(1) ASRC Research and Technology Solutions, Contractor to U.S.Geological Survey (USGS) Cascades Volcano Observatory (CVO), Vancouver, WA, USA;

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
22 March 2011: GSICS GRWG & GDWG Meeting Daejeon, Korea Tim Hewison SEVIRI-IASI Inter-calibration Uncertainty Evaluation.
Advertisements

USE SAR INTERFEROMETRY DINSAR AND PSI TO IDENTIFY THE GEOHAZARD RISK OF NATO AIRPORT NORTH EAST LARISSA (CENTRAL GREECE) Falah FAKHRI Harokopio University.
Anomaly Detection in Problematic GPS Time Series Data and Modeling Dafna Avraham, Yehuda Bock Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, Scripps Institution.
SAR Interferometry (InSAR): principles
Validation of radiometric models and simulated KaRIn/SWOT data based on ground and airborne acquisitions Page de titre, mentionner contributions Altamira.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: We thank the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) for providing RADARSAT-2 data. Figures were plotted with GMT and Gnuplot software and statistical.
The Community Geodetic Model (CGM): What is it and how does it relate to studies of lithospheric rheology? Jessica Murray, David Sandwell, and Rowena Lohman.
On Estimation of Soil Moisture & Snow Properties with SAR Jiancheng Shi Institute for Computational Earth System Science University of California, Santa.
Batch processing, stacking and time series analysis
Repeat station crustal biases and accuracy determined from regional field models M. Korte, E. Thébault* and M. Mandea, GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam (*now.
ALOS PALSAR interferometry of Taupo Volcanic Zone, New Zealand Sergey Samsonov 1,3, John Beavan 1, Chris Bromley 2, Bradley Scott 2, Gill Jolly 2 and Kristy.
Advantages of Decorrugation of Aeromagnetic Data using the Naudy-Fuller Space Domain Filter Saad Mogren (King Saud University, Saudi Arabia) and Derek.
L.M. McMillin NOAA/NESDIS/ORA Regression Retrieval Overview Larry McMillin Climate Research and Applications Division National Environmental Satellite,
Motion of Glaciers, Sea Ice, and Ice Shelves in Canisteo Peninsula, West Antarctica Observed by 4-Pass Differential Interferometric SAR Technique Hyangsun.
GB-SAR 시스템의 영상화 및 간섭기법 이훈열, 조성준, 성낙훈 강원대학교 지구물리학과 한국지질자원연구원 지반안전연구부 한국지구물리물리탐사학회 2007 학술대회 6 월 7-8 일 한국지질자원연구원.
7 th CNES/DLR Workshop LISTIC / TSI / GIPSA-lab / MAP-PAGE1 High Resolution SAR Interferometry: estimation of local frequencies in the context of Alpine.
“Real-time” Transient Detection Algorithms Dr. Kang Hyeun Ji, Thomas Herring MIT.
Deformation along the north African plate boundary observed by InSAR Ian Hamling 1,2 Abdelkrim Aoudia 2 1.GNS Science, Avalon, New Zealand 2.ICTP, Trieste,
Atmospheric phase correction for ALMA Alison Stirling John Richer Richard Hills University of Cambridge Mark Holdaway NRAO Tucson.
Height error “scaling” factor Temporal Decorrelation and Topographic Layover Impact on Ka-band Swath Altimetry for Surface Water Hydrology Delwyn Moller,
Time-series InSAR with DESDynI: Lessons from ALOS PALSAR Piyush Agram a, Mark Simons a and Howard Zebker b a Seismological Laboratory, California Institute.
Development of Focusing Algorithms for Arc-scanning Ground-Based Synthetic Aperture Radar Hoonyol Lee Dept. of Geophysics, Kangwon National University.
Particle Filter-Assisted Positioning Method for Identifying RFID-Tag Implanted in the Organism Gen Imai*, Katsushi Matsuda*, Hiromi Takahata and Minoru.
Data Acquisition and Processing GPRI-II imaged the glacier and peripheral ice at 3-minute intervals Gamma’s Differential Interferometry and Geocoding Software.
Troy P. Kling Mentors: Dr. Maxim Neumann, Dr. Razi Ahmed
MULTITEMP 2005 – Biloxi, Mississippi, USA, May 16-18, 2005 Remote Sensing Laboratory Dept. of Information and Communication Technology University of Trento.
Remote Sensing and Active Tectonics Barry Parsons and Richard Walker Michaelmas Term 2011 Lecture 4.
IGARSS 2011 – July, Vancouver, Canada Investigating the seismic cycle in Italy by multitemporal analysis of ALOS, COSMO-SkyMed and ERS/Envisat DInSAR.
