Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 39 references

Introduction to Geodetic Time Series Analysis

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper shows that for linear geodetic trajectory models with Gaussian noise, maximum likelihood estimation saturates the Cramér–Rao lower bound, making it the most accurate unbiased estimator available.

desk verdict Useful teaching chapter with a correct core, two fixable typos, and a benchmark set that makes it worth a referee's time. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.11364 v1 pith:CPJMQIZ3 submitted 2019-08-06 stat.OT stat.ME

Machiel S. Bos , Jean-Philippe Montillet , Simon D.P. Williams , Rui M.S. Fernandes This is my paper · ORCID
classification stat.OTstat.ME MSC 62M1062F1086A30
keywords maximumlikelihoodestimationweightedleastsquaresCramér–Raolowerboundpower-lawnoiseflickerGNSStimeseriestrajectorymodelcovariancematrix
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This book chapter sets out the statistical foundation for fitting trajectory models—trend, seasonal signals, offsets—to geodetic time series such as satellite positioning station records and tide gauges. Its central claim is that for linear trajectory models with Gaussian noise, maximum likelihood estimation is optimal: when the covariance matrix is known, the weighted least-squares solution achieves the Cramér–Rao lower bound, so no unbiased estimator can have smaller variance. Because the noise in real geodetic series is temporally correlated, the chapter derives practical covariance models, chiefly power-law noise generated by fractional differencing, and explains how to estimate both trajectory and noise parameters by maximum likelihood. The intended payoff is realistic uncertainty estimates for secular rates, since assuming white noise can understate velocity errors by a factor of 5–11 in satellite positioning time series.

What carries the argument

The driving object is the log-likelihood $\ln L = -\frac12[N\ln(2\pi)+\ln\det C + (y-Ax)^T C^{-1}(y-Ax)]$; maximising it yields the weighted least-squares estimator. The proof of optimality runs through the Fisher information matrix, whose curvature $I(x)=A^T C^{-1} A$ equals the inverse of the estimator covariance, saturating the Cramér–Rao bound. For temporally correlated noise, the chapter builds $C$ from the fractional-differencing filter $h_0=1$, $h_i=(i-\kappa/2-1)h_{i-1}/i$, so that random walk ($\kappa=-2$), flicker noise ($\kappa=-1$), and white noise ($\kappa=0$) all appear as special cases of one covariance family.

What would settle it

Generate long synthetic geodetic series from a stationary power-law process whose history begins decades before the first observation, fit the chapter's maximum-likelihood procedure, and compare the published error bars with the standard deviation of the fitted trends over thousands of realizations; any systematic shortfall would show that the zero-noise-before-start assumption matters.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that for a linear trajectory model $g(x,t)=Ax$, with Gaussian observation noise of known covariance $C$, the maximum likelihood estimator is the weighted least-squares estimate $\hat{x}=(A^T C^{-1} A)^{-1} A^T C^{-1} y$. Its covariance equals $(A^T C^{-1} A)^{-1}$, which matches the inverse of the Fisher information matrix $I(x)=A^T C^{-1} A$, so the Cramér–Rao lower bound is attained. The chapter therefore claims that among all existing estimation methods, none can produce a more accurate result than maximum likelihood, only an equal or worse one. It then supplies the machinery to make this practical for geodetic data: a power-law noise model $(1-B)^{-\kappa/2}v=w$ whose covariance matrix is built from fractional-differencing filter coefficients, plus the sum of power-law and white noise $C=\sigma_{\mathrm{pl}}^2 J(\kappa)+\sigma_w^2 I$ as the standard model for satellite positioning series.

