Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
SUMMARY Infrasound array data are commonly used to detect and characterize infrasonic signals from a variety of natural and anthropogenic sources. Here we examine the effectiveness of robust regression estimators (L1-norm regression, M-estimators and least trimmed squares) for infrasound array processing, and compare them against standard array processing algorithms (least-squares estimation, frequency–wavenumber analysis and progressive multi-channel correlation) using a combination of real and synthetic data. Of particular interest is how each algorithm performs when one of the array elements produces data outliers. Synthetic tests on elements containing a clock error, constant values or only pink noise are performed, and we analyse the relative ability of the estimators to recover plane wave parameters. The L1-norm regression, M-estimate, frequency–wavenumber analysis and least trimmed squares estimates provided superior results than conventional least-squares estimation. Evaluation of least trimmed squares weights consistently identified the element with the simulated error, providing additional information on array performance. Least trimmed squares processing consistently identified an element with reversed polarity for Alaska Volcano Observatory array ADKI. International Monitoring System stations IS57 and IS55 were likewise processed. Data from an element of IS57, which had lower cross-correlation values than the remaining elements, were consistently identified as having outliers in array processing. An element with a timing error was identified in the analysis of IS55 data. These results suggest robust regression methods, in particular least trimmed squares, improve upon standard methods and should be used more widely, as they can provide robust array processing results and insight into array performance. Further, robust regression methods are not limited to infrasound array processing applications, and it is likely that they would also be effective for seismic array data.
Bishop et al. (Fri,) studied this question.