Geodetic Time Series Analysis in Earth

Sciences Jean-Philippe Montillet

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/geodetic-time-series-analysis-in-earth-sciences-jean-
philippe-montillet/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Time series analysis 1st Edition Palma

https://textbookfull.com/product/time-series-analysis-1st-
edition-palma/

Studies on Time Series Applications in Environmental

Sciences 1st Edition Alina B■rbulescu (Auth.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/studies-on-time-series-
applications-in-environmental-sciences-1st-edition-alina-
barbulescu-auth/

Crypto Dictionary 1st Edition Jean-Philippe Aumasson

https://textbookfull.com/product/crypto-dictionary-1st-edition-
jean-philippe-aumasson/

Applied time series analysis with R Second Edition

Elliott

https://textbookfull.com/product/applied-time-series-analysis-
with-r-second-edition-elliott/
Mastering Time Series Analysis and Forecasting with
Python Bridging Theory and Practice Through Insights
Techniques and Tools for Effective Time Series Analysis
in Python 1st Edition Sulekha Aloorravi
https://textbookfull.com/product/mastering-time-series-analysis-
and-forecasting-with-python-bridging-theory-and-practice-through-
insights-techniques-and-tools-for-effective-time-series-analysis-
in-python-1st-edition-sulekha-aloorravi/

Design and analysis of time series experiments 1st

Edition Bartos

https://textbookfull.com/product/design-and-analysis-of-time-
series-experiments-1st-edition-bartos/

Nonlinear Time Series Analysis with R 1st Edition Ray

Huffaker

https://textbookfull.com/product/nonlinear-time-series-analysis-
with-r-1st-edition-ray-huffaker/

Time Series Analysis Methods and Applications for

Flight Data Zhang

https://textbookfull.com/product/time-series-analysis-methods-
and-applications-for-flight-data-zhang/

Value of Information in the Earth Sciences Integrating

Spatial Modeling and Decision Analysis 1st Edition Jo
Eidsvik

https://textbookfull.com/product/value-of-information-in-the-
earth-sciences-integrating-spatial-modeling-and-decision-
analysis-1st-edition-jo-eidsvik/
Springer Geophysics

Jean-Philippe Montillet
Machiel S. Bos Editors

Geodetic Time
Series Analysis
in Earth
Sciences
Springer Geophysics
The Springer Geophysics series seeks to publish a broad portfolio of scientific books,
aiming at researchers, students, and everyone interested in geophysics. The series
includes peer-reviewed monographs, edited volumes, textbooks, and conference
proceedings. It covers the entire research area including, but not limited to, applied
geophysics, computational geophysics, electrical and electromagnetic geophysics,
geodesy, geodynamics, geomagnetism, gravity, lithosphere research, paleomag-
netism, planetology, tectonophysics, thermal geophysics, and seismology.

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/10173

Jean-Philippe Montillet •

Machiel S. Bos
Editors

Geodetic Time Series

Analysis in Earth Sciences

123
Editors
Jean-Philippe Montillet Machiel S. Bos
Space and Earth Geodetic Analysis Instituto Dom Luiz
Laboratory Universidade da Beira Interior
Universidade da Beira Interior Covilha, Portugal
Covilha, Portugal
Institute of Earth Surface Dynamics
University of Lausanne
Neuchatel, Lausanne, Switzerland

ISSN 2364-9119 ISSN 2364-9127 (electronic)

Springer Geophysics
ISBN 978-3-030-21717-4 ISBN 978-3-030-21718-1 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21718-1
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar
methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from
the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained
herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard
to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Science is a way of thinking much more than
it is a body of knowledge.
—Carl Sagan
This book is a sample of my daily work and
passion in Earth sciences over many years. It
is often forgotten the tremendous time spent
by researchers in the process of
“discovering” new phenomena from studying
it, modelling the observations and discussing
the results.
First, I would like to take the opportunity to
thank all the contributors and especially my
co-editor Machiel S. Bos for the efforts to
produce this book from the early ideas in late
2017. Now, looking back at the early
beginning of my career, I remember some of
my older colleagues and mentors who
inspired me to pursue a career in sciences.
Years after years, the motivation has kept
growing up in me with my various interests in
many areas. A career in science is unique and
exciting!
Like many other scientists, this work would
not be possible if I was not surrounded by
understanding and caring people who are
standing on my side. I dedicate this book to
my family and in particular to my parents
(Jean-Louis & Monique) for helping me over
so many decades and supporting me to
overcome life obstacles, to my wife (Alison)
with a deep understanding of my passion and
time that I spend alone in the corridors of
science, to my beloved sons Clovis & Henry
for the joy they bring to me and completing
my life.
—Jean-Philippe Montillet

For Sandra who had to put up with a

husband glued to his laptop.
—Machiel S. Bos
Foreword: Welcome to the Not-So-Spherical
Cow

Students of high school physics often encounter a fictional flat Earth where objects
move without friction through a vacuum. As they grow in their understanding, the
complexities of sphericity and friction emerge; but gross simplifications often
remain of the real system being modelled. This is the world of the so-called—and
humorous—spherical cow—a visual metaphor for highly simplified models of
complex phenomena.
Students of geodesy will have been (or should have been) taught the comple-
mentarity of functional and stochastic models of a process—for any given problem,
any signal (including “noise”) must be considered appropriately in the functional
model or the stochastic model. Neglect of any component of the signal produces
erroneous and potentially misleading estimates of parameter values and their
uncertainties.
In the past, it was common in geodetic analysis to assume (usually untested) that
the functional model was complete, and the residual noise was white (temporally
uncorrelated) and could be treated as such in the stochastic model. A more robust
analysis of various geodetic signals has found that such time series normally
contain time-varying signal and noise is rarely white.
Because of these previous assumptions, there is little doubt that scientific con-
clusions have been reached that are not actually supported by the data: statistically
insignificant accelerations in ice sheets have been interpreted as significant; noise
has been interpreted as genuine strain in Earth’s crust; changes in linear rates of sea
level rise have been too confidently declared; seasonally varying deformation of the
solid Earth was approximated as time-constant annual harmonic. These
(not-entirely) hypothetical examples have major implications that extend well
beyond geodesy and geophysics and into society and policy. Spherical cows are not
sufficient.
In my own research field which focuses on geodesy in polar regions, the
developments summarised in this book have advanced our understanding tremen-
dously. New insights have been gained into the three-dimensional deformation of
Antarctica due to tectonics and surface loading changes over months to millennia,
while more robust estimates of ice mass change and their uncertainties have been

ix
x Foreword: Welcome to the Not-So-Spherical Cow

obtained from the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE). And yet
much analysis remains overly simple—it is still common to adopt simple models of
linear or quadratic changes in ice mass or volume—and the residuals are often
treated as white noise or simple autoregressive processes both of which are typically
not realistic. There is still much to do although the growing body of excellent
software tools means that major advances in rigour are within reach.
The focus of this book is to synthesise recent progress in geodetic time series
analysis theory and approaches that represents a shift away from a spherical cow to
a not-so-spherical cow. This book is both theoretical and practical. It shines a light
on a new theory, explores different methodologies and, helpfully, showcases the
implementation of methodology into practical tools to assist the entire community
in undertaking more robust time series analysis.
While this book focuses on geodetic time series analysis, it offers important
lessons and practical tools for members of any other community working with time
series who need to consider robust time series analysis in the presence of potentially
time-varying signals and/or time-correlated noise. Those communities may well be
adopting simple—or worse—untested models of time series signal and noise. It
challenges us to stop doing what everyone else is doing and consider more
inconvenient truths which require forming deeper knowledge and exploring new
data analysis techniques. In doing so, we will produce better science for the good of
everyone.

