Comparison of some robust parameter estimation techniques for outlier analysis applied to simulated GOCE mission data

  • B. Kargoll
Part of the International Association of Geodesy Symposia book series (IAG SYMPOSIA, volume 129)


Until now, methods of gravity field determination using satellite data have virtually excluded robust estimators despite the potentially disastrous effect of outliers. This paper presents computationally-feasible algorithms for Huber’s M-estimator (a classic robust estimator) as well as for the class of R-estimators which have not traditionally been considered for geodetic applications. It is shown that the computational time required for the proposed algorithms is comparable to the direct method of least squares. Furthermore, a study with simulated GOCE satellite gradiometry data demonstrates that the robust gravity field solution remains almost unaffected by additive outliers. In addition, using robustly-estimated residuals proves to be more efficient at detecting outliers than using residuals resulting from least squares estimation. Finally, the non-parametric R-estimators make less assumptions about the measurement errors and produce similar results to Huber’s M-estimator, making that class a viable robust alternative.


GOCE satellite gradiometry robust parameter estimation rank norm outlier diagnostics 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baarda, W. (1968). A testing procedure for use in geodetic networks. Publications on Geodesy by the Netherlands Geodetic Commission 2(5).Google Scholar
  2. Hettmansperger, T.P. (1984). Statistical inference based on ranks. John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  3. Hettmansperger, T.P. and J.W. McKean (1998). Robust non-parametric statistical methods. Arnold, London.Google Scholar
  4. Huber, P.J. (1981). Robust Statistics. John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  5. Jaeckel, L.A. (1972). Estimating regression coefficients by minimizing the dispersion of the residuals. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 43(5): 1449–1458.Google Scholar
  6. Koch, K.-R. (1999). Parameter estimation and hypothesis testing in linear models. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg.Google Scholar
  7. Pail, R. and G. Plank (2002). Assessment of three numerical solution strategies for gravity field recovery from GOCE satellite gradiometry implemented on a parallel platform. Journal of Geodesy 76:462–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Rousseeuw, P.J. and A.M. Leroy (2003). Robust regression and outlier detection. John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Schuh, W.D. (1996). Tailored numerical solution strategies for the global determination of the Earth’s gravity field. Mitteilungen der geodaetischen Institute der TU Graz 81.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. Kargoll
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Theoretical Geodesy (ITG)University of BonnBonnGermany

Personalised recommendations