MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118496521 · doi:10.3390/s21020443

Estimation and Analysis of GNSS Differential Code Biases (DCBs) Using a Multi-Spacing Software Receiver

2021· article· en· W3118496521 on OpenAlexaff
Ye Wang, Lin Zhao, Yang Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGNSS positioning and interference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGNSS applicationsSoftwareSatelliteComputer scienceSatellite systemRemote sensingGlobal Positioning SystemPhysicsTelecommunicationsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the use of global navigation satellite systems (GNSS) to monitor ionosphere variations by estimating total electron content (TEC), differential code biases (DCBs) in GNSS measurements are a primary source of errors. Satellite DCBs are currently estimated and broadcast to users by International GNSS Service (IGS) using a network of GNSS hardware receivers which are inside structure fixed. We propose an approach for satellite DCB estimation using a multi-spacing GNSS software receiver to analyze the influence of the correlator spacing on satellite DCB estimates and estimate satellite DCBs based on different correlator spacing observations from the software receiver. This software receiver-based approach is called multi-spacing DCB (MSDCB) estimation. In the software receiver approach, GNSS observations with different correlator spacings from intermediate frequency datasets can be generated. Since each correlator spacing allows the software receiver to output observations like a local GNSS receiver station, GNSS observations from different correlator spacings constitute a network of GNSS receivers, which makes it possible to use a single software receiver to estimate satellite DCBs. By comparing the MSDCBs to the IGS DCB products, the results show that the proposed correlator spacing flexible software receiver is able to predict satellite DCBs with increased flexibility and cost-effectiveness than the current hardware receiver-based DCB estimation approach.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicGNSS positioning and interferenceFrench-language works237,207