ArticleScientific reports2024
An improved Gaussian process for filling the missing data in GNSS position time series considering the influence of adjacent stations.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Due to various unavoidable reasons or gross error elimination, missing data inevitably exist in global navigation satellite system (GNSS) position time series, which may result in many analysis methods not being applicable. Typically, interpolating the missing data is a crucial preprocessing step before analyzing the time series. The conventional methods for filling missing data do not consider the influence of adjacent stations. In this work, an improved Gaussian process (GP) approach is developed to fill the missing data of GNSS time series, in which the time series of adjacent stations are applied to construct impact factors, together with a comparison of the conventional GP and the commonly used cubic spline methods. For the simulation experiments, the root mean square error (RMSE), mean absolute error (MAE) and correlation coefficient (R) are adopted to evaluate the performance of the improved GP. The results show that the filled missing data of the improved GP are closer to the true values than those of the conventional GP and cubic spline methods, regardless of the missing percentages ranging from 5 to 30%, with an interval of 5%. Specifically, the mean relative RMSE and MAE improvements for the improved GP with respect to the conventional GP are 21.2%, 21.3% and 8.3% and 12.7%, 16.2% and 11.01% for the North (N), East (E) and Up (U) components, respectively. In the real experiment, eight GNSS stations are analyzed using improved GP, together with conventional GP and a cubic spline. The results indicate that the first three principal components (PCs) of the improved GP can perverse 98.3%, 99.8% and 77.0% of the total variance for the N, E and U components, respectively. This value is obviously higher than those of the conventional GP and cubic spline. Therefore, we can conclude that the improved GP can better fill in the missing data in GNSS position time series than the conventional GP and cubic spline because of the impacts of adjacent stations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.