Recent advances for the inversion of the particulate backscattering coefficient at different wavelengths H. Loisel, C. Jamet, and D. Dessailly.
1 The Venzke et al. * Optimal Detection Analysis Jeff Knight * Venzke, S., M. R. Allen, R. T. Sutton and D. P. Rowell, The Atmospheric Response over the.
GISMO Simulation Study Objective Key instrument and geometry parameters Surface and base DEMs Ice mass reflection and refraction modeling Algorithms used.
School of Earth and Environment Institute of Geophysics and Tectonics Robust corrections for topographically- correlated atmospheric noise in InSAR data.
Long Time Span Interferograms and Effects of Snow Cover on Interferometric Phase at L-Band Khalid A. Soofi (ConocoPhillips), David Sandwell (UCSD, SCRIPPS)
Resolution (degree) and RMSE (cm) Resolution (degree) and RMSE (cm)
Advanced InSAR Processing Applications & Modeling the data Matthew Pritchard Cornell University Practical questions: How to get DEM & visualize data in.
1 (1) ISEIS, Chinese University of Hong Kong, NT, Shatin, Hong Kong (2) DEI, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy (3) DIEI, Università la Sapienza, Rome,
SWOT Near Nadir Ka-band SAR Interferometry: SWOT Airborne Experiment Xiaoqing Wu, JPL, California Institute of Technology, USA Scott Hensley, JPL, California.
Adaptive Rate Control for HEVC Visual Communications and Image Processing (VCIP), 2012 IEEE Junjun Si, Siwei Ma, Xinfeng Zhang, Wen Gao 1.
A More Accurate and Powerful Tool for Managing Groundwater Resources and Predicting Land Subsidence: an application to Las Vegas Valley Zhang, Meijing.
Disputable non-DC components of several strong earthquakes Petra Adamová Jan Šílený.
1-1 SWOT IGARSS July 27, 2011 INTERFEROMETRIC PROCESSING OF FRESH WATER BODIES FOR SWOT Ernesto Rodríguez, JPL/CalTech Delwyn Moller, Remote Sensing Solution.
5. Accumulation Rate Over Antarctica The combination of the space-borne passive microwave brightness temperature dataset and the AVHRR surface temperature.
Sea ice thickness from CryoSat – A new data set for operational ice services? Christian Haas German CryoSat Office AWI.
A WEIGHTED CALIBRATION METHOD OF INTERFEROMETRIC SAR DATA Yongfei Mao Maosheng Xiang Lideng Wei Daojing Li Bingchen Zhang Institute of Electronics, Chinese.
Halftoning With Pre- Computed Maps Objective Image Quality Measures Halftoning and Objective Quality Measures for Halftoned Images.
I hope its ok to do these InSAR exercises as the lab
Issues in GPS Error Analysis What are the sources of the errors ? How much of the error can we remove by better modeling ? Do we have enough information.
Persistent Scatterers in InSAR
SWOT Hydrology Workshop Ka-band Radar Scattering From Water and Layover Issues Delwyn Moller Ernesto Rodriguez Contributions from Daniel Esteban-Fernandez.
GISMO Simulation Status Objective Radar and geometry parameters Airborne platform upgrade Surface and base DEMs Ice mass reflection and refraction modeling.
How does InSAR work? Gareth Funning University of California, Riverside.
InSAR Processing and Applications
Introduction to Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar - InSAR
Earthquake source modelling by second degree moment tensors Petra Adamová Jan Šílený Geophysical Institute, Academy of Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic.
Time Dependent Mining- Induced Subsidence Measured by DInSAR Jessica M. Wempen 7/31/2014 Michael K. McCarter 1.
Figure 4: Temporal and spatial evolution of horizontal wind field on 11 February 2010 estimated by SDI (monostatic (blue)) and FPI bistatic (without vertical.
South East Strategic Regional Coastal Monitoring Programme – Annual Review Meeting, November 2009 Satellite Data for Coastal Monitoring Trevor Burton Fugro-BKS.
Fault Plane Solution Focal Mechanism.
Norris subsidence Caldera-wide uplift Figure 1 – ENVISAT beam mode 1 interferogram spanning and showing deformation in the region of Yellowstone.
2003 Tyrrhenian International Workshop on Remote Sensing INGV Digital Elevation Model of the Alban Hills (Central Italy) from ERS1-ERS2 SAR data Andrea.
Date of download: 7/8/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Comparison of leveling data (red open squares) and the InSAR time series (blue dots).
