Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 292

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Topography of the Moon from the Clementine lidar

Open access
Smith, David E., Zuber, Maria T., Neumann, Gregory A., Lemoine, Frank G.·1997·Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets

Abstract

Range measurements from the lidar instrument carried aboard the Clementine spacecraft have been used to produce an accurate global topographic model of the Moon. This paper discusses the function of the lidar; the acquisition, processing, and filtering of observations to produce a global topographic model; and the determination of parameters that define the fundamental shape of the Moon. Our topographic model; a 72nd degree and order spherical harmonic expansion of lunar radii, is designated Goddard Lunar Topography Model 2 (GLTM 2). This topographic field has an absolute vertical accuracy of approximately 100 m and a spatial resolution of 2.5°. The field shows that the Moon can be described as a sphere with maximum positive and negative deviations of ∼8 km, both occurring on the farside, in the areas of the Korolev and South Pole‐Aitken (S.P.‐Aitken) basins. The amplitude spectrum of the topography shows more power at longer wavelengths as compared to previous models, owing to more complete sampling of the surface, particularly the farside. A comparison of elevations derived from the Clementine lidar to control point elevations from the Apollo laser altimeters indicates that measured relative topographic heights generally agree to within ∼200 m over the maria. While the major axis of the lunar gravity field is aligned in the Earth‐Moon direction, the major axis of topography is displaced from this line by approximately 10° to the east and intersects the farside 24° north of the equator. The magnitude of impact basin topography is greater than the lunar flattening (∼2 km) and equatorial ellipticity (∼800 m), which imposes a significant challenge to interpreting the lunar figure. The floors of mare basins are shown to lie close to an equipotential surface, while the floors of unflooded large basins, except for S.P.‐Aitken, lie above this equipotential. The radii of basin floors are thus consistent with a hydrostatic mechanism for the absence of significant farside maria except for S.P.‐Aitken, whose depth and lack of mare require significant internal compositional and/or thermal heterogeneity. A macroscale surface roughness map shows that roughness at length scales of 10 1–10 2 km correlates with elevation and surface age.

Overview

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 · 10.1029/96je02940

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 292

Metadata

Authors
Smith, D. E., Zuber, M. T., Neumann, G. A., & Lemoine, F. G.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets
Published
1997-01
Volume
102
Issue
E1
Pages
1591-1611
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2058545189
Cited by
292
References
1
FWCI
12.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Topography of the Moon from the Clementine lidar. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/96je02940
The paper
Smith, D. E., Zuber, M. T., Neumann, G. A., & Lemoine, F. G. (1997). Topography of the Moon from the Clementine lidar. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets. https://doi.org/10.1029/96je02940

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.