• Atmosphere
• /
• v.26 no.3
• /
• pp.483-492
• /
• 2016

We have examined the random error of eddy covariance (EC) measurements on the basis of two-tower approach during daytime. Two EC towers were placed on the grassland with different vegetation density near Gumi-weir. We calculated the random error using three different methods. The first method (M1) is two-tower method suggested by Hollinger and Richardson (2005) where random error is based on differences between simultaneous flux measurements from two towers in very similar environmental conditions. The second one (M2) is suggested by Kessomkiat et al. (2013), which is extended procedure to estimate random error of EC data for two towers in more heterogeneous environmental conditions. They removed systematic flux difference due to the energy balance deficit and evaporative fraction difference between two sites before determining the random error of fluxes using M1 method. Here, we introduce the third method (M3) where we additionally removed systematic flux difference due to available energy difference between two sites. Compared to M1 and M2 methods, application of M3 method results in more symmetric random error distribution. The magnitude of estimated random error is smallest when using M3 method because application of M3 method results in the least systematic flux difference between two sites among three methods. An empirical formula of random error is developed as a function of flux magnitude, wind speed and measurement height for use in single tower sites near Nakdong River. This study suggests that correcting available energy difference between two sites is also required for calculating the random error of EC data from two towers at heterogeneous site where vegetation density is low.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society for Noise and Vibration Engineering Conference
• /
• 2007.11a
• /
• pp.1325-1328
• /
• 2007

When we visualize the sound field radiated from a spherical sound source, spherical acoustic holography is proper among acoustic holography methods. However, there are measurement errors due to sensor position mismatch, sensor mismatch, directivity of sensor, and background noise. These errors are amplified if one predicts the pressures close to the sources: backward prediction. The goal of this paper is to quantitatively examine the effects of the error due to sensor position mismatch on acoustic pressure estimation. This paper deals with the cases of which the measurement deviations are distributed irregularly on the hologram plane. In such cases, one can assume that the measurement is a sample of many measurement events, and the cause of the measurement error is white noise on the hologram plane. Then the bias and random error are derived mathematically. In the results, it is found that the random error is important in the backward prediction. The relationship between the random error amplification ratio and the measurement parameters is derived quantitatively in terms of their energies.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society for Noise and Vibration Engineering Conference
• /
• 2003.05a
• /
• pp.403-407
• /
• 2003

This paper studies the error of pressure, particle velocity, and intensity which are distributed in a space. Errors may be amplified when other sound field variables are predicted. We theoretically derive their bias error and random error. The analysis shows that many samples do not always guarantee good results. Random error of the velocity and intensity are increased when many samples are used. The characteristics of the amplification of the random error are analyzed in terms of the sample spacing. The amplification was found to be related to the spatial differential of random noise. The numerical simulations are performed to verify theoretical results.

• International Journal of Aeronautical and Space Sciences
• /
• v.15 no.3
• /
• pp.302-308
• /
• 2014

In this paper, a detailed investigation of the random vibration test is presented for strapdown inertial navigation systems (INS). The effect of the random vibration test has been studied from the point of view of navigation performance. The role of distribution functions and RMS value is represented to determine a feasible method to reject or reduce vibration related error in position and velocity estimation in inertial navigation. According to a survey conducted by the authors, this is the first time that the effect of the distribution function in vibration related error has been investigated in random vibration testing of INS. Recorded data of navigation grade INS is used in offline static navigation to examine the effect of different characteristics of random vibration tests on navigation error.

• Transactions of the Korean Society for Noise and Vibration Engineering
• /
• v.14 no.4
• /
• pp.352-357
• /
• 2004

This paper studies the errors that associated with particle velocity and intensity in a space. We theoretically derived their bias error and random error. The analysis shows that the more samples do not always guarantee the better results. The random error of the velocity and intensity are increased when we have many samples. The characteristics of the amplification of the random error are analyzed in terms of the sample spacing. The amplification was found to be related to the spatial differential of random noise. The numerical simulations are performed to verify theoretical results.