Load-bearing premise

The argument treats the covariance matrix as either known or correctly parameterized, and it assumes there was no noise before the first observation; if either fails, the reported trend uncertainty can be wrong.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If maximum likelihood is optimal, then any competing unbiased estimator of trajectory parameters can match but cannot beat the accuracy of the weighted least-squares solution for known Gaussian covariance.
  • Trend uncertainties should be computed under a coloured-noise model; the chapter reports that assuming pure white noise understates velocity error by factors of roughly 5–11 for satellite positioning series, about 6 for GRACE gravity series, and 1.5–2 for sea level.
  • Maximum likelihood can be split into a fast weighted least-squares step for trajectory parameters and a numerical search over noise parameters, keeping the computation tractable.
  • The zero-before-first-observation convention makes non-stationary power-law noise with $\kappa<-1$ tractable, giving finite covariance matrices that still grow over time.
  • For series thousands of points long, approximating the covariance matrix as a Toeplitz matrix reduces inversion cost from $O(N^3)$ to $O(N^2)$, which is what makes long records analysable in practice.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the noise before the first observation was not actually zero, the covariance at low frequencies—and hence the reported trend uncertainty—could be misstated; a direct test is to simulate stationary coloured noise with a long warm-up period and compare maximum-likelihood error bars with the empirical spread of fitted trends.
  • The same Cramér–Rao optimality argument transfers beyond trajectory fitting to any linear inverse problem in geodesy, so linear rate estimation and station position estimation share the same accuracy ceiling.
  • The paper's noise-model family suggests a testable hierarchy: adding the generalized Gauss–Markov flattening parameter should shrink estimated trend errors when the true noise spectrum flattens at low frequency, which can be checked on tide-gauge records.
  • The claim that no method beats maximum likelihood holds for unbiased estimators; if one accepts a small bias, regularized estimators could in principle report smaller variance, so the practical gap between unbiased maximum likelihood and biased alternatives is an open comparison.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This manuscript is the second chapter of a planned book on geodetic time series analysis. It derives maximum likelihood estimation for Gaussian noise, shows that for linear trajectory models the weighted least squares estimator coincides with the MLE and attains the Cramer-Rao lower bound when the covariance matrix is known, and then introduces power-law, GGM, and FIGGM noise models for geodetic data. It closes with Python examples that illustrate white-noise versus flicker-noise error bars and joint estimation of trajectory and noise parameters, plus a description of the BSG benchmark. The central derivations are correct and clearly presented, but the chapter contains a sign inconsistency in the power-law noise definition, an overbroad optimality claim, and several smaller errors in the numerical example.

Significance. As an introductory chapter, the paper is useful: it makes the MLE/CRLB logic accessible to geodetic practitioners, connects the likelihood to a Cholesky-based implementation, and ships runnable Python code and a benchmark dataset. The derivations in Sections 1-2 are standard and sound, and the emphasis on the role of colored noise in rate uncertainties is valuable. The strongest parts are the step-by-step likelihood derivation and the concrete numerical examples. However, the chapter is not a research contribution; its value is pedagogical, and the sign error in the noise model definition plus the code inconsistency need to be corrected before the material can be recommended for publication.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3, Eqs. (23)-(25)] The exponent of the fractional-integration operator is inconsistent. Eq. (23) defines (1-B)^(-kappa/2) v = w, and Eq. (24) expands the same operator with binomial parameter -kappa/2. For kappa=-1 this binomial form would give h1=-1/2 and h2=-1/8, whereas the recurrence (25) and the Python code produce h1=1/2 and h2=3/8. The recurrence is the one used to build the covariance matrix (26) and matches (1-B)^(kappa/2), i.e., fractionally integrated noise with spectral index kappa. The minus signs in Eq. (23) and in the upper argument of the binomial in Eq. (24) should be removed, and the displayed expansion in Eq. (24) should be checked for consistency. As printed, a reader implementing from Eq. (24) obtains a different covariance matrix, which invalidates the noise model used in the numerical examples.
  2. [Section 2, after Eq. (19); Section 6] The claim that 'out of all existing estimation methods, none of them will produce a more accurate result than MLE, only equal or worse' is too strong. The Cramer-Rao argument applies to unbiased estimators and assumes the covariance matrix C is known and correctly specified. When noise parameters are estimated jointly, MLE achieves the bound only asymptotically; when the assumed C is misspecified (see the v_i=0 initialization in Section 3), the bound does not apply at all. The sentence should be qualified to 'among unbiased estimators under a correctly specified model', and the asymptotic caveat should be stated in the Discussion as well.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 1, after Eq. (3)] The statement that all moments higher than two of a Gaussian are zero is false; for a zero-mean Gaussian, E[W^4]=3*sigma^4. The correct statement is that all cumulants of order greater than two vanish, or equivalently that the mean and covariance fully determine the Gaussian distribution.
  2. [Eq. (17)] The displayed inequality is not the Cramer-Rao inequality as written; the correct relation is Var(x_hat) * I(x) >= 1. Eq. (18) is correct, but the intermediate inequality should be fixed to avoid confusing readers.
  3. [Section 5, code block 'Correct Flicker noise'] The code sets sigma_pl=4, although the data were generated with sigma_pl=0.5 and the MLE later recovers 0.495. The printed uncertainties are eight times larger than they would be with sigma_pl=0.5, and the statement that the errors are '5 times larger' is not consistent with the output as printed. The code should use sigma_pl=0.5 or the text should explain the deliberate misspecification.
  4. [Section 3, around Eq. (26)] The zero-initialization assumption is acknowledged, but the chapter would be improved by a sentence noting that for stationary pre-existing noise this can bias the low-frequency covariance and hence the trend uncertainty; a reference to a quantitative study would help.
  5. [Section 5, Eq. (44)] The sentence says the power-law amplitude is scaled by Delta T^{-kappa/4}, but the displayed formula and numerical value use Delta T^{kappa/4} (for kappa=-1, a multiplication by 365.25^{1/4}). The sign should be aligned.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the MLE/CRLB derivation is self-contained, and the numerical examples are checks with known simulation parameters rather than fitted predictions.

