## 4 Summary and Conclusions  
The paper proposes a new method for adjusting an integrated network made up of GNSS vectors and classical terrestrial observations. The first computing stage involves a list of linear pseudo-observations that are original linear-angular observations converted into spatial distances. The next step is to transform (a priori) the mean errors of the classical measurements into mean errors of the pseudo-observations (the stochastic model). The functional model of the adjustment is made up of a set of observation equations for the GNSS vectors and for the new pseudo-observations (expressed as a function of the original linear-angular measurements). The objective of the pre-processing is the concurrent adjustment of the pseudo-observations and GNSS vectors in a common mathematical space \(XYZ\). The second part of the paper presented a practical application of the method to adjust an integrated geodetic network. The results (coordinates of points, their mean errors and spatial distances between the points) were juxtaposed with results of the adjustment of the GNSS vector network. The comparative analysis demonstrated that the new method for adjusting integrated networks yields similar results (coordinates) as an adjustment of a vector network. It has \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Point**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**Differences in Coordinates**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Resultant**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Differences in**} \\  & & **[mm]** & & **Linear** & **Differences in Mean Errors** & & **Error of** \\  & & **[mm]** & & **Discrepancy** & **[mm]** & & **Position** \\  & & & & **[mm]** & & & **[mm]** \\ \cline{2-8}  & \(X\) & \(Y\) & \(Z\) & \(\delta_{XYZ}\) & \(m_{X}\) & \(m_{Y}\) & \(m_{Z}\) & \(m_{P}\) \\ \hline
3 & \(-2.1\) & \(-3.0\) & \(0.9\) & \(3.8\) & \(0.0\) & \(0.1\) & \(0.0\) & \(0.1\) \\
4 & \(-1.9\) & \(-2.7\) & \(1.4\) & \(3.6\) & \(0.0\) & \(0.1\) & \(0.0\) & \(0.1\) \\
5 & \(-4.9\) & \(-0.6\) & \(1.1\) & \(5.0\) & \(0.2\) & \(0.3\) & \(0.1\) & \(0.3\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 8: Comparison of results of adjustments of the GNSS network and the integrated network. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Side**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**GNSS Vector**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Integrated**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Difference 1**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Classical**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**Difference 2**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**Difference 3**} \\  & & **[mm]** & & **[mm]** & & **[mm]** & & **[mm]** \\ \hline
**From** & **To** & **(\(d_{G}\))** & **(\(d_{IN}\))** & **(\(d_{G}\)-\(d_{IN}\))** & **(\(d_{CL}\))** & **(\(d_{G}\)-\(d_{CL}\))** & **(\(d_{IN}\)-\(d_{CL}\))** \\ \hline
2 & 3 & 24.9621 & 24.9623 & \(-0.1\) & \(24.9650\) & \(-2.9\) & \(-2.8\) \\
3 & 4 & 24.8927 & 24.8924 & 0.3 & \(24.8924\) & \(0.3\) & \(-0.1\) \\
4 & 5 & 24.4329 & 24.4356 & \(-2.7\) & \(24.4419\) & \(-9.0\) & \(-6.3\) \\
5 & 6 & 24.6339 & 24.6331 & 0.8 & \(24.6397\) & \(-5.9\) & \(-6.7\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 9: Comparison of spatial distances following the adjustment. further been demonstrated that an integrated network provides more accurate (close to real) spatial distances between points (in relation to reference distances obtained from precise classical surveys). The primary advantage of the proposed adjustment method is the ease of integration of GNSS vectors with linear pseudo-observations obtained from classical measurements. The preparation of pseudo-observations is much easier than for other available methods for adjusting integrated networks (where it is necessary to determine the lengths of geodetic lines and their azimuths on the ellipsoid, project classical observations onto the ellipsoid, or convert ellipsoidal heights into orthometric values, etc.). The proposed method can be employed to adjust periodic measurements of control networks for ground displacement monitoring. However, the use of this calculation method is limited to short lines.