A Data Quality Assessment Approach for High-Precision GNSS Continuously Operating Reference Stations (CORS) with Case Studies in Hong Kong and Canada/USA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Centimeter-level or better positioning accuracy is needed in engineering surveying applications. When employing the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) in engineering surveying, the high-precision real-time kinematic (RTK) positioning method must be used to achieve such positioning accuracy. Currently, precise point positioning (PPP) cannot reliably achieve the positioning accuracy needed for engineering surveying in real time. The high-precision RTK positioning method needs carrier-phase measurements and a reference station/network. Surveyors may not need a GNSS receiver in their organizations/companies to act as the reference station. Continuously Operating Reference Stations (CORS), run by international/national organizations/agencies or private companies such as GNSS receiver manufacturers, let users freely access the raw GNSS measurements or corrections for real-time and post-processing applications. The positioning accuracy of the GNSS rover is affected by the data quality of the reference stations, including virtual reference stations (VRS). The International GNSS Service (IGS) currently provides the number of cycle slips and the L1 and L2 average pseudorange multipath errors per station daily. The US National Geodetic Survey (NGS) provides daily station coordinate residuals. Carrier-phase data quality of the CORS stations is not provided by their organizations/agencies. Nowadays, many CORS stations track multi-GNSS satellites. This paper proposes a multi-GNSS and multi-frequency data quality assessment approach for CORS stations with a focus on carrier-phase data quality. The proposed approach is demonstrated with case studies on IGS/CORS networks in Hong Kong and Canada/USA. In other words, a strategy to obtain non-linear combined carrier-phase multipath errors and noise is proposed in this work. The data quality of a CORS station depends on the site environment, monument type and height, and GNSS receiver/antenna. An account of the data quality at some selected stations is given; the main focus of the paper is on the proposed data quality assessment 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 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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".