MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impacts of the Great May 2024 Geomagnetic Storm on Precise Point Positioning

2025· article· en· W4409122698 on OpenAlexfundno aff
William Rodrigo Dal Poz, A. C. da Silva, Afonso de Paula dos Santos, Nilcilene das Graças Medeiros, Ítalo Oliveira Ferreira, Júlio César de Oliveira

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Brasileira de Geografia Física · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGNSS positioning and interference
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHelmholtz-Zentrum Potsdam - Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum GFZNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsGeomagnetic stormStormEarth's magnetic fieldPoint (geometry)GeodesyMeteorologyPrecise Point PositioningEnvironmental scienceGeologyComputer scienceGlobal Positioning SystemGeographyPhysicsMathematicsMagnetic fieldTelecommunicationsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The adverse effects of space weather can be one of the main threats to human technology, such as the effects of large coronal mass ejections. Consequently, great geomagnetic storms can compromise the performance of Precise Point Positioning (PPP). Recently, after over two decades, on 05/10/2024, the main phase of a great and exceptional geomagnetic storm began, providing an excellent and rare opportunity to study its effects on the PPP using the CSRS-PPP online service. This work aims to evaluate the impacts of the great storm on three-dimensional accuracies, percentage of ambiguity resolution, and cycle slip, encompassing five days of processing, covering two days before the storm, one day coinciding with the main phase of the storm, and two days after the storm, coinciding with the recovery phase. The processing was carried out at an interval of 1 hour, from 23-24 UTC, coinciding with the main phase (05/10/2024), as the adverse effects of the storm manifest themselves in this phase. Data from 20 GNSS stations from the Brazilian Network for Continuous Monitoring of GNSS Systems were used. During the main phase of the storm, the average three-dimensional accuracy increased around four times compared to the previous day. The percentage of ambiguity resolution was equal to 0.0% for all stations analyzed. Furthermore, cycle slips increased significantly during the main phase of the storm. In summary, the results highlight the adverse impacts of the great and exceptional storm on the PPP.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.393
Threshold uncertainty score0.735

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Brasileira de Geografia FísicaSame topicGNSS positioning and interferenceFrench-language works237,207