MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410605106 · doi:10.1515/jag-2025-0018

Assessment of temporal variations of geoid, ellipsoidal and orthometric heights at proposed IHRF sites using space geodetic data

2025· article· en· W4410605106 on OpenAlexaff
Walyeldeen Godah, Samuel Milki Yadeta, Małgorzata Szelachowska, G. Fotopoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Geodesy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNarodowe Centrum Nauki
KeywordsGeoidGeodesyGeodetic datumUndulation of the geoidGeologyEllipsoidGeophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The determination of accurate geoid, ellipsoidal and orthometric heights is essential for applications related to surveying engineering, geodetic and geoscience research. The International Association of Geodesy (IAG) defined the International Height Reference System (IHRS) as the conventional gravity field-related global height system. The realization of the IHRS to establish an International Height Reference Frame (IHRF) and its temporal variations, is an ongoing geodetic task. The objective of this research is to assess temporal variations of geoid, ellipsoidal and orthometric heights at proposed IHRF sites using space geodetic data, namely Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) and GRACE Follow-On (GRACE-FO), Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS), Very Long Baseline Interferometry (VLBI), Satellite Laser Ranging (SLR), Doppler Orbitography and Radio-positioning Integrated by Satellite (DORIS) and hydrological model. GRACE/GRACE-FO-based and GLDAS-based Global Geopotential Models were utilized to determine temporal variations of geoid height (Δ N ) and time-dependent changes of ellipsoidal height (Δ h ) at proposed IHRF sites. Moreover, Δ h at proposed IHRF sites were also obtained from GNSS, VLBI, SLR and DORIS solutions. Temporal variations of orthometric height (Δ H ) at proposed IHRF sites were determined by combining Δ N and Δ h . Results reveal that Δ N , Δ h , and Δ H at proposed IHRF sites are not negligible as they can reach several centimetres in terms of seasonal variations and at the and 1 cm level annually. These Δ N , Δ h , and Δ H would be required for the modernization and unification of international/national vertical datums in addition to contemporary requirements for precise height measurements.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.278
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied GeodesySame topicGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207