Correlating Synthetic Aperture Radar (CoSAR) DIVYA CHALLA.
Motion of David Glacier in East Antarctica Observed by
Class tutorial Measuring Earthquake and volcano activity from space Shimon Wdowinski University of Miami.
Figure 1 ENVISAT beam mode 2, track 61 interferogram covering June 26, 2004 to Febrary 26, Inflation amounts to several tens of centimeters and.
Cross-Polarized SAR: A New Potential Technique for Hurricanes
Atmospheric phase correction for ALMA
이훈열, 조성준, 성낙훈 강원대학교 지구물리학과 한국지질자원연구원 지반안전연구부
CMOD Observation Operator
A KU-BAND GEOSYNCHRONOUS SYNTHETIC APERTURE RADAR MISSION ANALYSIS WITH MEDIUM TRANSMITTED POWER AND MEDIUM-SIZED ANTENNA Josep Ruiz Rodon, Antoni Broquetas,
Presentation transcript:

(1) ASRC Research and Technology Solutions, Contractor to U.S.Geological Survey (USGS) Cascades Volcano Observatory (CVO), Vancouver, WA, USA; (2) USGS CVO, Vancouver, WA 98683, USA; (3) University of Seoul, Seoul, Korea; Simulation of Time Series Deformation Analysis for Verifying a Refined Small BAseline Subset (SBAS) Technique Chang-Wook Lee (1), Zhong Lu (2) and Hyung-Sup Jung (3) Abstract A small baseline subset (SBAS) InSAR method has been developed to estimate time series surface deformation through a mutli-interferogram processing scheme. Using a synthetic dataset that takes into account two time-varying deformation sources, topography-induced errors, atmospheric delay anomalies, orbital errors and temporal decorrelation, we validate our SBAS codes. The simulated deformation and various artifacts are based on realistic ERS-1/ERS-2 SAR image acquisition dates and baseline configuration over Seguam volcano, Alaska. Detailed comparison between SBAS-derived products including time-series deformation maps, atmospheric delays, and baseline errors with those synthetic values attest the robustness of our SBAS technique. The small baseline subset (SBAS) interferometric synthetic aperture (InSAR) technique (Berardino et al., 2002) has been developed to map ground surface deformation using a multi-interferogram approach. To achieve deformation time-series information from multiple interferograms, the SBAS algorithm estimates the mean deformation rate and the topographic error. The atmospheric artifacts are mitigated through temporal high-pass and spatial low-pass filtering of interferograms after the mean deformation rates have been removed. SBAS InSAR uses the singular value decomposition (SVD) approach based on a minimum-norm criterion of the deformation rate to derive time-series deformation measurements. Although the SBAS algorithm (Berardino et al., 2002) is very effective for measuring time-series deformation, the suppression of errors caused by temporal decorrelation and other noise effects is not properly addressed. Linear deformation rates estimated using interferograms having unwrapping errors often lead to misestimates of the actual deformation history. Estimates of atmospheric artifacts and topographic errors based on the assumption of linear deformation rate during the periods spanned by individual interferograms can further detract from the retrieval of accurate time-series deformation measurements. A refined SBAS InSAR algorithm (Lee et al., 2010) (Figure 1) has been developed to improve estimates of time-series deformation through iterative processing. Phase unwrapping errors can be corrected by distinguishing between high- quality (HQ) images in which no unwrapping errors could be found and low-quality (LQ) ones where phase jumps due to unwrapping errors are possible. Estimating atmospheric artifacts, topographic errors, and time-series deformation measurements are refined through an iteration procedure. The temporal noise is further mitigated by the finite difference smoothing approach (Schmidt and Burgmann, 2003). In this study, we systematically validate our SBAS technique using synthetic datasets (Table 1) that are based on realistic ERS-1/ERS-2 SAR image acquisitions over Seguam volcano, Alaska where time-variant ground surface deformation have been observed (Lee et al., 2011). Table 1. Characteristics of ERS-1 and 2 data used in this study #MissionOrbitDateBaseline 1ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS ERS Introduction Data processing Figure 1. Block diagram of the refined SBAS InSAR processing algorithm Figure 2. Two examples of (a, g) simulated deformation-only interferograms, (b, h) simulated topographic residual errors of interferograms, (c, i) simulated atmospheric artifacts, (d, j) simulated orbital errors, (e, k) simulated temporal decorrelation noise, and (f, l) summation of simulated deformation and all error components. The phase images are plotted on a SAR amplitude map. We generate 48 synthetic interferograms that maintain good coherence during These interferograms have perpendicular baselines of less than 300 m and temporal separations of less than 5 years. Image