Geodetic versus geophysical perspectives of the ‘gravity anomaly’

By R. Hackney, Will E. Featherstone. 2003

152 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Aerospace Engineering, Geophysics, Oceanography

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/dba593e59a1f1ed6dc86acea03d83f9a762aaef9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Aerospace Engineering

1. Matthew Amos
2. Franz Barthelmes
3. Will E. Featherstone

In Geophysics

1. Matthew Amos
2. Franz Barthelmes
3. Will E. Featherstone

In Oceanography

1. Matthew Amos
2. Franz Barthelmes
3. Will E. Featherstone

Citations in the corpus

• Definition of Functionals of the Geopotential and Their Calculation from Spherical Harmonic Models (2009, background): “The term gravity anomaly is used with numerous different meanings in geodesy and geophysics and, moreover, there are different practical realisations (cf. Hackney & Featherstone, 2003).”
• New standards for reducing gravity data: The North American gravity database (2005, background): “…has received impetus from the availability of improved terrain and geoid databases, enhanced computational power, and increased use of global positioning system (GPS) technology to establish the location and heights of gravity stations (e.g., Fairhead et al., 2003; Hackney and Featherstone, 2003).”
• Unification of New Zealand’s local vertical datums: iterative gravimetric quasigeoid computations (2009, methodology): “This novel technique has not been attempted before in practice, although a preliminary mathematical framework is given by Rummel and Teunissen (1988) and Heck and Rummel (1990). New Zealand uses the normal-orthometric height system for levelled heights (DoSLI 1989).”