Cited by 54Geophysics and Gravity MeasurementsGNSS positioning and interferenceHistorical Geography and Cartography

Global height system unification with GOCE: A simulation study on the indirect bias term in the GBVP approach

Gerlach, Christian, Rummel, Reiner·2013·Journal of Geodesy

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00190-012-0579-y

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gerlach, C., & Rummel, R.
Affiliations
  • Bavarian Academy of Sciences and Humanities (DE)
  • Technical University of Munich (DE)
Corresponding author
Gerlach, Christian
Venue
Journal of Geodesy
Published
2012-07-14
Volume
87
Issue
1
Pages
57-67
ISSN
  • 0949-7714 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1394
OpenAlex
W2080421315
Cited by
54
References
22
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
4.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Geodesy (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Oceanography › Geophysics and Gravity Measurements
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › GNSS positioning and interference
  • Social Sciences › Geography, Planning and Development › Historical Geography and Cartography
Keywords
GOCE, geodetic boundary value problem, geoid determination, omission errors, ellipsoidal height, height

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