70] Xu X, Kargoll B, Bureick J, Yang H, Alkhatib H, Neumann. TLS-based profile model analysis of major composite structures with robust B-spline method, Composite Structures 2018, 184, 814–820.10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.10.057Search in Google Scholar
[71] Zamecnikova M, Wieser A, Woschitz H, Ressl C. Influence of surface reflectivity on reflectorless electronic distance measurement and terrestrial laser scanning. J of Appl Geodesy 2014, 8, 4, 311–325.10.1515/jag-2014-0016Search in Google Scholar
[72] Zamecnikova M, Neuner N. Untersuchung der Distanzabhängigkeit des gemeinsamen Einflusses des Auftreffwinkels und der Oberflächenrauheit auf die reflektorlose Distanzmessung einer scannenden Totalstation. AVN 2017, 11/12.Search in Google Scholar
[73] Zhao X, Alkhatib H, Kargoll B, Neumann I. Statistical evaluation of the influence of the uncertainty budget on B-spline curve approximation. J. Appl. Geodesy 2017, 11, 4, 215–230.10.1515/jag-2017-0018Search in Google Scholar
[74] Zhao X, Kargoll B, Omidalizarandi M, Xu X, Alkhatib H. Model selection for parametric surfaces approximating 3D point clouds for deformation analysis, Remote Sensing, 2018, 10, 4, 634, Special Issue: “3D Modelling from Point Clouds: Algorithms and Methods”.10.3390/rs10040634Search in Google Scholar
© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston