the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
SDUST2023VGGA: A Global Ocean Vertical Gradient of Gravity Anomaly Model Determined from Multidirectional Data from Mean Sea Surface
Abstract. Satellite altimetry is a vital tool for global ocean observation, providing critical insights into ocean gravity and its gradient. Over the past six years, satellite data from various space agencies have nearly tripled, facilitating the development of high-precision ocean gravity anomaly and ocean vertical gradient of gravity anomaly (VGGA) models. This study constructs a global ocean VGGA model named SDUST2023VGGA using multi-directional mean sea surface data. To address computational resource limitations, the global ocean is divided into ten sub-regions. In each sub-region, the DTU21 Mean Sea Surface (MSS) model and the CNES-CLS22 Mean Dynamic Topography (MDT) model are used to derive the geoid. To mitigate the influence of long-wavelength signals on the calculations, the study subtracts the long-wavelength geoid derived from the XGM2019e gravity field model from the original geoid, resulting in a residual geoid (short-wavelength). To ensure the accuracy of the VGGA calculations, a weighted least-squares method is employed using residual geoid data from a 17′ × 17′ area surrounding the computation point. This approach effectively accounts for the actual ocean environment, thereby enhancing the precision of the calculation results. After combining the VGGA models for all sub-regions, the model's reliability is validated against the SIO V32.1 VGGA (named curv) model. The comparison between the VGGA and the SIO V32.1 model shows a mean of -0.08 Eötvös (E) and an RMS of 8.50 E, indicating a high degree of consistency across the global scale. Analysis of the differences reveals that the advanced data processing and modeling strategies employed in the DTU21 MSS model enable SDUST2023VGGA to maintain stable performance across varying ocean depths, unaffected by ocean dynamics. The effective use of multi-directional mean sea surface data allows for the detailed capture of ocean gravity field information embedded in the MSS model. Analysis across diverse ocean regions demonstrates that the SDUST2023VGGA model successfully reveals the internal structure and mass distribution of the seafloor. The SDUST2023VGGA dataset is freely available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14177000 (Zhou et al., 2024).
- Preprint
(15159 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 04 Jan 2025)
-
RC1: 'Comment on essd-2024-544', Anonymous Referee #1, 05 Dec 2024
reply
This manuscript presents a vertical gravity gradient anomaly (VGGA) model constructed based on the DTU21 mean sea surface model. The research is thorough and meets quality standards. This makes me willing to apply this model in my future work. However, several issues need to be addressed before publication, particularly in terms of organization and clarity. These improvements would enhance the paper's readability and impact.
-
RC2: 'Comment on essd-2024-544', Anonymous Referee #2, 19 Dec 2024
reply
General Comments:
The study presents the SDUST2023VGGA model, which computes vertical gravity anomaly gradients from multiple directions using a gridded MSS model. The data processing techniques and experimental design employed are methodologically sound, and the validity of the proposed method is confirmed through a comparison with the V32.1 CURV model. Additionally, the analysis of the results is thorough and comprehensive. However, before publication, several issues need to be addressed. Firstly, certain aspects of the methodology, such as data preprocessing steps and parameter selection criteria, are not clearly explained and require further clarification to provide better context and understanding of the research approach. Secondly, the conclusion section is relatively brief. A more detailed summary would underscore the broader implications and support the wider application of the proposed model. Addressing these points will enhance the manuscript's readability and strengthen the overall impact of the research.
Major Comments:
- P1L8: The order of the gravity field model should be clearly specified. Additionally, the term "original geoid" is used incorrectly and should be corrected for accuracy.
- P1L18: The term "SDUST2023VGGA model" should be used consistently throughout the text instead of alternating with "dataset" to avoid confusion.
- P1L20: FYI, the SWOT-derived VGG has been released by SIO using wide-swath data, the first evaluation suggested that this dataset was much better than that derived solely from nadir altimetry (1 year SWOT was better than 30 years of nadir altimetry). The authors may include the SWOT information in deriving the global VGG.
- P3L55-L64: The language in this section should be restructured to enhance clarity and readability.
- P3L65: It appears that only the vertical gravity gradient anomaly has been modeled. Consequently, the study's objectives should be revised to accurately reflect this specific focus.
