Outlier detection algorithms and their performance in GOCE gravity field processing

Abstract.The satellite missions CHAMP, GRACE, and GOCE mark the beginning of a new era in gravity field determination and modeling. They provide unique models of the global stationary gravity field and its variation in time. Due to inevitable measurement errors, sophisticated pre-processing steps have to be applied before further use of the satellite measurements. In the framework of the GOCE mission, this includes outlier detection, absolute calibration and validation of the SGG (satellite gravity gradiometry) measurements, and removal of temporal effects. In general, outliers are defined as observations that appear to be inconsistent with the remainder of the data set. One goal is to evaluate the effect of additive, innovative and bulk outliers on the estimates of the spherical harmonic coefficients. It can be shown that even a small number of undetected outliers (<0.2 of all data points) can have an adverse effect on the coefficient estimates. Consequently, concepts for the identification and removal of outliers have to be developed. Novel outlier detection algorithms are derived and statistical methods are presented that may be used for this purpose. The methods aim at high outlier identification rates as well as small failure rates. A combined algorithm, based on wavelets and a statistical method, shows best performance with an identification rate of about 99%. To further reduce the influence of undetected outliers, an outlier detection algorithm is implemented inside the gravity field solver (the Quick-Look Gravity Field Analysis tool was used). This results in spherical harmonic coefficient estimates that are of similar quality to those obtained without outliers in the input data.

[1]  W. Baarda,et al.  A testing procedure for use in geodetic networks. , 1968 .

[2]  J. Cornfield,et al.  Tables of Percentage Points for the Studentized Maximum Absolute Deviate in Normal Samples , 1955 .

[3]  M Neuilly.  Modelling and Estimation of Measurement Errors , 2000 .

[4]  Nico Sneeuw,et al.  The polar gap , 1997 .

[5]  Yazhen Wang.  Jump and sharp cusp detection by wavelets , 1995 .

[6]  W. J. Dixon,et al.  Ratios Involving Extreme Values , 1951 .

[7]  Ingrid Daubechies,et al.  Ten Lectures on Wavelets , 1992 .

[8]  S. Mallat.  A wavelet tour of signal processing , 1998 .

[9]  Johannes Bouman,et al.  Calibration and Error Assessment of GOCE Data , 2002 .

[10]  Carl Christian Tscherning,et al.  Calibration of satellite gradiometer data aided by ground gravity data , 1998 .

[11]  W. M. Kaula.  Theory of satellite geodesy , 1966 .

[12]  Truong Q. Nguyen,et al.  Wavelets and filter banks , 1996 .

[13]  Vic Barnett,et al.  Outliers in Statistical Data , 1980 .

[14]  Richard H. Rapp,et al.  The Ohio State 1991 geopotential and sea surface topography harmonic coefficient models , 1991 .

[15]  I. Johnstone,et al.  Wavelet Shrinkage: Asymptopia? , 1995 .

[16]  David L. Donoho,et al.  Denoising and robust nonlinear wavelet analysis , 1994, Defense, Security, and Sensing.

[17]  F. Sansò,et al.  Spherical harmonic analysis of satellite gradiometry , 1993 .

[18]  Roland Pail,et al.  GOCE Quick-Look Gravity Solution: Application of the Semianalytic Approach in the Case of Data Gaps and Non-Repeat Orbits , 2003 .

[19]  Gernot Plank,et al.  GOCE Gravity Field Processing Strategy , 2004 .

[20]  Gernot Plank,et al.  Assessment of three numerical solution strategies for gravity field recovery from GOCE satellite gravity gradiometry implemented on a parallel platform , 2002 .