However, any numerical analyses of these patterns would have to include the limitations imposed by the error levels found.
The goodness of fit can be assessed by looking at the error level when \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$F_E$$$\end{document} F E crossing 50%%, i.e., the level which half of fittings do not exceed.
Moreover, our design of EAC is calculating a ratio instead of the particular value at each time instance, and this allows the error to be divided by a denominator, thus lowering the error level in computation.
In relation to the multiple formulation data obtained from successfully solved LPs, the error level caused by the proposed model was calculated.
Although the error (~10 cm at most) which can be mainly produced by the long-wavelength noise correction is possibly included in each interferogram, the displacement field seems to be little affected by the postseismic deformation exceeding the measurement error level.
The approximation error level is influenced by the amplitude of disturbances.
The total error level g is given by the following: delta =biglVert g^{delta }-gbigrVert =sqrt{ frac{1}{M+1}sum_{i=1}^{M+1} bigl(g^{ delta }(x_{i} -g(x_{i} -ggr)^{2}}. Figure 1 shows the numerical results of (k=2), (varepsilon =0.001), (varepsilon =0.01), respectively.
Although DPLSQ-HS is much faster than DPLSQ-TV, it has a drawback: the accuracy and time point error were worse than those by DPLSQ-TV, especially, when the observation error level was large.
The relative error level and absolute error level are computed by e_{r}=frac{sqrt{sum f-f^{mu,delta}=frac{sqrt{sum f-f^{mu}}} quad text{and}quad e_{a}= sqrt{frac{1}{(M+1)}sumbigl(f-f^{mu,delta}bigr)^{2}}.
We estimated the type I error level by selecting a random sample of 2000 calls for each set, and examining them visually one by one to see if their classification was correct.