full rationale

The chapter's central claim, that for a linear model with known Gaussian covariance the weighted least-squares estimator attains the Cramer-Rao lower bound and is therefore optimal, is derived directly from the likelihood in Eqs. (12)-(19). Setting the derivative of the log-likelihood to zero gives Eq. (14), and the Fisher information in Eq. (19) is exactly the inverse of the estimator covariance in Eq. (15). This is a mathematical identity within the stated Gaussian model, not an assumption of the conclusion. The power-law noise model is introduced from the literature (Hosking, Granger, Kasdin, Williams), and the explicitly acknowledged assumption v_i = 0 for i < 0 before Eq. (26) is a modeling boundary condition, not an input that is later renamed as an output; if the true noise process violates that condition, the optimality statement would not apply, but that is a correctness or assumption concern, not circularity. The numerical examples generate synthetic data with known parameters (slope, offset, sigma_pl = 0.5, kappa = -1) and verify that the estimator recovers those values; the BSG benchmark is provided as a dataset for independent testing, not as a prediction obtained from fitted inputs. Self-citations are used for software pointers and background references, but the core derivation does not rely on them.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new entities are postulated. The free parameters listed are hand-chosen inputs for synthetic examples and benchmark generation, not fitted claims. The central claim (MLE optimality) rests on standard assumptions of Gaussian zero-mean noise, linear model structure, and the initialization convention for fractional noise filters.

free parameters (4)
  • sigma_pl (synthetic example) = 0.5 (true, known for simulation)
    Used to generate the synthetic flicker noise in Section 5. Not fitted from real data; it is the known input amplitude. The MLE recovers approximately 0.495.
  • kappa (synthetic example) = -1 (true)
    Spectral index for flicker noise in the simulation. Recovered as -1.004 by MLE. Not load-bearing for the paper's central claim.
  • sigma (BSG benchmark) = 1.4 mm (horizontal), 4.8 mm (vertical)
    Chosen amplitude scale for the generated benchmark series in Section 5. Not fitted to data.
  • phi (BSG benchmark) = 0.6 (horizontal), 0.7 (vertical)
    Chosen fraction of power-law noise contribution in the benchmark series. Defines the benchmark, not a discovery.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The noise is Gaussian with zero mean, so mean and covariance fully characterize the stochastic process.
    Invoked in Section 1 for the likelihood function (Eq. 4) and throughout. This is the core probabilistic assumption behind MLE optimality.
  • domain assumption The trajectory model is a linear combination of known basis functions (Eq. 9).
    Section 2 defines linear models g(x,t)=Ax. The weighted least-squares solution (Eq. 14) and its variance depend on linearity.
  • ad hoc to paper The noise process is initialized with v_i=0 for i<0, i.e., no noise before the first observation.
    Section 3, around Eq. (26). This keeps covariance matrices finite for non-stationary power-law noise. If the true process had noise before the first epoch, the covariance model and resulting uncertainties would differ.
  • standard math The covariance matrix C is positive definite, so a Cholesky decomposition exists.
    Used in Section 5 numerical implementation and Eq. (40). Standard linear algebra fact, not unique to geodesy.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Introduction to Geodetic Time Series Analysis." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CPJMQIZ3

