Acta Geodaetica et Geophysica

, Volume 53, Issue 2, pp 295–307 | Cite as

Solution for GNSS height anomaly fitting of mining area based on robust TLS

  • Yeqing Tao
  • Guangxiong Mao
  • Xiaozhong Zhou
Original Study


Global navigation satellite system (GNSS) height solutions of mining area are readily contaminated by outliers because of the special geological environment. Additionally, GNSS height anomaly fitting model is a type of errors-in-variables model, and the traditional solution for parameter estimation does not account for error in the coefficient matrix. To solve these two problems, this paper presents a solution of the robust total least squares estimation for GNSS height anomaly fitting of mining area. Different from the traditional solution for robust estimation, an algorithm is established employing median method to obtain stable parameter values under the condition that observation data are highly contaminated. Employing Lagrange function and weight function, an iterative algorithm for the parameter estimation of GNSS anomaly fitting model is proposed, and the algorithm is verified using real data of mining area. The numerical results show that the proposed solution obtains stable parameter values when observation data are highly contaminated by outliers and demonstrate that the proposed algorithm is more accurate than traditional solutions for robust estimation.


Errors-in-variables model Total least squares Robust estimation Median method Height anomaly of mining area 



The authors would like to thank the reviewers and the editor. This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41601501; 41271135), Natural Science Found for Colleges and Universities of Jiangsu Province (16KJD420001) and Huaian Key Laboratory of Geographic Information Technology and Applications (HAP201405).


  1. Adcock RJ (1877) Note on the method of least squares. Analyst 4:183–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amiri-Simkooei AR (2013) Application of least squares variance component estimation to errors-in-variables models. J Geodesy 87(10):935–944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dongfang L, Jianjun Z, Yingchun S et al (2016) Construction method of regularization by singular value decomposition of design matrix. Acta Geod Cartogr Sin 45(8):883–889Google Scholar
  4. Fang X (2015) Weighted total least-squares with constraints: a universal formula for geodetic symmetrical transformations. J Geodesy 89(5):459–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Golub GH, Van Loan CF (1980) An analysis of the total least squares problem. SIAM J Number Anal 17:883–893CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Heiskanen WA, Moritz H (1967) Physical geodesy. W H Freeman and Company, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  7. Jiangwen Z (1989) Classic theory of errors and robust estimation. Acta Geod Cartogr Sin 18(2):115–120Google Scholar
  8. Ling Y, Yunzhong S, Lizhi L (2011) Equivalent weight robust estimation method based on median parameter estimates. Acta Geod Cartogr Sin 40(1):28–32Google Scholar
  9. Lu J, Chen Y, Li BF, Fang X (2014) Robust total least squares with reweighting iteration for three-dimensional similarity transformation. Surv Rev 46(334):28–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Mahboub V (2012) On weighted total least-squares for geodetic transformation. J Geodesy 86(5):359–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mahboub V (2014) Variance component estimation in errors-in-variables models and a rigorous total least-squares approach. Stud Geophys Geod 58(1):17–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Mahboub V, Amiri-Simkooei AR, Sharifi MA (2013) Iteratively reweighted total least squares: a robust estimation in error-in-variables models. Surv Rev 45(329):92–99Google Scholar
  13. Neitzel F (2010) Generalization of total least-squares on example of unweighted and weighted 2D similarity transformation. J Geodesy 84(12):751–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Pan G, Zhou Y, Sun H et al (2015) Linear observation based total least squares. Surv Rev 47(340):18–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Peiliang X, Liu J, Shi C (2012) Total least squares adjustment in partial errors- in-variables models: algorithm and statistical analysis. J Geodesy 86(8):661–675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Peter JH (1981) Robust statistics. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  17. Rousseeuw P, Wagner J (1994) Robust regression with a distribution intercept using least median of squares. Comput Stat Data Anal 17:65–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Schaffrin B (2006) A note on constrained total least-squares estimation. Linear Algebra Appl 417:245–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Schaffrin B, Felus YA (2008) On the multivariate total least-squares approach to empirical coordinate transformations: three algorithms. J Geodesy 82(6):373–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schaffrin B, Felus YA (2009) An algorithmic approach to the total least-squares problem with linear and quadratic constraints. Stud Geophys Geod 53:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Schaffrin B, Uzun S (2011) Error-in-variables for mobile mapping algorithms in the presence of outliers. Arch Photogramm Cartogr Remote Sens 22:377–387Google Scholar
  22. Schaffrin B, Wieser A (2008) On weighted total least-squares adjustment for linear regression. J Geodesy 82(7):415–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Schaffrin B, Lee I, Choi Y et al (2006) Total least squares (TLS) for geodetic straight-line and plane adjustment. Bull Geod Sc Aff 65:141–168Google Scholar
  24. Shen Y, Li B, Chen Y (2011) An iterative solution of weighted total least-squares adjustment. J Geodesy 85(4):229–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tao Y, Gao J, Yao Y (2014) TLS algorithm for GPS height fitting based on robust estimation. Surv Rev 46(336):184–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Xiaohua T, Yanmin J, Lingyun L (2011) An improved weighted total least squares method with applications in linear fitting and coordinate transformation. J Surv Eng 137(4):120–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Xuming G, Jicang W (2012) Generalized regularization to ill-posed total least squares problem. Acta Geod Cartogr Sin 41(3):372–377Google Scholar
  28. Xunqiang G, Zhilin L (2014) A robust weighted total least squares method. Acta Geod Cartogr Sin 43(9):888–894Google Scholar
  29. Yang Y (1999) Robust estimation of geodetic datum transformation. J Geodesy 73(5):268–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Urban and Environmental SciencesHuaiyin Normal UniversityHuaianPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations