Paper detail

Determining geopotential difference via relativistic precise point positioning time comparison: A case study using simulated observations

According to general relativity theory (GRT), the geopotential difference (GD) can be determined by comparing the change in time difference between precise clocks using the precise point positioning (PPP) time transfer technique, referred to as the relativistic PPP time comparison approach. We focused on high-precision time comparison between two precise clocks for determining the GD using the relativistic PPP time transfer,and conducted simulation experiments to validate the approach. In the experiments, we consider three cases to evaluate the performance of the approach using clocks with different stabilities, namely, the frequency stabilities of the clocks equipped at three selected ground stations are respectively (Case 1), (Case 2), and (Case 3) at time period. Conclusions are drawn from the experimental results. First, high-precision clocks can significantly improve the accuracy for PPP time transfer, but the improvement is limited by measurement noises. Compared to Case 1, the long-term stabilities of OPMT-BRUX as well as PTBB-BRUX are improved in Cases 2 and 3. The frequency stabilities of Cases 1-3 are approximately 4.28*10-16, 4.00*10-17, and 3.22*10-17 at 10-day averaging time for OPMT-BRUX, respectively, and for PTBB-BRUX, these values are approximately 3.73*10-16, 8.17*10-17, and 4.64*10-17. Second, the geopotential difference between any two stations can be determined at the decimeter level, with its accuracy being consistent with the stabilities of the time links in Cases 1-3. In Case 3, the determined geopotential differences between OPMT and BRUX deviate from the EIGEN-6C4 model values by -0.64 m2/s2 with an uncertainty of 1.11 m2/s2, whereas the deviation error between PTBB and BRUX is 0.76 m2/s2 with an uncertainty of 1.79 m2/s2. The approach proposed in this study can be also applied to testing GRT.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.