• Journal of KSNVE
• /
• v.8 no.6
• /
• pp.1023-1029
• /
• 1998

When one attempts to construct a hologram. one finds that there are many sources of measurement errors. These errors are even amplified if one predicts the pressures close to the sources. The pressure estimation errors depend on the following parameters: the measurement spacing on the hologram plane. the prediction spacing on the prediction plane. and the distance between the hologram and the prediction plane. This raper analyzes quantitatively the errors when these are distributed irregularly on the hologram plane The sensor mismatch and inaccurate measurement location. position mismatch. are mainly addressed. In these cases. one can assume that the measurement is a sample of many measurement events. The bias and random error are derived theoretically. Then the relationship between the random error amplification ratio and the parameters mentioned above is examined quantitatively in terms of energy.

• Communications for Statistical Applications and Methods
• /
• v.2 no.2
• /
• pp.296-302
• /
• 1995

When heteroscedasticity occurs in random effects linear model, the error variance may depend on the values of one or more of the explanatory variables or on other relevant quantities such as time or spatial ordering. In this paper we derive a score test as a diagnostic tool for detecting non-constant error variance in random effefts linear model based on the model expansion on error variance. This score test is compared to loglikelihood ratio test.

• Communications of the Korean Mathematical Society
• /
• v.20 no.2
• /
• pp.405-409
• /
• 2005

In [1], Sharma and Goel obtained a bound for random error correcting codes with Lee weight considerations. The purpose of this paper is to first point out a discrepancy in this result and then give a correct version of the same, improving upon the bound tremendously.

• Journal of the Korea Society for Simulation
• /
• v.10 no.4
• /
• pp.41-50
• /
• 2001

When optimizing a complex system by determining the optimum condition of the system parameters of interest, we often employ the process of estimating the unknown objective function, which is assumed to be a second order spline function. In doing so, we normally use common random numbers for different set of the controllable factors resulting in more accurate parameter estimation for the objective function. In this paper, we will show some mathematical result for the analysis of variance when using common random numbers in terms of the regression error, the residual error and the pure error terms. In fact, if we can realize the special structure of the covariance matrix of the error terms, we can use the result of analysis of variance for the uncorrelated experiments only by applying minor changes.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Surveying, Geodesy, Photogrammetry and Cartography
• /
• v.32 no.3
• /
• pp.233-244
• /
• 2014

Precise Point Positioning (PPP) is an increasingly recognized precisely the GPS/GNSS positioning technique. In order to improve the accuracy of PPP, the error sources in PPP measurements should be reduced as much as possible and the ambiguities should be correctly resolved. The correct ambiguity resolution requires a careful control of residual errors that are normally categorized into random and systematic errors. To understand effects from two categorized errors on the PPP ambiguity resolution, those two GPS datasets are simulated by generating in locations in South Korea (denoted as SUWN) and Hong Kong (PolyU). Both simulation cases are studied for each dataset; the first case is that all the satellites are affected by systematic and random errors, and the second case is that only a few satellites are affected. In the first case with random errors only, when the magnitude of random errors is increased, L1 ambiguities have a much higher chance to be incorrectly fixed. However, the size of ambiguity error is not exactly proportional to the magnitude of random error. Satellite geometry has more impacts on the L1 ambiguity resolution than the magnitude of random errors. In the first case when all the satellites have both random and systematic errors, the accuracy of fixed ambiguities is considerably affected by the systematic error. A pseudorange systematic error of 5 cm is the much more detrimental to ambiguity resolutions than carrier phase systematic error of 2 mm. In the $2^{nd}$ case when only a portion of satellites have systematic and random errors, the L1 ambiguity resolution in PPP can be still corrected. The number of allowable satellites varies from stations to stations, depending on the geometry of satellites. Through extensive simulation tests under different schemes, this paper sheds light on how the PPP ambiguity resolution (more precisely L1 ambiguity resolution) is affected by the characteristics of the residual errors in PPP observations. The numerical examples recall the PPP data analysts that how accurate the error correction models must achieve in order to get all the ambiguities resolved correctly.