Hobart, Australia Matt King

University of Tasmania
Preface

This topic of this book is the analysis of geodetic time series. As Torge (2001)
wrote: “The problem of geodesy is to determine the figure and external gravity field
of the Earth and of other celestial bodies as a function of time, from observations on
and exterior to the surfaces of these bodies”. While geodesy has a long history,
going back to surveyors in ancient Egypt, it has been revolutionised by the recent
developments of the Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS). At the moment,
more than 15,000 permanent GNSS stations are fully operational and provide daily
positions with mm-level accuracy. The analysis of the variations of the position
over time provides important information about various geophysical processes.
Examples are the estimation of the motion of tectonic plates, the deflation/inflation
event of volcanos, the offsets produced by earthquakes, the vertical land motion of
continents induced by post-glacial rebound, the movement of glaciers and the
estimation of some particular transient signals (e.g. slow slip events and
post-seismic transients) which are sometimes precursors of natural hazards (e.g.
landslides and flooding).
In addition, sea level time series observed by tide gauges and satellite altimetry
provide information about the secular sea level rise, as a response to the melting of
large glaciers from the poles (Antarctica and Greenland) and produce accurate
flooding maps in densely populated coastal areas around the world. Next, the
Earth’s gravity field is not constant over time. The recent Gravity Recovery and
Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellite mission has produced maps of the global
gravity field from 2003 to 2017. The follow-on mission (GRACE-FO) will extend
this time series. The data has been used to detect the aforementioned ice and snow
melting on Greenland and Antarctica, drought cycles and the quantification of
groundwater storage variations. To emphasise its impact on the study of the Earth,
this area of research is called environmental geodesy.
The present book is dedicated to the art of fitting a trajectory model to those
geodetic time series in order to extract accurate geophysical information with
realistic error bars. In the vast amount of the literature published on this topic in the
past 25 years, we are specifically interested in parametric algorithms which are
estimating both functional and stochastic models using various Bayesian statistical

xi
xii Preface

tools (maximum likelihood, Monte Carlo Markov chain, Kalman filter, least squares
variance component estimation, information criteria). Taking a pedagogical
approach, we introduce step by step the characteristics and properties intrinsic
of these time series using simulations and real data examples. The computing time
efficiency and accuracy of the estimated parameters from these various parametric
algorithms are compared with the performances of the “Hector” software package
(Bos et al. 2013). In addition, some discussions relate to the stochastic noise model
selection for various environmental applications. Thus, the first part of this book is
focused on the theory behind modelling the time series together with some para-
metric estimators. The second part of this book deals with various applications in
environmental geodesy and civil engineering.
Finally, this book is addressed to graduate students and professionals working
with geodetic time series and environmental geodesy, requiring an advanced
knowledge of Bayesian statistics. The reader will find the latest advances in
modelling geodetic time series together with some current applications.

Acknowledgements The editors would like to thank the authors for their contributions to this
book. Their involvement at all stages of the preparation has been great. The editors are also
grateful to the Springer Nature editorial team for the smooth interaction and the swift production.

Neuchâtel, Switzerland Jean-Philippe Montillet

Covilha, Portugal Machiel S. Bos

References

Bos, M.S., Fernandes, R.M.S., Williams, S.D.P., Bastos, L. (2008) Fast error analysis of
continuous GPS observations, J Geod 82(3):157–166, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-007-
0165-x.
Torge, W. (2001) Geodesy, 3rd edition, de Gruyter, ISBN: 978-3111885957.
Contents

1 The Art and Science of Trajectory Modelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Michael Bevis, Jonathan Bedford and Dana J. Caccamise II
2 Introduction to Geodetic Time Series Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Machiel S. Bos, Jean-Philippe Montillet, Simon D. P. Williams
and Rui M. S. Fernandes
3 Markov Chain Monte Carlo and the Application to Geodetic
Time Series Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
German Olivares-Pulido, Felix Norman Teferle
and Addisu Hunegnaw
4 Introduction to Dynamic Linear Models for Time Series
Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
Marko Laine
5 Fast Statistical Approaches to Geodetic Time Series Analysis . . . . . 157
Michael A. Floyd and Thomas A. Herring
6 Least Squares Contribution to Geodetic Time Series Analysis . . . . 185
Alireza Amiri-Simkooei
7 Modelling the GNSS Time Series: Different Approaches
to Extract Seasonal Signals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
Anna Klos, Janusz Bogusz, Machiel S. Bos and Marta Gruszczynska
8 Stochastic Modelling of Geophysical Signal Constituents
Within a Kalman Filter Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239
Olga Engels
9 Filtering of GPS Time Series Using Geophysical Models
and Common Mode Error Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261
Xiaoxing He, Jean-Philippe Montillet, Machiel S. Bos,
Rui M. S. Fernandes, Weiping Jiang and Kegen Yu

xiii
xiv Contents

10 Comparison of Spacewise and Timewise Methods for GRACE

Gravity Field Recovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279
Neda Darbeheshti, Florian Wöske, Matthias Weigelt, Hu Wu
and Christopher Mccullough
11 Estimation of the Vertical Land Motion from GNSS Time Series
and Application in Quantifying Sea-Level Rise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317
Jean-Philippe Montillet, Machiel S. Bos, Timothy I. Melbourne,
Simon D. P. Williams, Rui M. S. Fernandes and Walter M. Szeliga
12 Time Series Analysis of Rapid GNSS Measurements
for Quasi-static and Dynamic Bridge Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345
Gethin Wyn Roberts, Xiaolin Meng, Panos Psimoulis
and Christopher J. Brown
13 Conclusions and Future Challenges in Geodetic Time Series
Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419
Jean-Philippe Montillet and Machiel S. Bos
Editors and Contributors

About the Editors

Jean-Philippe Montillet (MS’03 (Aalborg), PhD’08

(Nottingham), SMIEEE’14) is Geoscientist working in
GNSS technology with applications in mathematical
geodesy, geophysics and civil engineering. His latest
research projects include crustal deformation and sea
level rise in the Pacific Northwest. He has also been
involved in the analysis of Earth observations (i.e.
GRACE and satellite altimetry) and climate change
monitoring and climate of the past simulations
(TRACE21K, PMIP). The past 5 years, he has extensively
worked on geodetic time series analysis, including signal
processing techniques to extract geophysical and tran-
sient signals, and several works on the stochastic and
functional modelling. His work is generally funded by
governments (EPSRC, RC Australia, NASA, Swiss CTI)
and collaboration with safety authorities or government
agencies.

xv
xvi Editors and Contributors

Machiel S. Bos obtained in 1996 his M.Sc. from the

Delft University of Technology. In 2001, he received
his Ph.D. from the University of Liverpool. Afterwards,
he held various post-doc positions in Sweden, the
Netherlands and Portugal. Currently, he is Post-Doc
Fellow at Instituto Dom Luiz. His scientific interests
include ocean tide loading, GPS time series analysis
and geoid computations.

Contributors

Alireza Amiri-Simkooei Department of Geomatics Engineering, Faculty of Civil

Engineering and Transportation, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran;
Acoustics Group, Faculty of Aerospace Engineering, Delft University of
Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
Jonathan Bedford GeoForschungsZentrum, Telegrafenberg, Potsdam, Germany
Michael Bevis Division of Geodetic Science, School of Earth Sciences, Ohio State
University, Columbus, OH, USA
Janusz Bogusz Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Military University of
Technology, Warsaw, Poland
Machiel S. Bos Instituto Dom Luiz, Universidade da Beira Interior, Covilha,
Portugal
Christopher J. Brown Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering,
Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK
Dana J. Caccamise II NOAA’s National Geodetic Survey, Silver Spring, MD,
USA
Neda Darbeheshti Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics (Albert Einstein
Institute), Leibniz Universität Hannover, Hannover, Germany
Olga Engels Institute of Geodesy and Geoinformation, University of Bonn, Bonn,
Germany
Rui M. S. Fernandes Space and Earth Geodetic Analysis Laboratory,
Universidade da Beira Interior, Covilha, Portugal;
Instituto Dom Luiz, Universidade da Beira Interior, Covilha, Portugal
Editors and Contributors xvii

Michael A. Floyd Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences,

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA
Marta Gruszczynska Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Military
University of Technology, Warsaw, Poland
Xiaoxing He School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, East China Jiaotong
University, Nan Chang, China;
GNSS Research Center, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China
Thomas A. Herring Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA
Addisu Hunegnaw University of Luxembourg, Geodesy and Geospatial
Engineering, Luxembourg City, Luxembourg
Weiping Jiang GNSS Research Center, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China
Anna Klos Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Military University of
Technology, Warsaw, Poland
Marko Laine Finnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, Finland
Christopher Mccullough Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of
Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA
Timothy I. Melbourne Pacific Northwest Geodetic Array, Central Washington
University, Ellensburg, WA, USA
Xiaolin Meng Nottingham Geospatial Institute, The University of Nottingham,
Nottingham, UK
Jean-Philippe Montillet Space and Earth Geodetic Analysis Laboratory,
Universidade da Beira Interior, Covilha, Portugal;
Institute of Earth Surface Dynamics, University of Lausanne, Lausanne,
Switzerland
German Olivares-Pulido Geoscience Australia, National Positioning
Infrastructure Positioning and Community Safety Division, Canberra, ACT,
Australia
Panos Psimoulis Nottingham Geospatial Institute, The University of Nottingham,
Nottingham, UK
Gethin Wyn Roberts Faculty of Science and Technology, University of the Faroe
Islands, Tórshavn, Faroe Islands
Walter M. Szeliga Pacific Northwest Geodetic Array, Central Washington
University, Ellensburg, WA, USA
Felix Norman Teferle University of Luxembourg, Geodesy and Geospatial
Engineering, Luxembourg City, Luxembourg
xviii Editors and Contributors

Matthias Weigelt Institut für Erdmessung, Leibniz Universität Hannover,

Hannover, Germany
Simon D. P. Williams Marine Physics and Ocean Climate group, National
Oceanographic Centre, Liverpool, United Kingdom
Hu Wu Institut für Erdmessung, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Hannover,
Germany
Florian Wöske Center of Applied Space Technology and Microgravity (ZARM),
University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany
Kegen Yu School of Environmental Science and Spatial Informatics, China
University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou, China
Abbreviations

AF Adaptive filtering
AIC Akaike information criterion
AOD Atmospheric and oceanic de-aliasing
AR Autoregressive (model)/Acceptance Rate
ARIMA Autoregressive integrated moving average
ARMA Autoregressive–moving average
ASD Amplitude spectral density
APL Atmospheric pressure loading
AU Artificial unit
BCS Bridge coordinate system
BIC Bayesian information criterion
BLUE Best linear unbiased estimation
BSG Benchmark synthetic GNSS
CE Centre of solid Earth
COM Centre of mass
CME Common-mode error
CUPT Coordinates update
DFT Discrete Fourier transform
DIA Detection, identification and adaptation
DLM Dynamic linear model
DOP Dilution of precision
ECDF Empirical cumulative density function
EEMD Ensemble empirical mode decomposition
ELTM Extended linear trajectory model
EOP Earth orientation parameter
ESA European Space Agency
ETM Extended trajectory model
FARIMA Fractional ARIMA
FFT Fast Fourier transform
FIGGM Fractionally integrated GGM

xix
xx Abbreviations

FN Flicker noise
FOGM First-order Gauss–Markov
FOGMEX First-order Gauss–Markov extrapolation
GBR Ground-based radar
GEO Geostationary orbit
GGM Generalised Gauss Markov (noise)
GIA Glacial isostatic adjustment
GLONASS Globalnaya navigazionnaya sputnikovaya sistema
GMSL Global mean sea level
GNSS Global Navigation Satellite System
GNV1B GPS navigation level 1B
GOCE Gravity and Steady-State Ocean Circulation Explorer
GPS Global Positioning System
GRACE Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (satellite mission)
GRACETOOLS GRACE gravity field recovery tools
GrAtSiD Greedy automatic signal decomposition
IAP Integrated Application Promotion
IDFT Inverse discrete Fourier transform
IFB Inter-frequency bias
IGS International GNSS Service
IGSO Inclined geosynchronous orbit
INS Inertial navigation system
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
IQR Interquartile range
ISM Industrial, scientific and medical
ISTB Inter-satellite-type bias
ITRF International Terrestrial Reference Frame
JPL Jet Propulsion Laboratory
KBR1B K-band ranging level 1B
KF-RW Kalman filter random walk
KF Kalman filter
LLS Linear least squares
LS Least squares
LSA Least squares adjustment
LS-HE Least squares harmonic estimation
LS-VCE Least squares variance component estimation
LTPDA LISA Technology Package Data Analysis
MA Moving average
MCMC Monte Carlo Markov chain
MEO Mid-Earth orbit
MIDAS Median interannual difference adjusted for skewness
ML Maximum likelihood
MLE Maximum likelihood estimator
MSL Mean sea level
NNLS-VCE Non-negative least squares variance component estimation
Abbreviations xxi

NOTA Network of the Americas

NRMS Normalised root mean square
NS Number of stations
NTOL Non-tidal ocean loading
OLM Optimal loading model
OSU Ohio State University
OTF On the fly
PC Principal component
PCA Principal component analysis
PL Power-law
PLL Phase-locked loop
PMM Plate motion model
PPP Precise point positioning
PSD Power spectral density
PSMSL Permanent service for mean sea level
QLM QOCA loading map
QOCA Quasi-observation combination analysis
QZSS Quasi-Zenith Satellite System
RACMO Regional atmospheric climate model
REML Restricted maximum likelihood
RLR Revised local reference
RMS Root mean square
RSL Relative sea level
RSLR Relative sea level rise
RTK Real-time kinematic
RW Random walk
SBAS Space-based augmentation system
SHM Structural health monitoring
SLR Sea level rise
SLTM Standard linear trajectory model
SMB Surface mass balance
SSA Singular spectrum analysis
STARS Sequential t-test analysis of regime shift
TEC Total electron content
TG Tide gauge
UK United Kingdom
UNSW University of New South Wales
VLBI Very-long-baseline interferometry
VLM Vertical land motion
WIM Weigh in motion
WLS Weighted least squares
WN White noise
WRMS Weighted root mean square
ZUPT Zero velocity update
Chapter 1
The Art and Science of Trajectory
Modelling

Michael Bevis, Jonathan Bedford and Dana J. Caccamise II

Abstract Coordinate time series are, by definition, trajectories, so the kinematic

models that geodesists and geophysicists use to describe these time series are trajec-
tory models. We describe various classes of trajectory models, and present a dozen
case studies that illustrate the use of these models and also illuminate the diversity
of ways in which the Earth moves and deforms. We distinguish between the deter-
ministic approach to trajectory modelling, which emphasizes the physical meaning
of the various components of the trajectory, and a more automatic, autonomous and
heuristic approach to finding and fitting a trajectory model.

Keywords Trajectory model · Geodynamics · Geodesy · Transient deformation

1.1 Introduction

Bevis and Brown (2014) sought to codify a long-established, if slowly-developing

trend in crustal motion geodesy by suggesting that the equations used to describe
the motion of GPS or GNSS stations should be thought of as trajectory models.
They argued that the observed trajectories of the great majority of GNSS stations,
worldwide, could be well modelled using just two families of trajectory models. Their
third main thrust was that modern (i.e. more general) trajectory models should be
used to define geometrical reference frames, and not just model the displacement time

M. Bevis (B)
Division of Geodetic Science, School of Earth Sciences, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH,
USA
e-mail: mbevis@osu.edu
J. Bedford
GeoForschungsZentrum, Telegrafenberg, Potsdam, Germany
e-mail: jbed@gfz-potsdam.de
D. J. Caccamise II
NOAA’s National Geodetic Survey, Silver Spring, MD, USA
e-mail: dana.caccamise@noaa.gov

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 1

J.-P. Montillet and M. S. Bos (eds.), Geodetic Time Series
Analysis in Earth Sciences, Springer Geophysics,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21718-1_1
2 M. Bevis et al.

series expressed in those frames. This paper describes some further developments in
trajectory modelling, and provides some examples of displacement time series that
exemplify some typical and unusual patterns of crustal motion and deformation.
Geodesists tend to value trajectory models mostly as geometrical, i.e. kinematic
descriptions of station displacement, and they have only a secondary interest in
the dynamics of motion and deformation. Improving trajectory models can help
geodesists to construct more stable and consistent reference frames—the frames in
which all displacement time series are expressed. The fundamental concern of the
geodesist is geometrical consistency, either in three dimensions or in four. In contrast,
geophysicists are more interested in what can be inferred about the physical processes
driving the motion and deformation of the solid Earth, by examining the trajectories
of geodetic stations or networks. These agendas tend to be mutually supportive, so
geophysically-inclined geodesists, and geodetically-inclined geophysicists, tend to
flip from one mindset to the other, according to their immediate needs.
We note that while station trajectory models are most commonly applied to geode-
tic coordinate or crustal displacement time series, the same formalisms can be applied
to vector or scalar measures of change in other geophysical contexts, such as mass
change time series estimated using the GRACE satellite mission (Bevis et al. 2019),
and the relative sea level (RSL) histories recorded by tide gauges (Caccamise 2018).
Because a tide gauge records the vertical motion of the sea surface relative to the
solid ground on which the gauge rests, RSL time series can record both coseismic
jumps and postseismic transients, but with the opposite sign of the signals recorded
by a co-located GPS or GNSS station.
The first author and his colleagues at Ohio State University normally take a ‘deter-
ministic’ approach to station trajectory modelling. For example, we use our computer
codes to estimate the sign and size of one or more jumps or discontinuities in a GPS
time series, but we determine (and assign) the number of jumps in each station tra-
jectory model, and the times of those jumps, based on prior knowledge of specific
physical events such as antenna changes, or earthquakes. We handle postseismic
transients in essentially the same way. But the second author often takes a far more
heuristic or ‘stochastic’ approach, in which the number and the onset times of tran-
sients are determined by his software, which is running in a less constrained, and
far more ‘automatic’ or ‘autonomous’ mode of operation (Bedford and Bevis 2018).
We write most of this article from the former, deterministic perspective, but we will
return to the topic of automatic signal decomposition in Sect. 4 of the paper.

1.2 Trajectory Models

The position vector of a station x(t) can be decomposed in a geocentric cartesian axis
system {X,Y,Z} or in a local or topocentric cartesian axis system {E,N,U} in which
the axes point east, north and up. The standard linear trajectory model (SLTM) is a
kinematic model which is the sum of three displacement modes, or distinct classes
1 The Art and Science of Trajectory Modelling 3

of motion, that describe the progressive trend of the trajectory, any instantaneous
jumps in position, and periodic or cyclical displacements:

x(t) = xtrend + xjumps + xcycle (1.1)

Jumps are described as linear combinations of Heaviside step functions at pre-

scribed jump times {t j }. The number of jumps, nJ , may be zero, one or more. Jumps
include coseismic jumps, which are real movements of the ground, and ‘artificial’
jumps associated with changes in the GPS antenna and/or its radome, or changes
in the antenna monument, etc. Nearly all GPS time series exhibit a seasonal cycle
of displacement which can be modelled as a 4-term Fourier series with periodicities
of 1 year and 0.5 years. These cycles are caused by seasonal changes in the water,
snow and ice loads supported by the solid earth (Bevis and Brown 2014), or (less
commonly) by seasonal changes in atmospheric pressure.
The most common trajectory model invokes a constant velocity trend, in which
case the SLTM has the following form:


nJ
  nF
x(t) = x R + v(t − t R ) + bjH t − tj + [sk sin(ωk t) + ck cos(ωk t)] (1.2)
j=1 k=1

where t R is an arbitrary reference time, often set to the mean time of observation, xR
= x(t R ) is the reference position, and v is the station velocity vector, which is assumed
to be constant. The function H is the Heaviside or unit step function, and vector bj
describes the direction and magnitude of the jump which occurs at time t j , and nJ is
the number of jumps. The 3-vectors sk and ck are the Fourier coefficients (one for
each component of the position vector) for the harmonic with angular frequency ωk ,
and nF is the number of distinct frequencies. The angular frequency ωk = 2π/τk ,
where τk is the corresponding period. To model annual displacement cycles, we
choose the fundamental period τ1 = 1 year, and the periods of the higher harmonics
τk = 1/k years. This ensures that the cycle constructed from nF sines and nF cosines
(and a total of nF frequencies or periods) repeats only once per year. Nearly always
it is adequate to set nF = 2, specifying a 4-term Fourier series.
In the event that the station does not move with a constant velocity trend, we can
use a more general form of the SLTM in which the trend is polynomial in time, thus:


n p+1

nJ
  nF
x(t) = pi (t − t R )i−1 + bjH t − tj + [sk sin(ωk t) + ck cos(ωk t)]
i=1 j=1 k=1
(1.3)

where nP is the maximum order of the polynomial. If nP = 1, then this model reduces
to the constant velocity model, with p1 = xR and p2 = v. If nP = 2, it becomes the
quadratic trend or ‘constant acceleration’ model in which the acceleration vector a =
2 p3 . No matter what the value of nP , p1 always corresponds to the reference position
4 M. Bevis et al.

xR . In our experience it is only rarely necessary to set nP > 3. For the large majority
of GPS stations, it is adequate to set nP = 1.
The vector Eq. (1.3) can be thought of as a system of three scalar equations
describing the temporal evolution of the X, Y, and Z coordinates respectively. But it
can just as easily be used to describe the E, N, and U components of displacement.
That is, one could associate x 3 with Z or U. Indeed, it is usually better to fit and
present displacement histories in E,N,U rather than X,Y,Z because the physical noise
processes affecting the vertical coordinate, U, are fundamentally distinct from those
affecting the horizontal coordinates, E and N. This distinction is lost or blurred when
examining displacement time series in X,Y,Z.
The SLTM cannot adequately describe postseismic transient displacements. This
can be done by augmenting the SLTM using one or more exponential or logarithmic
transients. A simple logarithmic transient displacement, d(t), has the form

d = A log(1 + t/T ) (1.4)

where A is the amplitude coefficient, T is the characteristic time scale of the transient
displacement, and t is the time since the earthquake occurred. Since this formula
applies only after the earthquake has occurred, we are restricted to the domain t >
0. The scalar d might refer to any one of the geocentric Cartesian coordinates (X, Y,
or Z) or topocentric Cartesian coordinates (E, N, and U) used to describe a geodetic
time series.
A common alternative for a decaying transient function is the exponential form

d = A (1 − exp(−t/T )) (1.5)

This formula is often more attractive to theorists because it invokes a transient

that decays to zero as t tends to infinity. This seems physically reasonable. In con-
trast Eq. (1.4) does not have this asymptotic behaviour, and the cumulative transient
displacement grows indefinitely, though at a slower and slower rate as t increases.
This leads some to conclude that the logarithmic transient is physically unreason-
able. We suggest that a more nuanced and useful conclusion is that Eq. (1.4) is just
an approximation to reality—but often a very convincing, long-sustained and very
useful approximation. This logarithmic transient is favoured by some because it is
predicted by rate and state friction theory for the afterslip-driven component of post-
seismic deformation (Marone et al. 1991; Marone 1998; Perfettini and Avouac 2007;
Perfettini et al. 2010).
Those who insist on the rather ‘purist’ position of favouring Eq. (1.5) over
Eq. (1.4), based on its asymptotic behaviour, might reflect on the fact that nearly
all modern error analyses for GNSS station velocity estimates are dominated by
the assumption that positioning noise can be represented by a combination of white
noise and power law noise (Zhang et al. 1997; Mao et al. 1999; Williams et al. 2004),
most frequently a combination of white noise and flicker (or 1/f) noise. There are
dozens of examples of physical systems exhibiting flicker noise behaviour, and these
1 The Art and Science of Trajectory Modelling 5

characterizations often provide excellent fits to power spectra over many decades of
frequency. Nevertheless, flicker noise behaviour cannot be maintained for all frequen-
cies, because this would lead to a physically unreal situation in which the integral
of the power spectrum diverges at both the low and high frequency limits (Press
1978). Flicker noise behaviour has to be band-limited in practice, but because these
divergences are logarithmic, it is often perfectly reasonable to ignore this fact when
analyzing a specific data set. The choice of a flicker noise model is fundamentally
heuristic, as is, for many geodesists, the assumption of a logarithmic transient.
A better fit to an observed postseismic transient can be obtained using a double
transient in which there are two characteristic time scales, T 1 and T 2 . If we prefer
logarithmic transients this leads us to

d = A1 log(1 + t/T1 ) + A2 log(1 + t/T2 ) (1.6)

whereas devotees of exponential transients prefer

d = A1 (1 − exp(−t/T1 )) + A2 (1 − exp(−t/T2 )) (1.7)

In both cases we adopt the convention that T 1 < T 2 . It is also possible to invoke
hybrid double transients that mix the logarithmic and exponential forms, thus

d = A1 log(1 + t/T1 ) + A2 (1 − exp(−t/T2 )) (1.8)

where T1 < T2 by design, and not just by convention. This variant is motivated by the
idea that early postseismic transients are dominated by afterslip, but later on these
transients are dominated by bulk viscoelastic relaxation of the stresses induced by the
earthquake. Viscoelasticity is often associated with exponential transient behaviour.
It is also possible to invoke multi-transients with three or more characteristic time
scales, though this is rarely done in the ‘deterministic’ school of trajectory modelling.
Although double transients always produce a better fit than do simple or single
transients, since they increase the number of adjustable parameters, they often lead
to inversions with considerably larger condition numbers, implying that the solution
is less stable and might lead to less reliable predictions of future behaviour, despite
producing a better fit to the data already in hand. This occurs because the double
transient model may start to model the ‘noise’ as well as the ‘signal’. In the first
author’s experience, daily GPS/GNSS positioning noise always has a strong power
law component, and this leads to temporal structure in the noise, which often looks
like it includes a long period signal (Mandelbrot 1969; Press 1978). This pseudo-
signal may be ‘sucked up’ into a trajectory model during the estimation process.
For analysts working in a ‘deterministic’ mode, who assign physical significance
to the coefficients of the trajectory model, and/or wish to use the model to make pre-
dictions about the future position of the station, it is potentially dangerous to invoke
double transients (logarithmic or exponential) if the observations being modelled are
very noisy, and even more dangerous to involve multi-transients involving three or
6 M. Bevis et al.

more characteristic time scales, particularly when the transient occurs near the end
of the time series. Suppose we have solved the standard least squares problem, Ax
= b, where x contains the coefficients of the trajectory model, and we are concerned
about the change x in the solution vector x, caused by a small fluctuation b in
the data vector b. We might view b as representing the (unknown) noise affect-
ing the ‘true’ b-vector. The relative change or uncertainty in the data vector can be
represented by the ratio of the norms ||b ||/|| b|| and the associated relative change
in the solution vector by ||x||/||x||. If κ is the condition number of matrix A, whose
columns are the basis functions of the trajectory model, then the sensitivity of the
solution to noise in the data is often approximated using the expression ||x||/||x||
= κ ||b ||/|| b||. Thus, we can view the condition number of the design matrix as
a relative error magnification factor (e.g. Forsythe et al. 1977). The lowest possible
condition number is 1. It is possible to encounter least squares problems in which κ
~ 1 million, or even higher. When the condition number κ is very large then a tiny
change in the noise affecting the data may produce a large relative change in the
solution. In this case, the least squares problem is said to be poorly posed. Clearly
this situation is very undesirable when we wish to assign physical significance to
the solution vector. (But if our only goal is obtaining a very good fit between model
and data, i.e. producing a very small RMS misfit, then very large κ values might not
bother us at all!).
It is easily discovered via simple numerical experiments that the design matrix
for a linear trajectory model containing a double transient often has a much larger
condition number than does the design matrix for a model incorporating a simple
transient but is otherwise identical. The design matrix for a model that incorporates a
triple transient often has a very much larger condition number. A very large condition
number is particularly worrying when we suspect that our data is very noisy, so that
||b ||/||b||, the relative measure of this noise, is unusually large, since the instability
in the solution increases with both κ and ||b ||/||b||. Therefore, we are reluctant to
use multi-transients unless we are analyzing long, fairly evenly spaced and fairly
high-quality displacement time series. For example, we almost never invoke double
transients when we are modelling postseismic transients in tide gauge observations
rather than GPS displacements. In the case of GPS or GNSS displacement time series
we normally invoke double transients when fitting long postseismic transients, but
we are then very careful not to use these models to predict station coordinates more
than a few months beyond the time range of the observations used to estimate the
parameters of the transient model. Increasing the number of degrees of freedom
available to a trajectory model always improves its fit to the observations, but it can
also lead to less accurate predictions of the trajectory beyond the time window of
observation. This is the famous trade-off between resolution and reliability.
It is well known that exponential and logarithmic transients can produce very
similar fits to GPS time series manifesting postseismic deformation, given equal
degrees of freedom, so the choice between them is hardly crucial for the geodesist
who simply wants a good fit between data and model. In some contexts, such as that
of empirical transient analysis (Bedford and Bevis 2018), the exponential form is
the more natural choice because of its asymptotic behaviour. But the space geodesy
1 The Art and Science of Trajectory Modelling 7

group at Ohio State University has convinced itself that double logarithmic transients
often provide slightly better fits than double exponential transients, and very slightly
better fits than composite logarithmic-exponential transients (Sobrero 2018), and as
a result we nearly always invoke logarithmic transients.
Bevis and Brown (2014) defined the extended trajectory model (ETM) as the
combination of a SLTM and one or more transients. For those preferring logarithmic
transients, the ETM is


n p+1

nJ
  nF
x(t) = pi (t − t R )i−1 + bjH t − tj + [sk sin(ωk t) + ck cos(ωk t)]
i=1 j=1 k=1


nT
+ ai log(1 + ti /Ti ) (1.9)
i=1

where nT is the number of logarithmic transients. For each transient caused by an

earthquake at time t EQ , we define t = 0 for t < t EQ and t = (t – t EQ ) otherwise.
Note that we can invoke double transients by having the same value of t EQ for two
of the t i vectors, but different values for the scale parameter T i . Indeed, when our
emphasis is on fitting a time series rather than predicting the future position of a
station, we have occasionally invoked three transient time scale parameters, that is,
triple logarithmic transients.
One of the most attractive aspects of the SLTM is that this model is linear in
its coefficients, so the task of fitting an observed time series with this model, i.e.
solving for the coefficients or parameters of the trajectory model, reduces to solving
a linear least squares problem. This is not true for the ETM, but if the characteristic
time scales (T ) of the logarithmic transients are assigned rather than estimated, then
the problem again becomes linear and the ETM is renamed the extended linear
trajectory model (ELTM). It is often reasonable to pre-assign the transient time scale
parameters, particularly when invoking a double logarithmic transient. In this case
we usually set T 1 = 0.0523 years and T 2 = 1 year, because formally optimizing their
values very rarely leads to significant improvements in fit (Wang 2018). When the
displacement data are too noisy or too short to justify the use of a double transient,
then we will typically estimate the best single value for T using a non-linear least
squares process, particularly when we are more strongly focused on physical meaning
rather than geodetic utility.

1.3 A Gallery of Geodetic Trajectories

In this section we present examples of geodetic time series from around the world,
and use them to describe the art of trajectory modelling, and/or to illuminate the
character, and sometimes the complexities, of the Earth’s behaviour. Most of our
8 M. Bevis et al.

(a) GRACE CUMULATIVE MASS CHANGE SOLUTIONS FOR GREENLAND

500
(A) TOTAL MASS CHANGE
0 (b) (B) SEASONALLY ADJUSTED MASS CHANGE
SLTM FIT TO 500
DATA BEFORE
-500 2013.4 THEN
PROJECTED
0
FORWARD
-1000 -500
MASS (GT)

-1500 -1000

MASS (GT)
-1500
-2000
-2000
-2500
GRACE -2500
Quadratic Trend
-3000
Trend + Cycle -3000

-3500 -3500
2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015
TIME TIME

Fig. 1.1 a The GRACE mass change solutions for Greenland fit in the reference period (ending
in 2013.4) with an SLTM composed of a quadratic trend and an annual cycle represented by a
4-term Fourier series. This model was projected forward after 2013.4. b The mass change solution
after the mean annual cycle was removed, compared to the quadratic trend component of the mass
trajectory model. This seasonally-adjusted mass change time series manifests the recent deglaciation
of Greenland. The remarkable change in behaviour that began in the summer of 2013, and its
implications, have been discussed by Bevis et al. (2019)

examples are drawn from crustal motion geodesy. But we begin with one of two case
studies involving a scalar time series.
The GRACE time series shown in Fig. 1.1 is the mass change computed, for
Greenland as a whole, by Bevis et al. (2019). The original solutions are shown
using the blue circles in Fig. 1.1a. We used a least squares procedure to fit a SLTM
composed of a quadratic trend and a four-term Fourier Series, but only for those
mass solutions obtained before 2013.4. The resulting mass trajectory model was
then projected forward to the end of the time series, producing the solid red curve.
The trend component of the SLTM is shown by the dashed red curve in Fig. 1.1a.
One of the useful things that we can do with a trajectory model is to decompose the
trajectory. We frequently do this in order to seasonally adjust or “de-cycle” a time
series. We simply evaluate the cyclical component of the model at the observation
times, and remove this mean cycle from the data. This produces the blue circles in
Fig. 1.1b. We can then compare the de-cycled observations with a revised trajectory
model in which the cyclical component has been removed. Since there are no jumps
or transients in this SLTM, the resulting seasonally-adjusted trajectory model is
simply the quadratic trend—the solid red curve in Fig. 1.1b. Note that the mean
cycle was estimated using only the data before 2013.4, but was used to adjust all
the data, including the mass solutions obtained after that date. Because the mean
seasonal cycle in ice mass does not contribute to deglaciation, it is interesting to
remove it, and view what remains as the ‘deglaciation curve’, without the distraction
of seasonal variation. In this case we see that seasonally-adjusted ice loss integrated
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Lefty o' the bush
 This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

Title: Lefty o' the bush

Author: Burt L. Standish

Release date: November 2, 2023 [eBook #72013]

Language: English

Original publication: New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1914

Credits: Produced by Donald Cummings and the Online

Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LEFTY O'

THE BUSH ***
LEFTY O’ THE BUSH
SPIKES FIRST, LOCKE SLID.
LEFTY O’ THE BUSH
BY

BURT L. STANDISH
Author of “Lefty o’ the Big League,” “Lefty o’ the Blue
Stockings,” “Lefty o’ the Training Camp.”

ILLUSTRATED

GROSSET & DUNLAP

PUBLISHERS NEW YORK
 Copyright, 1914, by
GROSSET & DUNLAP, Inc.

All Rights Reserved

Printed in the United States of America

 CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE

I Out in the Bush 11

II Under Cover 18
III The Man to Pitch 23
IV The Parson’s Daughter 29
V A Bad Beginning 35
VI “Take Him Out!” 40
VII Himself Again 47
VIII Steadying Down 53
IX Some Pitching! 58
X A Pitchers’ Battle 63
XI On the Raw Edge 67
XII The “Squeeze Play” 73
XIII The Last Strike-Out 78
XIV After the Game 86
XV Man to Man 91
XVI Benton King Awakens 97
XVII Father and Daughter 104
XVIII The Green-Eyed Monster 112
XIX The Agitation in Bancroft 120
XX Men of Conscience! 128
 XXI A Secret Meeting 132
XXII Riley Shoots His Bolt 140
XXIII Lefty’s Fickle Memory 145
XXIV A Matter of Veracity 152
XXV The Test and the Denial 157
XXVI Was It a Bluff? 166
XXVII The Item in the News 173
XXVIII The Gage Flung Down 180
XXIX The Frame-Up 186
XXX The Letter in the Desk 193
XXXI Tom, Tommy and Janet 201
XXXII The Initials 209
XXXIII King Aroused 218
XXXIV Given the Lie 224
XXXV The Photograph 230
XXXVI Crumbled Castles 236
XXXVII The Bell Boy 244
XXXVIII “And Did Not Understand” 250
XXXIX Bancroft Comes to Conquer 258
XL Pinwheel Murtel 264
XLI Gone Wrong 271
XLII A Sudden Shift 276
XLIII A Game Worth Winning 282
XLIV Facing His Accusers 288
XLV The Forgery 294
XLVI Cleared Up 300
LEFTY O’ THE BUSH
 CHAPTER I
OUT IN THE BUSH

A fter running his eye over the Kingsbridge batting order, Mike
Riley, manager of the Bancroft “Bullies,” rolled the black cigar
well into the corner of his mouth, lifted himself ponderously to his
feet, and walked across toward the bench of the home team.
Kingsbridge had taken the field for practice, the visitors having
warmed up already. The Northern League, a genuine “bush”
organization, had opened two days earlier in Bancroft and Fryeburg,
but this was to be the first game of the season in Kingsbridge, a
hustling, crude, though ambitious pulp-mill town.
As it was Saturday afternoon, when the mills closed down at three
o’clock, there was certain to be a big crowd in attendance, double
assurance of which could be seen in the rapidly filling grand stand
and bleachers, and the steady stream of humanity pouring in through
the gates.
As Riley approached, a lean, sallow man, with a hawk-beak nose,
rose from the home bench and nodded, holding out a bony hand,
which, cold as a dead fish, was almost smothered in the pudgy paw
put forth to meet it.
“Hello, Hutch!” gurgled the manager of the Bullies, with a show of
cordiality, although he quickly dropped the chilling hand. “How’s
tricks? See you took a fall outer Fryeburg yistidday.”
“Yes, we got away with it,” answered the local manager, in a
monotonous, dead-level voice, lacking wholly in enthusiasm. “But the
‘Brownies’ are a cinch; nothing but a bunch of raw kids.”
“Uh-huh!” grunted Riley, twisting his thumb into the huge watch
chain which spanned the breadth of his bulging waistcoat; “that’s
right. Still, you didn’t have much leeway to spare, did ye?”
 “Put it over by one measly run, that’s all. Deever’s arm went on the
blink in the seventh, and the greenhorns came near hammering out
a win. Locke managed to hold ’em.”
“Who is this Locke? I see he’s down to wing ’em for you to-day.
Where’d you find him, huh?”
“Don’t ask me who he is. I never heard of him before. He’s some
green dub of a port-side flinger old man Cope picked up. You know
Cope used to play the game back in the days of the Deluge, and he
thinks he knows all about it. As he’s chairman of the Kingsbridge
Baseball Association, and one of the heaviest backers of the team,
folks round here let him meddle enough to keep him appeased. All
the same, long as they’ve hired me to manage, I’m going to manage,
after I’ve shown ’em how much Cope don’t know about it.”
“That’s the talk, Hutch,” chuckled the Bancroft manager. “You’ve
got some team, and you oughter be able to make it interestin’ for the
rest of us, if the rubes let you have your swing. It was that old fox,
Cope, who got Deever away from me arter I had Pat as good as
signed, which makes me feel a bit raw, natural. Outside of Deever,
and Locke, and a few others, I s’pose the team’s practically your
make-up?”
“Then you’ve got another guess coming,” returned Bob
Hutchinson. “Skillings, Lace, Crandall, and Hickey make the whole of
my picking; Cope practically got together the rest of the bunch. But
wait; some of ’em won’t hold their jobs long, between you and me,
Mike.
“Perhaps we hadn’t better chin any longer, for I see we’re being
watched, and the people of this town are so hot against Bancroft,
and you in particular, that they might get suspicious, and think there
was something crooked doing if we talked too long.”
“Guess that’s right,” admitted Riley. “They ain’t got no love for me
in Kingsbridge, ’count of our rubbing it inter them last year. Makes
me laugh, the way they squealed. They were so sore they swore
they’d have a team to beat us this year at any cost. That’s how you
got your job; they decided to have a reg’ler manager, who could give
all his time and attention to handlin’ the team. Sorry for you, Hutch,
but if they beat Bancroft under the wire with the bunch they’ve
scraped together, I’ll quit the game for good. So long.”
Having learned that Hutchinson was not wholly responsible for the
make-up of the Kingsbridge nine, Riley did not hesitate to express
himself in this manner, thus betraying the disdain in which he really
held his opponents of the day.
Only once since the organization of the so-called Northern
League, which really had very little organization whatever, being run,
like many small, back-country “leagues,” in a loose, hit-or-miss
fashion—only once had Bancroft failed to win the championship; and
that year Riley, a minor leaguer before age and avoirdupois had
deposited him in the can, had not handled the club.
Bancroft was a city, and it cut her fans deeply to be downed on the
diamond by a smaller place, besides severely wounding in their
pockets some of the sports who had wagered real money. Hence the
former successful manager was called back to the job, at which he
was always prepared to make good through any means available.
Kingsbridge had entered the league the previous season, filling
the place of a town that, loaded with baseball debts, and
discouraged by poor success, had dropped out. Owing its existence
to Cyrus King, lumberman and pulp manufacturer, Kingsbridge was
barely four years old, yet its inhabitants already numbered nearly five
thousand.
Furthermore, it was confidently looking forward to the time,
believed to be not far distant, when it should outstrip the already
envious city of Bancroft, and become the “metropolis” of that
particular region.
While pretending to scoff at the “mushroom village,” Bancroft was
secretly disturbed and worried, fearing the day when Kingsbridge,
through the enterprise of its citizens, the interest and power of its
founder, and the coming of a second railroad, which was seeking a
charter, would really forge to the front, and leave the “big town down
the river” in the lurch. Therefore, quite naturally, the rivalry between
the two places was intense in other things besides baseball.
There is nothing like the game, however, to bring to the surface
the jealousies and rivalries existing between towns having
contending teams; something about the game is certain to tear open
old sores and stir up ancient animosities apparently long forgotten.
Especially is this true in minor leagues and “out in the bush,”
where not infrequently it appears to the chance stranger that whole
towns—men, women, and children—have gone baseball crazy.
It is in such places that one may see the game, as a game, at its
best—and its worst. Here victory or defeat assumes a tragic
importance that must seem laughable to the ordinary city fan; the
former being frequently the cause of rejoicing and celebrating,
sometimes with fireworks and brass bands, while the latter will cast
over the community a cloud of gloom which could be equaled only by
an appalling catastrophe.
This intensity of feeling and emotion may scarcely be understood
by a person who has never followed with individual interest the
fortunes of a backwoods team, tasting the sweet intoxication of
triumph, hard earned and contested to the last ditch, or the
heartbreaking bitterness of defeat and shattered hopes.
 CHAPTER II
UNDER COVER

