MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386761750 · doi:10.1088/1681-7575/acfa04

GPS PPP-AR frequency transfer and its application for comparing atomic fountain primary frequency standards between NRC and PTB

2023· article· en· W4386761750 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bin Jian, Scott Beattie, S. Weyers, Johannes Rahm, Brian Donahue, Marina Gertsvolf

Bibliographic record

VenueMetrologia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Frequency and Time Standards
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlgorithmComputer scienceAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Artificial intelligenceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We report on the first characterization of the frequency transfer performance of the GPS precise point positioning with carrier-phase integer ambiguity resolution (PPP-AR) implemented by the Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) online service CSRS-PPP. We show that continuous PPP-AR links of multiple days can be formed by carefully fixing the day boundary phase discontinuity. The stability of the links can reach 7 × 10 − 16 and 1 × 10 − 16 (Allan deviation) at 1 d and 7 d averaging times, respectively, and mid to low 10−17 at 20 d–30 d. We compared the atomic fountain primary frequency standards (PFS) between NRC in Ottawa, Canada and PTB in Braunschweig, Germany for 135 d via GPS PPP-AR and precise point positioning links. The NRC and PTB PFS agree within a few parts in 1016, which is well below the combined systematic uncertainty. It is expected that with uncertainty at 10−17, the PPP-AR links will become a powerful tool for remote comparisons of atomic optical clocks, essential for the future redefinition of the SI second.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.288
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMetrologiaSame topicAdvanced Frequency and Time StandardsFrench-language works237,207