Reference Peak

Local Tilt Investigation

Aims and Objectives

Purpose of test: To investigate the magnitude and mechanism of local tilting of the DTM in the region of the reference peak.

Additional Objectives:

Background

A local tilt in the region of the reference peak is apparent upon inspection of the DTM, specifically the 4mx4m bigmap which is centered on the peak. Furthermore, tilt of bigmaps with respect to truth models has been observed across tests. The purpose of this investigation is to measure the magnitude and direction of tilt through tiling and iterating steps and to explore the mechanism by which the DTM tilts with respect to the truth model.

A possible source of systematic error and tilt is the procedure for updating the solution of a single maplet by considering the local solutions of all overlapping maplets and applying an 'overlap correction'. The standard procedure for tiling bigmaps and iterating maplets with regards to overlaps is as follows.

Tiling a bigmap:

Iterating the maplets contained in a bigmap:

This study therefore intends to investigate the contribution of the order in which overlap corrections are applied to the tilt local to the reference peak, calculate the magnitude and direction of tilt at various tiling GSD steps, calculate the vertical error introduced by tilt and observe systematic error in a larger area around the reference peak.

Methodology

Test Over11I was chosen for the investigation since it has been the focus of user-to-user and server-to-server repeats and has a low number of images, enabling relative speed in processing.

The following tests were conducted:

T11RFI-01stepA-1cm-4m.jpg T11RFI-01stepA-1cm-10m.jpg

Images, from left to right, 4m x 4m bigmap centered on the reference peak, and 10m x 10m bigmap centered on the reference peak.

Two evaluation areas were used to obtain CompMapVec heat plots, central transits and statistics, as illustrated above. The 4m x 4m evaluation area is consistent with the full suite of Over11I test evaluations. An additional 10m x 10m area centered on the reference peak was evaluated in order to consider systematic errors, tilt and relative statistics for a larger landscape around the reference peak which contains multiple peak and crater features. As per the Over11 test suite, the evaluation area ground sample distance was 1cm across tests.

Tilt Diagram.png

The magnitude of local tilt was calculated from the heights at the edges of the 4m x 4m bigmap and truth model central transits running due North and due East. Local tilt therefore refers to the tilt of the underlying DTM landscape with respect to the truth landscape extending only 2m from the center of the reference peak.

The local tilt induced vertical error was calculated by obtaining the vertical displacement due to tilt across 4m.

Results and Discussion

Repeatability

The results of the repeatability test are stored here: Local Tilt Repeatability Results

The Over11I baseline and repeat test demonstrate high repeatability:

The differences in formal uncertainty, RMSs and tilt reported herein are therefore due entirely to the order in which the maplets are processed and overlap corrections applied.

Dynamic Tilt Behavior

To view animations illustrating the dynamic tilting over tiling and iteration steps, please follow the links:

Local Tilt Heat Plot Animations

Local Tilt Central Transit Animations

The static images are stored here:

Local Tilt Heat Plots

Local Tilt Central Transits

The dynamic tilt behavior is different depending on the order by which the maplets have been processed and overlap corrections applied.

For both the standard ('forwards') and the 'backwards' tiled/iterated tests, 10cm tiling results in a significant tilt across the 10m evaluation area which decreases with lower GSD tiling and iteration, although the entire DTM surface drifts vertically, away from the truth.

Interestingly the direction of tilt across the standard (forward) and backward tiling/iteration tests is broadly similar West to East but not consistent North to South, but not opposite in direction as would perhaps be expected given the reversed order of processing maplets and applying overlap corrections.

In terms of the central transits, the West-East central transits for standard (forward) and backward tiling/iteration are not dissimilar, with differences in tilt magnitude after the 10cm and 5 cm tiling diminishing through iteration to reach near-conformity by 50 iterations. The North-South transits however remain dissimilar in tilt magnitude and direction throughout the 10cm and 5cm tiling and iteration steps.

Tilt is no longer visible for the 2cm and 1 cm tilings and the standard (forward) and backward tiling/iteration tests start to conform.

Dynamic tilt behavior is also recognizably similar across tests Over11I, S, T and U, which differ only in number of images and the viewing conditions.

Magnitude of Tilt and Scalability with DTM Ground Sample Distance

The results of the tilt magnitude and vertical displacement calculations are stored here: Local Tilt Magnitude Results

Stats: Forward (Standard) vs Backward Tiling and Iterating

Link to charts: Local Tilt Stats

Discussion.

10m Site Stats

Link to charts:

Link to charts: 10m TAG vs 4m Peak Stats

Compare statistics between the 4m peak site and the 10m site, centered on the peak.

Conclusions and Recommendations

How feature-based is the tilt magnitude?