the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
GCL-Mascon2024: a novel satellite gravimetry mascon solution using the short-arc approach
Abstract. This paper reports an innovative mass concentration (mascon) solution obtained with the short-arc approach, named “GCL-Mascon2024”, for estimating spatially enhanced mass variations on the Earth's surface by analyzing K-/Ka Band Ranging satellite-to-satellite tracking data collected by the Gravity Recovery And Climate Experiment (GRACE) mission. Compared to contemporary GRACE mascon solutions, this contribution has three notable and distinct features: First, this solution recovery process incorporates frequency-dependent data weighting techniques to reduce the influence of low-frequency noise in observations. Second, this solution uses variable-shaped mascon geometry with physical constraints such as coastline and basin boundary geometries to more accurately capture temporal gravity signals while minimizing signal leakage. Finally, we employ a solution regularization scheme that integrates climate factors and cryospheric elevation models to alleviate the ill-posed nature of the GRACE mascon inversion problem. Our research has led to the following conclusions: (a) the temporal signals from GCL-Mascon2024 exhibit 6.5 %−20.4 % lower residuals over the continental regions, as compared with the (Release) RL06 versions of other contemporary mascon solutions from GSFC, CSR, and JPL; (b) in Greenland and global hydrologic basins, the correlation coefficients of estimated mass changes between GCL-Mascon2024 and other RL06 mascon solutions exceed 95.0 %, with comparable amplitudes; especially over non-humid river basins, the GCL-Mascon2024 suppresses random noise by 36.7 % compared to contemporary mascon products; and (c) in desert regions, the analysis of residuals calculated after removing the climatological components from the mass variations indicates that the GCL-Mascon2024 solution achieves noise reductions of over 28.1 % as compared to the GSFC and CSR RL06 mascon solutions. The GCL-Mascon2024 gravity field solution (Yan and Ran, 2024) is available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14008167.
- Preprint
(9029 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 17 Apr 2025)
-
RC1: 'Comment on essd-2024-512', Anonymous Referee #1, 04 Mar 2025
reply
Summary
This paper presents a novel satellite gravimetry mascon solution named GCL-Mascon2024 for recovering the mass changes on the Earth's surface, which is the first to implement the short-arc approach for Mascon solution estimation. I commend the authors for their novel approach and encourage them to continue refining and expanding upon this exciting methodology. The research findings are highly innovative and scientifically valuable and are of great significance for the research of the Earth's gravity field and the development of related fields. The paper has a complete structure, clear logic, reasonable experimental design, and detailed data, providing new ideas and methods for follow-up research. However, there is still room for improvement. I would like to recommend minor revisions of the manuscript before publication in Earth System Science Data, according to the comments as follows.
Comments
- I would like to know whether the gradient correction, a well-established component of the classical short-arc approach, was incorporated into the Mascon solution process. If gradient correction was applied, I recommend the authors provide a detailed description of the strategy used. If gradient correction was not applied, the authors should justify this decision. This additional information would enhance the methodological transparency and allow readers to better evaluate the robustness of the proposed approach.
- The noise of GCL-Mascon2024 in the Caspian Sea and northern Australia is very low. This is an intriguing result that warrants further investigation. It is advisable to conduct an in-depth analysis centering around the Caspian Sea, highlighting the performance of your solution and improving the analysis.
- It is recommended to add comparisons of the residuals in the open ocean.
- Please clarify the time interval used for constructing the observation equation, particularly in light of the differing sampling rates between the kinematic orbit (10 seconds) and other L1B data (5 seconds). Specifically, address how these discrepancies in sampling rates are reconciled.
- Kindly provide a detailed explanation of the error assessment strategy employed for the kinematic orbits. This should include the following: -The criteria used to identify and classify errors, -Whether interpolated epochs are incorporated into constructing the observation equation, etc.
Minor comments
- Page 3, Lines 93-95: Section 5 is information on the dataset, and section 6 is the conclusion. These two parts are reversed in the text. Please adjust the order to ensure consistency.
- Page5, Line 157, Table 1: Please explain the similarities and differences between the background force model in the Mascon solution and the spherical harmonic solution.
- Page12, Line 320: annual amplitude -> annual amplitudes
- Page 16, Table 5: The table currently presents with four decimal places. However, such precision does not appear necessary for this study's context. To improve clarity and readability, it is recommended to round the values to 1 decimal place or, at most, 2 decimal places.
- Page 19, Table6: Similar to the above comment. Please revise the table 6 accordingly.
- Page 18, section 4.2.3: Please explain why the climate component needs to be removed from the desert for the Mascon solutions validation and assessment and add the necessary references.
- Page 20, section 6: I recommend including the access dates for all datasets, which ensures readers and future researchers can trace the exact versions of the data used in the study.
- P25, Lines 794-796: The manuscript generally maintains a high referencing standard; however, I noticed inconsistencies in the formatting of author names in the reference list. e.g., in Line 794, the author is cited as "Wiese, D.," while in Line 796, the same author is cited as "Wiese, D. N.". I recommend carefully reviewing the entire reference list and standardizing the formatting of author names.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-512-RC1 -
CC1: 'Comment on essd-2024-512', Yaozong Li, 10 Mar 2025
reply
This paper presents some novel work for a new mascon result, particularly in the design of regularization matrix.
I woud like to know the underlying considerations behind different resolutions for ocean and land regions ( 400×400 km vs. 300×300 km).
The design of the MVRCN matrix lacks specific explanation for oceanic regions, and similarly, analysis of the results.
Figure 8, Panel (b): y-axis label may be corrected from “mE/Hz1/2” to "m/Hz1/2"; Panel (d): to "m/s/Hz1/2".
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-512-CC1
Data sets
GCL-Mascon2024: a novel satellite gravimetry Mascon solution using the short-arc approach Zhengwen Yan and Jiangjun Ran https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14008167
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
289 | 42 | 10 | 341 | 8 | 7 |
- HTML: 289
- PDF: 42
- XML: 10
- Total: 341
- BibTeX: 8
- EndNote: 7
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1