acquisition dates and baseline configuration are based on ERS-1/ERS-2 Track 201 acquisitions over Seguam volcano, Alaska. Each of synthetic interferograms contains ground surface deformation, atmospheric contribution, orbit error, topographic error, temporal decorrelation and noise. The phase components due to deformation, atmospheric delay, orbit error, DEM error and temporal decorrelation are simulated separated and then combined to produce the synthetic interferograms for SBAS processing (Figure 2). Figure 3. (a) Temporal decorrelation observations (blue dots) and model (red curve) using observed ERS-1/ERS-2 interferograms over seguam volcano (Lee et al., 2011). (b) Standard deviation of InSAR phase measurements based on temporal decorrelation model in (a). SBAS result We apply SBAS processing on a set of 48 simulated interferograms (e.g., Figures 4b and 4g). The retrieved surface deformation images from the SBAS processing are shown in Figures 4d and 4i. The difference between the simulated interferograms (Figures 4b and 4g) and the retrieved deformation interferograms (Figures 4d and 4i) contains primarily atmospheric artifacts, orbit errors and decorrelation noise (Figures 4c and 4h). The SBAS-retrieved deformation images (Figures 4d and 4i) are compared with the original deformation images (Figures 4a and 4f), and the results are shown in Figure 4e and 4j. We also compare the mean surface deformation during between the simulated and SBAS-retrieved (Figure 5). Figure 6 represents surface deformation between the retrieved and the “truth” corresponding to profile A-A’ of the spatial domain on the figure 5a and 5b. The difference of two results has less than 1.1 mm and standard deviation is 0.2 mm. The scattergram between the SBAS-retrieved deformation rates and the truth is shown in Figure 7. The correlation coefficient reaches to R 2 =0.963, suggesting the SBAS can retrieve the time-variant deformation very well. Figure 4. Deformation and error images retrieved from SBAS processing of multi-temporal simulated interferograms with error components. Figure 5. Average deformation map between simulated (a) and SBAS result (b). (c) represents residual image from (a) and (b). - Mean = 0.6 mm - Standard deviation = 2.4 mm - Mean = 0.6 mm - Standard deviation = 2.2 mm - Mean = 0.6 mm - Standard deviation = 0.2 mm Figure 6. Profile of true mean deformation and SBAS-derived deformation over profile A-A’ in Figure 5. Figure 7. Scattergrams between simulated (true) time- series deformation and SBAS-derived time-series deformation. Time-series deformation Figure 8 displays time-series surface deformation maps from SBAS processing. Figure 9 shows time-series deformation at two locations over the western caldera and eastern caldera, respectively. SBAS processing produces time-variant deformation patterns that agree well with the “truth” data. While the difference between the retrieved and the “truth” at the west caldera point (Figure 5a) reaches a maximum of 3.4 mm and a standard deviation of 0.8 mm, it is less than 6±1.3 mm on the east caldera. 1.5 cm 0 Conclusions We validate our SBAS processing method using simulated deformation observations. The simulated InSAR images contain time-variant deformation due to two different deformation sources, atmospheric delay anomalies, orbital errors, DEM errors and decorrelation errors. The simulated InSAR observations are based on realistic SAR image acquisition time and baseline configuration from ERS-1/ERS-2 track 201 over Seguam volcano, western Alaska. Comparison between the retrieved ground surface deformation and theoretic (true) deformation confirms the effectiveness of this algorithm, suggesting that our SBAS processing can remove and suppress most of the atmospheric delay artifacts and orbital errors. Figure 8. Time-series Surface deformation maps from SBAS processing. Figure 9. Time series deformation of simulated (true) interferograms and SBAS result at two locations (Site 1 and 2 in Figure 5).  References Berardino, P., G. Fornaro, R. Lanari, and E. Sansoti (2002), A new algorithm for surface deformation monitoring based on small baseline Differential SAR Interferograms, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., 40(11), Lee C.W., Lu, Z., Jung, H.S., Won, J.S., Dzurisin, D., Surface Deformation of Augustine Volcano (Alaska), , From Multiple-Interferogram Processing Using a Refined SBAS InSAR Approach, USGS Professional Papers 1769, Lee C.W., Lu, Z., Won, J.S., Jung, H.S., Dzurisin, D., Dynamic deformation of Seguam Volcano, Alaska, , from multi-interferogram InSAR processing, Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, (Review). S chmidt, D., and R. Burgmann (2003), Time-dependent land uplift and subsidence in the Santa Clara valley, California, from a large interferometric synthetic aperture radar data set, J. Geophys. Res., 108(B9), doi: /2002JB