@misc{pith2026190811364,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Introduction to Geodetic Time Series Analysis},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CPJMQIZ3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.11364}
}
read the original abstract

This contribution is the chapter 2 of the book "geodetic time series analysis" (10.1007/978-3-030-21718-1). The book is dedicated to the art of fitting a trajectory model to those geodetic time series in order to extract accurate geophysical information with realistic error bars in geodymanics and environmental geodesy related studies. In the vast amount of the literature published on this topic in the past 25 years, we are specifically interested in parametric algorithms which are estimating both functional and stochastic models using various Bayesian statistical tools (maximum likelihood, Monte Carlo Markov chain, Kalman filter, least squares variance component estimation, information criteria). This chapter will focus on how the parameters of the trajectory model can be estimated. It is meant to give researchers new to this topic an easy introduction to the theory with references to key books and articles where more details can be found. In addition, we hope that it refreshes some of the details for the more experienced readers. We pay special attention to the modelling of the noise which has received much attention in the literature in the last years and highlight some of the numerical aspects.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.11364 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The Gaussian probability density function, togethe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Sketch of a trajectory model containing common pheno [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Examples of white, flicker and random walk noise [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: One-sided power spectral density for white, flicker a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Our synthetic time series containing a simple line pl [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The log of the log(L) function as function of κ and σpl. The result is shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Geophys Res Letters 19(4):333--336, doi:10.1029/91GL02832

    Agnew DC (1992) The time-domain behaviour of power-law noises . Geophys Res Letters 19(4):333--336, doi:10.1029/91GL02832

    work page doi:10.1029/91gl02832 1992

  2. [2]

    Monographs on statistics and applied probability, Chapman & Hall, New York

    Beran J (1994) Statistics for long-memory processes. Monographs on statistics and applied probability, Chapman & Hall, New York

    work page 1994

  3. [3]

    Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Methodological) 57(4):659--672, ://www.jstor.org/stable/2345935

    Beran J (1995) Maximum Likelihood Estimation of the Differencing Parameter for Invertible Short and Long Memory Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average Models . Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Methodological) 57(4):659--672, ://www.jstor.org/stable/2345935

    work page arXiv 1995

  4. [4]

    J Geodesy 82:157--166, doi:10.1007/s00190-007-0165-x

    Bos MS, Williams SDP, Ara \'u jo IB, Bastos L (2008) Fast error analysis of continuous GPS observations . J Geodesy 82:157--166, doi:10.1007/s00190-007-0165-x

    work page doi:10.1007/s00190-007-0165-x 2008

  5. [5]

    J Geodesy 87:351--360, doi:10.1007/s00190-012-0605-0

    Bos MS, Williams SDP, Ara \'u jo IB, Bastos L (2013) Fast error analysis of continuous GNSS observations with missing data . J Geodesy 87:351--360, doi:10.1007/s00190-012-0605-0

    doi:10.1007/s00190-012-0605-0 2013

  6. [6]

    Geophys J Int 196:1423--1430, doi:10.1093/gji/ggt481

    Bos MS, Williams SDP, Ara \'u jo IB, Bastos L (2014) The effect of temporal correlated noise on the sea level rate and acceleration uncertainty . Geophys J Int 196:1423--1430, doi:10.1093/gji/ggt481

    work page doi:10.1093/gji/ggt481 2014

  7. [7]

