Replies: 2 comments 2 replies
-
I also watch this issue to get a better understanding. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
1 reply
-
Could you post more about exactly how you got the three values, especially how you perform your own least squares fit? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
1 reply
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Hello everyone,

After completing the MintPy time series processing, I understand that the velocities in velocity.h5 are obtained by performing a first-order least-squares linear fit on the deformation time series in timeseries_ERA5_demErr.h5. However, when I compare the results for a given pixel using three approaches: visualizing the time series with tsview.py timeseries_ERA5_demErr.h5, manually extracting the time series from timeseries_ERA5_demErr.h5 and performing my own least-squares fit, and directly reading the velocity from velocity.h5—I obtain noticeably different values. For example, tsview.py shows -5.83 cm/yr (as shown in the figure), my manual fit from timeseries_ERA5_demErr.h5 gives -5.48 cm/yr, and velocity.h5 reports -6.08 cm/yr. While these differences may seem small, they become significant when validating against GNSS velocities at the millimeter-per-year level. I also noticed that the time series displayed in the tsview.py command-line output differs from the time series extracted directly from timeseries_ERA5_demErr.h5. Could you please explain the reason for this discrepancy? Thank you for your help.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions