I used ISCE's Sentinel-1 TOPS stack processor+FRInGE to process the deformation time series of Yongning, Yunnan, China, and found that the FRInGE time series algorithm gave more valid deformation information. However， I encountered difficulties when geocoding the results using the geocode.py in ISCE, and found that the coded results did not match actuality.
The specific code to run in the terminal is as follows：
stackSentinel.py -s ./rawdata/ -d ./dem/demLat_N26_N29_Lon_E098_E102.dem.wgs84 -a ../../AuxDir/ -o ./orbit/ -b '27.45 28.00 100.44 101.00' -W slctops2vrt.py -i ../merged/ -s coreg_stack -g geometry -c slcs -B 27.45 28.00 100.44 101.00
...
unwrapStack.py -s slcs -m Sequential/miniStacks/ -d Sequential/Datum_connection/ -M 15 -u 'unwrap_fringe.py' --unw_method snaphugeocode.py ./Sequential/miniStacks/20220103_20220503/unwrap/20220103.unw --lat-file ../merged/geom_reference/lat.rdr --lon-file ../merged/geom_reference/lon.rdr
I used ISCE's Sentinel-1 TOPS stack processor+FRInGE to process the deformation time series of Yongning, Yunnan, China, and found that the FRInGE time series algorithm gave more valid deformation information. However， I encountered difficulties when geocoding the results using the geocode.py in ISCE, and found that the coded results did not match actuality. The specific code to run in the terminal is as follows：
stackSentinel.py -s ./rawdata/ -d ./dem/demLat_N26_N29_Lon_E098_E102.dem.wgs84 -a ../../AuxDir/ -o ./orbit/ -b '27.45 28.00 100.44 101.00' -W slctops2vrt.py -i ../merged/ -s coreg_stack -g geometry -c slcs -B 27.45 28.00 100.44 101.00...unwrapStack.py -s slcs -m Sequential/miniStacks/ -d Sequential/Datum_connection/ -M 15 -u 'unwrap_fringe.py' --unw_method snaphugeocode.py ./Sequential/miniStacks/20220103_20220503/unwrap/20220103.unw --lat-file ../merged/geom_reference/lat.rdr --lon-file ../merged/geom_reference/lon.rdr