[teqc] about "missed obs" on TEQC report

Lou Estey lou at unavco.org
Fri Jul 16 07:42:35 MDT 2010


All,

I received a few comments that users felt that "missed obs" was a confusing
label.  Fair enough.  When this was added a year+ ago, I was focusing on new
functionality that seemed useful (and otherwise not available) and not the
labeling.  But to improve labeling, it would certainly be better to refer to
these as something like "masked obs" and reverse the angle condition in the
message, e.g. the tidb qc that Simón was showing would then be:

Possible obs >  10.0 deg:  20244
Complete obs >  10.0 deg:  14473
  Deleted obs >  10.0 deg:    347
   Masked obs <  10.0 deg:   5072

That's a bit clearer.  I'll make this change, unless anyone has a better
suggestion.

cheers,
--lou

On 7/15/2010 10:41 AM, Lou Estey wrote:
> Dear Simón,
>
>> I would like to know how the field “Missed obs” in the TEQC+qc report is
>> computed. In the attached TEQC+qc report it does not happen that:
>>
>> Possible obs = complete obs + missed obs + deleted obs
>>
>> as one would probably expect. I have been able to understand how the
>> fields “Possible obs”, “complete obs” and “deleted obs” from the TEQC-qc
>> report are computed, but this is not the case for “missed obs”. Could
>> you please tell me how is “Missed obs” exactly computed?
>
> No, "missed obs" is not that at all. I will admit that the current
> labeling in the qc summary is pretty confusing, as in your attached
> file shows:
>
> Possible obs > 10.0 deg: 20244
> Complete obs > 10.0 deg: 14473
> Missed obs > 10.0 deg: 5072
> Deleted obs > 10.0 deg: 347
>
> "Missed obs" as added in 7 Mar 2009 (see
> http://facility.unavco.org/software/teqc/log.html ) and is
> related to the discrepancy lines '-dn' and '+dn':
>
> -dn| ++++++++ + ++ 11211 + ++++++ ++++ +122243433444444465556765588888 |-dn
> +dn| 1 51 3 525713412 4 5 2 1 21411123344444445554468688777688888881|+dn
>
> See all those '+' values on the '-dn' line? That's telling you that
> there is good data below 10 degrees (which is the default value for
> the cutoff mask for the qc). The "missed obs" count is the actual
> number of obs below the cutoff mask, i.e. you've "missed" using them
> in the qc if you keep the cutoff mask as is. If you lower the mask value
> (using the '-set_mask #' option), then the '+'s on the '-dn' line
> should become reduced in number and as should the "missed obs" count.
>
> What you where thinking of is ... "totally absent obs"?
>
> absent obs = possible obs - complete obs - deleted obs
>
> You can compute this yourself using the values provided, where
> this is, like the rest, dependent on the cutoff mask angle.
>
> cheers,
> --lou
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Louis H. Estey, Ph.D. office: [+001] 303-381-7456
> UNAVCO, 6350 Nautilus Drive FAX: [+001] 303-381-7451
> Boulder, CO 80301-5554 e-mail: lou unavco.org
> WWW: http://www.unavco.org http://jules.unavco.org
>
> "If the universe is the answer, what is the question?"
> -- Leon Lederman
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


More information about the teqc mailing list