K ingsbridge, with its pulp-mill and saw-mill laborers, was precisely

the sort of a place to back a team to the limit, and to demand a
winning club, regardless of expense.
On Saturdays, because of the early shutting down of the mills,
nearly all the laborers could get out to witness the contests, and few
there were who failed to attend, unless sickness or imperative
necessity kept them away. In fact, on the last day of the week, the
attendance in that town was as large as the average turnout in
Bancroft.
The mill town’s initial experience had been most unsatisfactory
and discouraging. Starting out with a nine made up of youngsters,
among whom were college men and high-school boys, it had made a
promising beginning, actually standing at the head of the league for
almost three weeks, and then fighting Bancroft for first place for an
equal length of time.
But the youngsters did not seem to have staying qualities, and
this, combined with poor management and the “fair-or-foul” methods
of the Bullies, had eventually sent Kingsbridge down the ladder to
finish the season at the very foot of the list.
This failure, however, simply aroused the town to grim
determination, bringing about the organization of a baseball
association which included many of the leading citizens, Henry
Cope, who kept the largest general store in town, being chosen
chairman. The association pledged itself to put a winning team on to
the field, and Cope, having considerable knowledge of baseball and
players, set to work in midwinter preparing for the coming campaign.
He was given a comparatively free hand by his associates, although,
in order that Bancroft might not hear and get wise, the purpose of his
movements was kept secret until it was almost time for the league to
open.
Then it became known that Bob Hutchinson, a manager who had
handled teams in one of the well known minor leagues, had been
secured to take charge of the “Kinks.” It was also made public that a
team of fast and experienced players throughout had been signed,
and the names of several of these players were printed in the
sporting column of the Bancroft News.
Hope flamed high in Kingsbridge. The topic of the street corners
was baseball. It was freely proclaimed that the town was prepared to
take a heavy fall out of Bancroft, and would begin by downing the
“hated enemy” in the very first clash, which was scheduled to occur
in the down-river city.
Of course a few pessimistic killjoys, of whom every community
must have its quota, scoffed at the efforts and expectations of the
enthusiasts, declaring it was not possible for a place no larger than
Kingsbridge, no matter how earnestly it might try, to defeat a city with
Bancroft’s record and resources. These croakers were not popular,
yet their gloomy prophecies awakened misgivings in many a heart.
In Bancroft the midwinter silence of Kingsbridge had aroused
some alarm lest the mill town, troubled with cold feet, should fail to
come to the scratch when the season opened, which would make it
necessary to lure some other place into the fold, or run the league
three-cornered, something most unpleasant and undesirable.
Even when Kingsbridge sent a representative to attend the usual
annual meeting of the league association, the quiet declination of
that representative to give out any particulars concerning the
personnel of the up-river team had left a feeling of uneasiness,
despite his repeated assurance that there would be such a team.
Later, on the appearance of the newspaper report that Kingsbridge
had engaged Bob Hutchinson as manager, and the publication of an
incomplete roster of the mill-town players, Bancroft’s relief and
satisfaction had been tempered by alarm of a different nature. For it
now became apparent that the city’s ambitious rival had all along
been quietly at work preparing to spring a surprise in the form of an
unusually strong nine that would make the other clubs go some, right
from the call of “play.”
Mike Riley had not sought to allay this final feeling of
apprehension; on the contrary, for purely personal reasons, he
fostered it. For would it not encourage the backers of his team,
believing as they did in his sound baseball sense, to give him even
greater liberty in management? And when he should again win the
championship, as he secretly and egotistically felt certain of doing,
the luster of the accomplishment must seem far more dazzling than
usual.
After Bancroft’s opening-day success, when she had rubbed it into
the Kinks to the tune of 8 to 4, Riley became completely satisfied
that the Kingsbridge nine was a false alarm.
Aware of Hutchinson’s particular weaknesses, he had never really
feared the man; but let this much be said to Riley’s credit: whenever
possible, he preferred to capture victory by the skill and fighting
ability of his team, rather than through secret deals and shady,
underhanded methods. And he always developed a team of
aggressive, browbeating fighters; hence the far-from-pleasing
appellation of “Bullies.”
In her second game, Kingsbridge’s victory over Fryeburg had
come as a surprise to Manager Riley, whose judgment had led him
to believe that the Brownies would also open the season with a
triumph on their own field. Hence his desire to question Hutchinson
about it.
Tom Locke, the new pitcher who had relieved Pat Deever when
the Fryeburgers took Deever’s measure in the seventh, was an
unknown to Riley, and, the chap being slated to go against Bancroft
this day, Mike had sought information concerning him.
Hutchinson, however, could tell him nothing save that the young
man had been signed by Henry Cope; but, holding Cope’s baseball
judgment openly in contempt, this seemed sufficiently relieving, and,