Determining receiver biases in GPS-derived total electron content in the auroral oval and polar cap region using Ionosonde measurements

Global Positioning System (GPS) total electron content (TEC) measurements, although highly precise, are often rendered inaccurate due to satellite and receiver differential code biases (DCBs). Calculated satellite DCB values are now available from a variety of sources, but receiver DCBs generally remain an undertaking of receiver operators and processing centers. A procedure for removing these receiver DCBs from GPS-derived ionospheric TEC at high latitudes, using Canadian Advanced Digital Ionosonde (CADI) measurements, is presented. Here we will demonstrate the inadequacy of common numerical methods for estimating receiver DCBs in high-latitude regions and compare our CADI-calibrated vertical TEC (vTEC) measurements to corresponding IGS IONEX interpolated vTEC map data. We demonstrate that the bias values determined using the CADI method are largely independent of the topside model (exponential, Epstein, and α-Chapman) used. We further confirm our results via comparing CADI-estimated biases with those derived from incoherent scatter radar (ISR) measurements. These CADI-method results are found to be within 1.0 TEC units (TECU) of ISR measurements, where the numerical methods used are found to be in excess of 5.0 TECU in error when compared to ISR measurements.

[1]  Gabor E. Lanyi,et al.  A comparison of mapped and measured total ionospheric electron content using global positioning system and beacon satellite observations , 1988 .

[2]  Xueqin Huang,et al.  Simulation of polar cap field‐aligned electron density profiles measured with the IMAGE radio plasma imager , 2004 .

[3]  J. Titheridge,et al.  The real height analysis of ionograms: A generalized formulation , 1988 .

[4]  James R. Clynch,et al.  Variability of GPS satellite differential group delay biases , 1991 .

[5]  E. Sardón,et al.  Estimation of total electron content using GPS data: How stable are the differential satellite and receiver instrumental biases? , 1997 .

[6]  Takashi Maruyama,et al.  Determination of GPS receiver differential biases by neural network parameter estimation method , 2005 .

[7]  Xueqin Huang,et al.  Polar cap electron density distribution from IMAGE radio plasma imager measurements: Empirical model with the effects of solar illumination and geomagnetic activity , 2008 .

[8]  A Comparison between the TEC Computed using GPS and Ionosonde Measurements , 2013 .

[9]  J. Taylor.  An Introduction to Error Analysis , 1982 .

[10]  Richard B. Langley,et al.  Use of varying shell heights derived from ionosonde data in calculating vertical total electron content (TEC) using GPS – New method , 2009 .

[11]  Stuart Crozier,et al.  Software developed for obtaining GPS‐derived total electron content values , 2007 .

[12]  T. Fuller‐Rowell,et al.  A comprehensive evaluation of the errors inherent in the use of a two‐dimensional shell for modeling the ionosphere , 2008 .

[13]  D.A. Smith.  Computing unambiguous TEC and ionospheric delays using only carrier phase data from NOAA's CORS network , 2004, PLANS 2004. Position Location and Navigation Symposium (IEEE Cat. No.04CH37556).

[14]  Richard B. Langley,et al.  Canadian High Arctic Ionospheric Network (CHAIN) , 2009 .

[15]  Xiaoqing Pi,et al.  GPS normalization and preliminary modeling results of total electron content during a midlatitude space weather event , 2001 .

[16]  Orhan Arikan,et al.  Estimation of single station interfrequency receiver bias using GPS‐TEC , 2008 .

[17]  J. Titheridge.  Ionogram analysis: Least squares fitting of a Chapman‐layer peak , 1985 .

[18]  Guanyi Ma,et al.  Derivation of TEC and estimation of instrumental biases from GEONET in Japan , 2002 .

[19]  René Warnant,et al.  Reliability of the TEC Computed Using GPS Measurements — The Problem of Hardware Biases , 1997, Acta Geodaetica et Geophysica Hungarica.