    Box GEP, Jenkins GM, Reinsel GC, Ljung GM (2015) Time Series Analysis, Forecasting and Control , 5th edn. Wiley

    work page 2015

  8. [8]

    McGraw-Hill Kogakusha, Ltd., Tokyo

    Bracewell R (1978) The Fourier Transform and its Applications , 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill Kogakusha, Ltd., Tokyo

    work page 1978

Show all 39 references
  1. [9]

    Springer-Verlag, New York

    Brockwell P, Davis RA (2002) Introduction to Time Series and Forecasting , second edition edn. Springer-Verlag, New York

    2002

  2. [10]

    Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

    Buttkus B (2000) Spectral Analysis and Filter Theory in Applied Geophysics . Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

    2000

  3. [11]

    Statistical analysis of the time-series of permanent GPS stations

    Caporali A (2003) Average strain rate in the Italian crust inferred from a permanent GPS network - I. Statistical analysis of the time-series of permanent GPS stations . Geophys J Int 155:241--253, doi:10.1046/j.1365-246X.2003.02034.x

    2003 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Duxbury Resource Center

    Casella G, Berger R (2001) Statistical Inference , 2nd edn. Duxbury Resource Center

    2001

  5. [13]

    J Geodesy 89:591--606, doi:10.1007/s00190-015-0801-9

    Dmitrieva K, Segall P, DeMets C (2015) Network-based estimation of time-dependent noise in GPS position time series . J Geodesy 89:591--606, doi:10.1007/s00190-015-0801-9

    2015 doi

  6. [14]

    Journal of Econometrics 14(2):227 -- 238, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(80)90092-5

    Granger C (1980) Long memory relationships and the aggregation of dynamic models . Journal of Econometrics 14(2):227 -- 238, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(80)90092-5

    1980 doi

  7. [15]

    Journal of Time Series Analysis 1(1):15--29, doi:10.1111/j.1467-9892.1980.tb00297.x, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1467-9892.1980.tb00297.x

    Granger CWJ, Joyeux R (1980) An Introduction to Long-Memory Time Series Models and Fractional Differencing . Journal of Time Series Analysis 1(1):15--29, doi:10.1111/j.1467-9892.1980.tb00297.x, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1467-9892.1980.tb00297.x

    1980

  8. [16]

    Entropy 19(9), doi:10.3390/e19090437, ://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/19/9/437

    Graves T, Gramacy R, Watkins N, Franzke C (2017) A Brief History of Long Memory: Hurst, Mandelbrot and the Road to ARFIMA, 1951–1980 . Entropy 19(9), doi:10.3390/e19090437, ://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/19/9/437

    2017 doi

  9. [17]

    Journal of Geodesy doi:10.1007/s00190-019-01244-y, ://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-019-01244-y

    He X, Bos MS, Montillet JP, Fernandes RMS (2019) Investigation of the noise properties at low frequencies in long GNSS time series . Journal of Geodesy doi:10.1007/s00190-019-01244-y, ://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-019-01244-y

    2019 doi

  10. [18]

    Biometrika 68:165--176

    Hosking JRM (1981) Fractional differencing . Biometrika 68:165--176

    1981

  11. [19]

    Nature 180:494, doi:10.1038/180494a0

    Hurst HE (1957) A Suggested Statistical Model of some Time Series which occur in Nature . Nature 180:494, doi:10.1038/180494a0

    1957 doi

  12. [20]

    Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Jaynes ET (2003) Probability theory: The logic of science . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    2003

  13. [21]

    Geophys Res Letters 22(21):2905--2908, doi:10.1029/95GL02661

    Johnson HO, Agnew DC (1995) Monument motion and measurements of crustal velocities . Geophys Res Letters 22(21):2905--2908, doi:10.1029/95GL02661

    1995 doi

  14. [22]

    Proc IEEE 83(5):802--827

    Kasdin NJ (1995) Discrete simulation of colored noise and stochastic processes and 1/f^ power-law noise generation . Proc IEEE 83(5):802--827

