Performance analysis of NOAA tropospheric signal delay model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tropospheric delay is one of the dominant global positioning system (GPS) errors, which degrades the positioning accuracy. Recent development in tropospheric modeling relies on implementation of more accurate numerical weather prediction (NWP) models. In North America one of the NWP-based tropospheric correction models is the NOAA Tropospheric Signal Delay Model (NOAATrop), which was developed by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Because of its potential to improve the GPS positioning accuracy, the NOAATrop model became the focus of many researchers. In this paper, we analyzed the performance of the NOAATrop model and examined its effect on ionosphere-free-based precise point positioning (PPP) solution. We generated 3 year long tropospheric zenith total delay (ZTD) data series for the NOAATrop model, Hopfield model, and the International GNSS Services (IGS) final tropospheric correction product, respectively. These data sets were generated at ten IGS reference stations spanning Canada and the United States. We analyzed the NOAATrop ZTD data series and compared them with those of the Hopfield model. The IGS final tropospheric product was used as a reference. The analysis shows that the performance of the NOAATrop model is a function of both season (time of the year) and geographical location. However, its performance was superior to the Hopfield model in all cases. We further investigated the effect of implementing the NOAATrop model on the ionosphere-free-based PPP solution convergence and accuracy. It is shown that the use of the NOAATrop model improved the PPP solution convergence by 1%, 10% and 15% for the latitude, longitude and height components, respectively.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".