A statistical collocation accuracy assessment of contemporary satellite temporal gravimetry data products
Wei Chen,
Yuhao Xiong,
C.K. Shum,
Ehsan Forootan,
Min Zhong,
Jiangjun Ran,
Changqing Wang,
Wei Feng,
Wenhao Li,
Zihan Yang,
Yingchun Shen
Affiliations
Wei Chen
College of Resource Environment and Tourism, Hubei University of Arts and Science, Xiangyang, China
Yuhao Xiong
School of Geospatial Engineering and Science, Sun Yat-sen University, Zhuhai, China
C.K. Shum
Division of Geodetic Science, School of Earth Sciences, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA
Ehsan Forootan
Department of Sustainability and Planning, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
Min Zhong
School of Geospatial Engineering and Science, Sun Yat-sen University, Zhuhai, China
Jiangjun Ran
Department of Earth and Space Science, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen, China
Changqing Wang
State Key Laboratory of Geodesy and Earth’s Dynamics, Innovation Academy for Precision Measurement Science and Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan, China
Wei Feng
School of Geospatial Engineering and Science, Sun Yat-sen University, Zhuhai, China
Wenhao Li
School of Geomatics Science and Technology, Nanjing Tech University, Nanjing, China
Zihan Yang
College of Agriculture, Xiangyang Polytechnic, Xiangyang, China
Yingchun Shen
State Key Laboratory of Geodesy and Earth’s Dynamics, Innovation Academy for Precision Measurement Science and Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan, China
The Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) and GRACE Follow-On (GRACE-FO) missions have enabled consistent production of monthly gravity field solutions by international institutes, contributing to the International Centre for Global Earth Models. Each institute employs distinct processing strategies, yielding varied estimates of terrestrial water storage (TWS). In this study, we employ statistical collocation techniques (Total assessment ratio, TAR) to assess and compare the performance of GRACE TWS data products (2003.03 ~ 2014.03) and GRACE-FO TWS data (2018.06 ~ 2022.11). For GRACE TWS, the TAR values are as follows: COST-G (0.15), ITSG (0.83), APM-SYSU (0.85), CSR (0.91), JPL (0.93), GFZ (0.94), Tongji (0.96), HUST (1.08), SUST (1.18), CNES (1.37), and AIUB (1.41). Similarly, for GRACE-FO TWS, the TAR values are COST-G (0.15), JPL (0.81), ITSG (0.96), CSR (0.97), GFZ (1.06), and CNES (1.41). Furthermore, our comparison across basin sizes and climatic regions reveals that COST-G exhibits lower uncertainty and larger signal-to-noise ratios in TWS, making it particularly noteworthy for its utility. Conversely, other single solutions that depict long-term trends and annual amplitudes demonstrate comparable values across various basin sizes, climatic regions, and specific areas.