- P3L64: Why not use observed SSHs from multi-satellite missions, why used an existing MSS model for deriving the VGG? The authors may include the possible reasons.
- P3L86: There are multiple instances of inconsistent abbreviation usage throughout the manuscript. Please ensure that all abbreviations are defined upon their first occurrence and maintained consistently throughout the text.
- P4: While the CNES-CLS22 MDT is mentioned as having increased resolution, the original resolution of the model is not specified and should be included. Additionally, the order of the XGM2019e model is not mentioned and should be provided for completeness.
- P5L129: The term "reference data" is inappropriate in this context and should be revised to a more suitable term.
- P5L139-155: Several uncommon terms are used in this section. Consider replacing "several" with "multiple" and "set to" with "defined as" to adopt a more formal tone. Additionally, substituting "Clip" with "Crop" would improve clarity and understanding.
- P6L155: The use of "initially" creates confusion and hinders readability. This phrasing should be revised for greater clarity.
- P7L164: The variable "h" in Equation 1 is not defined. Please provide a clear definition or description of this variable.
- P7L170: Since ∇²U = 0, the vertical component can be expressed using the two horizontal components. Therefore, the original phrasing is unsatisfactory and needs to be improved to accurately convey this relationship.
- P7L175: The rationale behind increasing the resolution should be explained to justify this methodological choice.
- P7L181: Replace "original" with "full wavelength" to enhance the reader's understanding of the "remove-restore" process.
- P8L193: Please verify the accuracy of this citation, as the manuscript does not appear to include any analysis regarding the calculation of window size and its impact on the computation.
- P9L203: We recommend referring to it as "component" rather than "direction" to maintain consistency and precision in terminology.
- P9L205: Based on your description, the process at this point should involve calculating the residual geoid rather than the geoid. Please verify and correct this accordingly.
- P9L207: The variable "l" still needs to be defined. Additionally, the restore process should be clarified. The explanation of the remove-restore process in other sections is more detailed than in the methods section, which is inconsistent and needs to be addressed.
- P9L218: The original text refers to the second-order partial derivative of the MSS data. It should clarify whether this pertains to the second-order partial derivative of the geoid or the residual geoid.
- P10 Fig 4: Does "mean" in the flowchart refer to the operation on the overlap section? Additionally, please provide a clear definition of "overlap" within the manuscript to ensure clarity.
- P14: The author applied two rounds of filtering to the residuals for data analysis. It should be clarified whether the filtered data were used in subsequent comparisons and processing to understand the impact of this filtering on the results.
- P15, “Discussion”. The SIO has released SWOT refined VGG data, the authors can compare your own data with the SIO’s product. I suggest the authors to add these results regarding the comparisons with SWOT-derived VGG.
- P15L324-356: The discussion is overly verbose, which impacts readability. The text should be reorganized for clarity and conciseness, focusing on the most relevant points and eliminating redundant information.
- P19L375-379: The results appear to be correct; however, there is a concern that when the slope is below 1%, the STD and RMS values appear to be somewhat larger. Please provide possible explanations for this observation.
- P20: For Region C in Fig. 9, was land data included in the calculation? The color bar suggests that this region has complex terrain and areas extending above sea level, which could affect the calculation results. If land data was used, the analysis in this section should be revisited to account for these factors.
- P22L444-L449: The relationship between VGGA and seabed topography is not linear. Consider removing the Linear Regression analysis unless it is included for comparison with other methods. Please evaluate the primary purpose of this analysis when making your decision.
- P25: The conclusion section lacks depth, and some analyses, such as those of SVR and MLP, are not well summarized. Expanding this section to include a comprehensive summary of all key findings would strengthen the manuscript.
- P27: The format of the References needs to be standardized. Please ensure that all references adhere to the journal's formatting guidelines for consistency and professionalism.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-544-RC2
Data sets
SDUST2023VGGA Zhou Ruichen, Guo Jinyun, Ya Shaoshuai, Sun Heping, and Liu, Xin https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14177000
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
126 | 33 | 7 | 166 | 7 | 6 |
- HTML: 126
- PDF: 33
- XML: 7
- Total: 166
- BibTeX: 7
- EndNote: 6
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1