    1995

  15. [23]

    Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA

    Kay SM (1993) Fundamentals of Statistical Signal Processing: Estimation Theory . Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA

    1993

  16. [24]

    Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences , Springer-Verlag, doi:10.1007/BFb0048699

    Koch KR (1990) Bayesian Inference with Geodetic Applications . Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences , Springer-Verlag, doi:10.1007/BFb0048699

    1990 doi

  17. [25]

    Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg

    Koch KR (2007) Introduction to Bayesian Statistics , 2nd edn. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg

    2007

  18. [26]

    J Geophys Res 109:B04406, doi:10.1029/2003JB002819

    Langbein J (2004) Noise in two-color electronic distance meter measurements revisited . J Geophys Res 109:B04406, doi:10.1029/2003JB002819

    2004 doi

  19. [27]

    Comput Geosci 36(5):611--619, doi:10.1016/j.cageo.2009.08.011

    Langbein J (2010) Computer algorithm for analyzing and processing borehole strainmeter data. Comput Geosci 36(5):611--619, doi:10.1016/j.cageo.2009.08.011

    2010 doi

  20. [28]

    J Geodesy 86:775--783, doi:10.1007/s00190-012-0556-5

    Langbein J (2012) Estimating rate uncertainty with maximum likelihood: differences between power-law and flicker--random-walk models . J Geodesy 86:775--783, doi:10.1007/s00190-012-0556-5

    2012 doi

  21. [29]

    Springer, doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-2150-0

    Mandelbrot BB (1999) Multifractals and 1/f Noise . Springer, doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-2150-0

    1999 doi

  22. [30]

    SIAM Review 10:422--437

    Mandelbrot BB, van Ness JW (1968) F ractional B rownian motions, fractional noises and applications. SIAM Review 10:422--437

    1968

  23. [31]

    J Geophys Res 104(B2):2797--2816, doi:10.1029/1998JB900033

    Mao A, Harrison CGA, Dixon TH (1999) Noise in GPS coordinate time series . J Geophys Res 104(B2):2797--2816, doi:10.1029/1998JB900033

    1999 doi

  24. [32]

    Mathematical Geosciences 47(6):627--646

    Montillet JP, Yu K (2015) Modeling Geodetic Processes with Levy -Stable Distribution and FARIMA . Mathematical Geosciences 47(6):627--646

    2015

  25. [33]

    Comments on Astrophysics 7:103--119

    Press WH (1978) Flicker noises in astronomy and elsewhere . Comments on Astrophysics 7:103--119

    1978

  26. [34]

    Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA

    Press WH, Teukolsky SA, Vetterling WT, Flannery BP (2007) Numerical Recipes 3rd Edition: The Art of Scientific Computing , 3rd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA

    2007

  27. [35]

    J Econom 53:165--188

    Sowell F (1992) Maximum likelihood estimation of stationary univariate fractionally integrated time series models . J Econom 53:165--188

    1992

  28. [36]

    Fractals 3:785--798

    Taqqu MS, Teverovsky V, Willinger W (1995) Estimators for long-range dependence: An empirical study. Fractals 3:785--798

    1995

  29. [37]

    Earth and Planetary Science Letters 385:12 -- 21, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2013.10.016, ://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012821X13005797

    Williams SD, Moore P, King MA, Whitehouse PL (2014) Revisiting grace antarctic ice mass trends and accelerations considering autocorrelation. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 385:12 -- 21, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2013.10.016, ://www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

    2014 doi

  30. [38]

    J Geodesy 76(9-10):483--494, doi:10.1007/s00190-002-0283-4

    Williams SDP (2003) The effect of coloured noise on the uncertainties of rates from geodetic time series . J Geodesy 76(9-10):483--494, doi:10.1007/s00190-002-0283-4

    2003 doi

  31. [39]

    GPS Solut 12(2):147--153, doi:10.1007/s10291-007-0086-4

    Williams SDP (2008) CATS : GPS coordinate time series analysis software . GPS Solut 12(2):147--153, doi:10.1007/s10291-007-0086-4

    2008 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.