MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112754078 · doi:10.1017/s0373463307004250

Assessment of Several Interpolation Methods for Precise GPS Orbit

2007· article· en· W2112754078 on OpenAlexaff
Hamad Yousif, Ahmed El‐Rabbany

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Navigation · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGNSS positioning and interference
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEphemerisGNSS applicationsGlobal Positioning SystemPrecise Point PositioningGeodesyInterpolation (computer graphics)Orbit (dynamics)Computer scienceSpline interpolationOrbital elementsAlgorithmBilinear interpolationGeographySatelliteComputer visionPhysicsAerospace engineeringEngineeringAstronomyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

GPS applications such as Precise Point Positioning (PPP) require the availability of precise ephemeris at high rate. To support these applications, several institutions such as the International GNSS Service (IGS) have developed precise orbital service. Unfortunately, however, the data rate of such precise orbits is usually limited to 15 minutes. To overcome this problem, a number of orbital interpolation methods are proposed. This paper examines the performance of four interpolation methods for IGS precise GPS orbits, namely Lagrange, Newton Divided Difference, Cubic Spline and Trigonometric interpolation. In addition, the paper discusses a new approach, which utilizes the residuals between the broadcast and precise ephemeris to generate a high density precise ephemeris. It is shown that the new approach produces better results than previously reported orbital interpolation accuracy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.364 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NavigationSame topicGNSS positioning and interferenceFrench-language works237,207