Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 263

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

ERS‐1/2 orbit improvement using TOPEX/POSEIDON: The 2 cm challenge

Le Traon, P.‐Y., Ogor, F.·1998·Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans

Abstract

The ERS orbit error reduction method using TOPEX/POSEIDON (T/P) data as a reference [Le Traon et al., 1995a] was applied to ERS‐1 cycles from phases C, E, F, and G and to the first 16 cycles of the ERS‐2 mission (phase A). T/P M‐GDR (geophysical data record) (version C) and ERS‐1/2 ocean product (OPR) data were used. ERS‐1/2 orbits are the D‐PAF (processing and archiving facility) orbits and, when necessary, ERS‐1/2 altimetric corrections were updated to make the T/P and ERS‐1/2 corrections homogeneous. The adjustment method has been refined, and formal error on the estimation is now calculated. The ERS‐1/2 orbit error estimation is thus estimated to be precise to within about 2 cm root‐mean‐square (rms). E‐E crossover differences are reduced from 12 to 17 cm to only 6.5 cm rms for all processed cycles. Similarly, the T/P‐E crossover differences are reduced from 11 to 14 cm to only 7 cm rms. The adjusted D‐PAF orbit error varies between 6 and 12 cm rms. The adjustment has also been performed for the Joint Gravity Model 3(JGM 3) orbits of ERS‐I phases C, E, and F. The rms difference between the corrected orbits for the D‐PAF and JGM 3 orbits is only about 1 cm rms, while it is about 11 cm before T/P orbit error correction. This shows that the adjustment is almost insensitive to the initial ERS‐I orbit used. It also confirms the 2 cm precision of the method. We also do repeat‐track analysis on the 35 day repeat cycles of ERS‐I phase C. The mean difference in sea level variance before and after orbit error correction is 34 cm2 (D‐PAF orbit) and 17 cm2 (JGM 3 orbit). The corrected ERS‐1 and T/P sea level variabilities, however, are in excellent agreement. The study thus shows that ERS‐1/2 orbit error must be corrected before analyzing large‐scale oceanic signals and combining ERS‐1/2 with T/P data. The proposed method provides a very effective correction and thus significantly enhances the quality of ERS‐1/2 data. Corresponding data sets will be distributed to the scientific community by Archiving, Validation, and Interpretation of Satellite Oceanographic Data (AVISO).

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 · 10.1029/97jc01917

Cites

8 of 8 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 8 references

Cited by

See all 263

Metadata

Authors
Le Traon, P. ‐., & Ogor, F.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans
Published
1998-04-15
Volume
103
Issue
C4
Pages
8045-8057
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2097186989
Cited by
263
References
8
FWCI
9.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: ERS‐1/2 orbit improvement using TOPEX/POSEIDON: The 2 cm challenge. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/97jc01917
The paper
Le Traon, P. ‐., & Ogor, F. (1998). ERS‐1/2 orbit improvement using TOPEX/POSEIDON: The 2 cm challenge. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans. https://doi.org/10.1029/97jc01917

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.