Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T16:31:38.065Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Accuracy of the ICRF: an Intercomparison of VLBI Analysis Software

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 August 2015

C.S. Jacobs
Affiliation:
Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) 4800 Oak Grove Dr., Pasadena, CA 91109-8099
O.J. Sovers
Affiliation:
Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) 4800 Oak Grove Dr., Pasadena, CA 91109-8099
D. Gordon
Affiliation:
Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) Code 926, Greenbelt, MD, 20771
C. Ma
Affiliation:
Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) Code 926, Greenbelt, MD, 20771
A.-M. Gontier
Affiliation:
Observatoire de Paris 61 Avenue de l’Observatoire, F-75014 Paris France

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

As discussed in other papers in this volume, the IAU XXIII General Assembly adopted a new fundamental celestial reference frame: the International Celestial Reference Frame (ICRF) based on VLBI observations of extragalactic radio sources (Ma et al., 1997). It is approximately 300 times more accurate than its predecessor, the FK5. At present, no other technique has produced a more accurate celestial frame than VLBI, Since no other astrometric technique provides an external standard of accuracy, the VLBI claim of a great leap forward in accuracy must be verified by internal consistency tests. This paper addresses one aspect of internal consistency: the ability of independent VLBI software packages to reproduce a celestial frame without significant loss of accuracy. This is no small task since the software packages are large - involving on the order of 100 000 lines of code. What does VLBI software do? Aside from routines designed to collect the data and extract raw observables which will not be considered here, its principal task is to model the differential group delay and phase delay rate of radio signals received at two widely separated antennas (Sovers, Fanselow & Jacobs, 1998). The software then refines this model via a least squares adjustment of relevant physical parameters which describe station locations, source positions, clock offsets, atmospheric refraction, tidal effects, etc. In the early 1990s, studies revealed that differences in software implementation and analyst’s choices of model options were one of the largest contributors to differences in independent calculations of VLBI celestial frames. These differences were of comparable size to the formal uncertainties of the celestial frame’s source positions.

Type
II. Joint Discussions
Copyright
Copyright © Kluwer 1998

References

Gontier, A.-M., (1992) “Orientation de la Terre par Mesure VLBI”, Ph. D. dissertation, Observatoire de Paris, Paris, France.Google Scholar
Ma, C., (1978) “VLBI Applied to Polar Motion, Relativity and Geodesy” Ph. D. dissertation, University of Maryland; also NASA TM 79582, GSFC, Greenbelt MD.Google Scholar
Ma, C., Arias, E.F., Eubanks, T.M., Fey, A.L., Gontier, A.-M., Jacobs, C.S., Sovers, O.J., Archinal, B.A., and Charlot, P. (1997) in IERS Technical Note 23, Ma, C. and Fcissel, M., eds., Observatory of Paris, Paris, France.Google Scholar
See also: Ma, C., et. al. (1998) “The ICRF Based on VLBI Observations of Extragalactic Radio Sources”, in prep. A&A.Google Scholar
Sovers, O.J., Fanselow, J.L., and Jacobs, C.S., (1998) “Astrometry and Geodesy with Radio Interferometry: Experiments, Models, Results”, Rev. Mod. Phys., 70.Google Scholar