CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 7GNSS positioning and interferenceGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsHistorical Geography and Cartography

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Geodetic World Height System Unification

Sideris, Michael·2014·Handbook of Geomathematics
DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-27793-1_83-1
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/978-3-642-27793-1_83-1

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The GBVP approach has major drawbacks: use of different standards in different regions and restricted accessibility to terrestrial gravity data.

    “Its major drawbacks, however, are the use of different standards in different regions (e.g. gravity data: gravity anomaly or gravity disturbance; tide systems: mean or zero tide system for computing the potential difference; gravity field models: different models with different spherical harmonic degree and order for removing the long-wavelength contributions) and the restricted accessibility to”

    From Clock networks for height system unification: a simulation study (2019) · cites this paper as Sideris 2014

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. Amjadiparvar B, Sideris MG, Rangelova E (2013) North American height datums and their offsets: evaluation of the GOCE-based global geopotential models in Canada and USA. J Appl Geodesy 7(3):191–203 · DOI
  2. Amos MJ, Feathersone WE (2009) Unification of New Zealand’s local vertical datums: iterative gravimetric quasi-geoid computations. J Geodesy 83:57–68. doi:10.1007/s00190-008-0232-y · DOI
  3. Argus DE, Peltier WR (2010) Constraining models of postglacial rebound using space geodesy: a detailed assessment of model ICE-5G (VM2) and its relatives. Geophys J Int 181:697–723
  4. Bursa M et al (2008) Mean Earth’s equipotential surface from Topex/Poseidon altimetry. Stud Geophys et Geod 42:459–466 · DOI
  5. Cartwright DE, Crease J (1963) A Comparison of the geodetic-reference levels of England and France by means of the sea surface. Proc R Soc Lond Ser A Math Phys Sci 273(1355):558–580 · DOI
  6. Featherstone WE, Filmer MS (2012) The north-south tilt in the Australian Height Datum is explained by the ocean’s mean dynamic topography. J Geophys Res 117:C08035. doi:10.1029/2012JC007974 · DOI
  7. Fischer I (1977) Mean sea level and the marine geoid – an analysis of concepts. Mar Geodesy 1:37. doi:10.1080/01490417709387950 · DOI
  8. Gatti A, Reguzzoni M, Venuti G (2013) The height datum problem and the role of satellite gravity models. J Geodesy 87:15–22. doi:10.1007/s00190-012-0574-3 · DOI
  9. Gerlach C, Fecher F (2012) Approximations of the GOCE error variance-covariance matrix for least-squares estimation of height datum offsets. J Geod Sci 2(4):247–256 · DOI
  10. Gerlach C, Rummel R (2013) Global height system unification with GOCE: a simulation study on the indirect bias term in the GBVP approach. J Geodesy 87:57–67 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Heck B (2005) Problems in the definition of vertical reference frames. In: Proceedings of V Hotine Marussi Symposium on Mathematical Geodesy, Matera. International Association of Geodesy symposia, vol 127. Springer, pp 164–173 · DOI
  12. Heck B, Rummel R (1990) Strategies for solving the vertical datum problem using terrestrial and satellite geodetic data. In: Proceedings of Sea Surface Topography and the Geoid, Edinburgh. International Association of Geodesy symposia, vol 104. Springer, New York, pp 116–128 · DOI
  13. Hofmann-Wellenhof B, Moritz H (2006) Physical geodesy, 2nd edn. Springer, Wien/New York
  14. Moritz H (2013) Classical physical geodesy. In: Freeden W, Nashed MZ, Sonar T (eds) Handbook of Geomathematics. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg
  15. Pail R et al (2011) First GOCE gravity field models derived by three different approaches. J Geodesy 85(11):819–843 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Pavlis NK, Holmes SA, Kenyon SC, Factor JK (2012) The development and evaluation of the Earth Gravitational Model 2008 (EGM2008). J Geophys Res 117:B04406. doi:10.1029/2011JB008916 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Pugh DT (1987) Tides, surges, and mean sea level. Wiley, Chichester
  18. Rangelova E, Sideris MG, Amjadiparvar P, Hayden T (2014) Height datum unification by means of the GBVP approach using tide gauges. In: Proceedings of the VIII Hotine-Marussi Symposium on Mathematical Geodesy, Rome. International Association of Geodesy Symposia, vol 142. Springer (in press) · DOI
  19. Rangelova E, van der Wal W, Sideris MG (2012) How significant is the dynamic component of the North American vertical datum? J Geod Sci 2(4):281–289. doi:10.2478/v10156-012-0005-7 · DOI
  20. Rummel R, Ilk KH (1995) Height datum connection – the ocean part. Allg Vermessungs 8–9:321–330
  21. Rummel R, Teunissen P (1988) Height datum definition, height datum connection and the role of the geodetic boundary value problem. Bull Géod 62:477–498 · DOI
  22. Sanchez L (2007) Definition and realization of the SIRGAS vertical reference system within a globally unified height system. In: Proceedings of Dynamic Planet, Cairns. International Association of Geodesy symposia, vol 130. Springer, pp 638–645 · DOI
  23. Sanchez L (2008) Approach for the establishment of a global vertical reference level. In: Proceedings of VI Hotine-Marussi Symposium on Theoretical and Computational Geodesy, Wuhan. International Association of Geodesy symposia, vol 132. Springer, pp 119–125 · DOI
  24. Sansò F, Sideris MG (eds) (2013) Geoid determination – theory and methods. Lecture Notes in Earth-Sciences. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, 734pp
  25. Sansò F, Usai S (1995) Height datum and local geodetic datum in the theory of geodetic boundary value problems. Allg Vermussungsnachreichten, Wichmann, Heft 8–9:343–385
  26. Sansò F, Venuti G (2002) The height datum/geodetic datum problem. Geophys J Int 149:768–775
  27. Sideris MG, Fotopoulos G (eds) (2012) Special issue on regional and global geoid-based vertical datums. J Geod Sci 2(4):246–376 · DOI
  28. Tenzer R, Vatrt V, Gan L, Abdalla A, Dayoub N (2011) Combined approach for the unification of leveling networks in New Zealand. J Geod Sci 1(4):324–332. doi:10.2478/v10156-011-0012-0 · DOI
  29. Woodworth PL, Hughes CW, Bingham RJ, Gruber T (2012) Towards worldwide height system unification using ocean information. J Geod Sci 2(4):302–318 · DOI
  30. Xu P (1992) A quality investigation of global vertical datum connection. Geophys J Int 110:361–370. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.1992.tb00880.x · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Sideris, M.
Affiliations
University of Calgary (CA)
Corresponding author
Sideris, Michael
ORCID
Sideris, Michael
Venue
Handbook of Geomathematics
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published
2014
Pages
1-16
DOI
10.1007/978-3-642-27793-1_83-1
OpenAlex
W2291043881
Cited by
7
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
Springer eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › GNSS positioning and interference
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Geophysics › Geophysics and Gravity Measurements
  • Social Sciences › Geography, Planning and Development › Historical Geography and Cartography
Keywords
vertical datum unification, vertical datum, geoid modeling, spirit leveling, sea level rise, coastal flooding, crustal deformation, subsidence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review