Publications Repository - Gdańsk University of Technology

The long-range dependence (LRD) of the stochastic part of GPS-derived topocentric coordinates change (North, East, Up) results with relatively high autocorrelation values with a focus on self-similarity. One of the reasons for such self-similarity in the GPS time series are noises that are commonly recognised to prevail in the form of the flicker noise model. To prove the self-similarity of the stochastic part of GPS time series we used more than 130 ASG-EUPOS (active geodetic network EUPOS) stations from an area of Poland with a 5-year span of the daily topocentric coordinate changes. The deterministic part of time series was removed by means of the least-squares (LS) method, median absolute deviation (MAD) criterion and the sequential t-test algorithm, respectively. Then the self-similarity of the residue was proved by the results of the Ljung–Box test, whose values close to zero showed the dependence of the stochastic part of the GPS time series. The residue was analysed by means of the rescaled range (R/S) method with the H (Hurst) parameter and the detrended fluctuation analysis (DFA) with the scaling exponent α. Both H and α values ranged within assumed LRD limits of 0.5 and 1. This analysis was followed by noise investigation with a maximum likelihood estimation (MLE). The white plus the power-law noise models were assumed a priori, which gave us a spectral indices κ between − 0.4 and − 1.2 for all of the time series. It proved that fractional white noise outweighs other types of noises in GPS time series. Authors found here, that the LRD methods by omitting the noise amplitude data led to an underestimation of H values and their misinterpretation. The larger the omitted amplitude is, the greater the difference between the noise characters estimated with R/S values in comparison to the reference values of κ are. Some of these differences exceed even the value of 0.6, which may result in the estimation of false noise character in GPS data thus eliciting wrong conclusions

Authors

• J. Bogusz,
• dr inż. Anna Klos,
• prof. dr hab. inż. Mariusz Figurski link open in new tab ,
• M. Kujawa