Cited by 24Advanced Frequency and Time StandardsRelativity and Gravitational TheoryGNSS positioning and interference

A new test of gravitational redshift using Galileo satellites: The GREAT experiment

Open access
Delva, Pacôme, Puchades, Neus, Schönemann, Erik, Dilssner, Florian, Courde, Clément, Bertone, Stefano, Gonzalez, Francisco, Hees, Aurélien +6 more·2019·Comptes Rendus. Physique

Abstract

We present the result of the analysis of the GREAT (Galileo gravitational Redshift test with Eccentric sATellites) experiment. An elliptic orbit induces a periodic modulation of the fractional frequency difference between a ground clock and the satellite clock, partly due to the gravitational redshift, while the good stability of Galileo clocks allows one to test this periodic modulation to a high level of accuracy. GSAT0201 and GSAT0202, with their large eccentricity and on-board H-maser clocks, are perfect candidates to perform this test. Satellite laser ranging data allows us to partly decorrelate the orbit perturbations from the clock errors. By analyzing several years of Galileo tracking data, we have been able to improve the Gravity probe A test (1976) of the gravitational redshift by a factor of 5.6, providing, to our knowledge, the first reported improvement since more than 40 years.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.crhy.2019.04.002

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Delva, P., Puchades, N., Schönemann, E., Dilssner, F., Courde, C., Bertone, S., Gonzalez, F., Hees, A., Le Poncin-Lafitte, C., Meynadier, F., Prieto-Cerdeira, R., Sohet, B., Ventura-Traveset, J., & Wolf, P.
Affiliations
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • European Space Operations Centre (DE)
  • Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur (FR)
  • University of Bern (CH)
  • European Space Research and Technology Centre (NL)
Corresponding author
Delva, Pacôme
Venue
Comptes Rendus. Physique
Published
2019-03-01
Volume
20
Issue
3
Pages
176-182
ISSN
  • 1631-0705 (ISSN-L)
  • 1878-1535
OpenAlex
W2944687278
Cited by
24
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 8
FWCI
1.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Comptes Rendus Physique (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Aarhus Universitetsforlag eBooks (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Physical Reports (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • European Space Agency
  • Generalitat Valenciana (APOSTD2017)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Advanced Frequency and Time Standards
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Relativity and Gravitational Theory
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › GNSS positioning and interference
Keywords
gravitational redshift, Galileo satellites, eccentric orbits, satellite laser ranging, orbital perturbations

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