Home Moho depth estimation of northern of East African Rift System
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Moho depth estimation of northern of East African Rift System

  • Eyasu Alemu EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: August 22, 2023
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill
Submit Manuscript Author Information
Journal of Applied Geodesy
From the journal Journal of Applied Geodesy Volume 18 Issue 1

Abstract

The northern part of the East African Rift System is characterized by depleted Moho depth and thermally thinned lithosphere. This research aims to determine the Moho depth of the study area through non-linear gravity inversion and cross-validation with seismic Moho estimates. The study utilized gravity data to obtain the gravity anomaly of the Moho interface, a topographic grid for removing topographic effects, a crustal model to determine total sediment thickness and its gravitational effect, and seismic Moho depth for constraining the forward model and cross-validation. The estimated Moho depth of the study area ranges between 5 km (in the Indian Ocean) to 45 km (in the Ethiopian Highlands), with slight variation compared to seismic Moho relief. This is because the reference level, calculated for the thinner part of the study region, underestimates the entire area. Upwelling magma in the Eastern branches of the EARS may also incur slight variation in the estimated Moho depth; rifting, volcanism, melt intrusion, magmatic uplift, and tectonic setting all influence the Moho depth of the study area. Furthermore, reverberations affect most seismic Moho estimations in the region. The slight variation can be mitigated by improving the gravity network for accurate validation and precise heat flow measurement to correctly identify magmatic anomalies and density contrasts. Additionally, applying reverberation removal techniques in the study region could improve seismic Moho estimation.

Keywords: cross-validation; forward modelling; gravity disturbance; Moho depth; non-linear inversion; satellite gravity
Corresponding author: Eyasu Alemu, Geodesy and Geodynamics Research and Development Department, Space Science and Geospatial Institute (SSGI) 33679 Minilik Avenue II, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, E-mail:

  1. Research ethics: The composition of this study complies with all ethical standards.

  2. Author contributions: The author confirms sole responsibility for the following: study conception and design, installation of GMT, PyGMT, anaconda, and Moho depth inversion software and slight modification on the python code of the inversion software, data collection and analysis, development of GMT and PyGMT code for mapping the result obtained from the inversion software and generate digital elevation model of the study area, interpretation and discussion of the results, and manuscript writing, review, and editing. Finally, the author decided to submit the work for publication.

  3. Conflict of interest statement: The author state that he has no known competing financial interests or personal ties that could have influenced the research presented in this study.

  4. Research funding: This study received no specific financial support.

  5. Transparency: The author attests that the manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study that was reported; that no significant aspects of the investigation have been omitted; and that any deviations from the study's original design have been justified.

  6. Data availability: Datasets are available in an institutional repository that can be downloaded easily from the portal. ·GOCO06s - https://icgem.gfz-potsdam.de/;·CRUST1.0 - https://igppweb.ucsd.edu/~gabi/crust1.html; and·ETOPO1 - https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/global/. Seismic Moho datasets published in the literature (Dugda M., Nyblade A. (2014); Dugda et al. (2005); Globig et al. (2016); and Hammond et al. (2011) etc). The datasets generated during the analysis will be made available upon reasonable request by the corresponding author.

References

1. Steinhart, JS. Mohorovicic discontinuity. In: Runcorn, SK, editor. International dictionary of geophysics, vol 2. Oxford: Pergamon Press; 1967:991–4 pp.Search in Google Scholar

2. Reguzzoni, M, Sampietro, D, Sanso, F. Global Moho from the combination of the CRUST2.0 model and GOCE data. Geophys J Int 2013;195:222–37. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggt247.Search in Google Scholar

3. van der Meijde, M, Fadel, I, Ditmar, P, Hamayun, M. Uncertainties in crustal thickness models for data sparse environments: a review for South America and Africa. J Geodyn 2015;84:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jog.2014.09.013.Search in Google Scholar

4. Bouman, J, Ebbing, J, Fuchs, M. Reference frame transformation of satellite gravity gradients and topographic mass reduction. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 2013;118:759–74.10.1029/2012JB009747Search in Google Scholar

5. Kvas, A, Mayer-Gürr, T, Krauss, S, Brockmann, J, Schubert, T, Schuh, W, et al.. The satellite-only gravity field model GOCO06s. GFZ Data Services; 2019.10.5194/essd-2020-192Search in Google Scholar

6. Braitenberg, C, Ebbing, J. New insights into the basement structure of the West Siberian Basin from forward and inverse modelling of GRACE satellite gravity data. J Geophys Res Atmos 2009;114:B06402. https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JB005799.Search in Google Scholar

7. Shin, H, Mazarico, E, Lemoine, F. Improved nearside gravity field of the Moon by localizing the power law constraint. Geophys Res Lett 2009;36:L11203. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL038556.Search in Google Scholar

8. Barzaghi, R, Biagi, L. The collocation approach to Moho estimate. Ann Geophys 2014;57:190. https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-6367.Search in Google Scholar

9. Uieda, L, Barbosa, V. A gravity-derived Moho model for South America: source code, data, and model results from ‘fast non-linear gravity inversion in spherical coordinates with application to the South American Moho’. Geophys J Int 2016;208:162–76. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggw390.Search in Google Scholar

10. Sünkel, H. An isostatic Earth model. In: Report, vol 367. Columbus: Department of Geodetic Science and Surveying, Ohio State University; 1985.Search in Google Scholar

11. Moritz, H. Great mathematicians and the geosciences: from Leibniz and Newton to Einstein and Hilbert. In: Session Reports Leibniz Society of Sciences, vol 104; 2009:115–30 pp.Search in Google Scholar

12. Sjöberg, L. Solving Vening Meinesz–Moritz inverse problem in isostasy. Geophys J Int 2009;179:1527–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2009.04397.x.Search in Google Scholar

13. Silva, J, Costa, D, Barbosa, V. Gravity inversion of basement relief and estimation of density contrast variation with depth. Geophysics 2006;71:J51–8. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2236383.Search in Google Scholar

14. Silva, J, Santos, D, Gomes, K. Fast gravity inversion of basement relief. Geophysics 2014;79:G79–1. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2014-0024.1.Search in Google Scholar

15. Martins, C, Barbosa, V, Silva, J. Simultaneous 3D depth-to basement and density contrast estimates using gravity data and depth control at few points. Geophysics 2010;75:I21–8. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3380225.Search in Google Scholar

16. Martins, C, Lima, W, Barbosa, V, Silva, J. Total variation regularization for depth-to-basement estimate: Part 1-mathematical details and applications. Geophysics 2011;76:I1–12. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3524286.Search in Google Scholar

17. Barnes, G, Barraud, J. Imaging geologic surfaces by inverting gravity gradient data with depth horizons. Geophysics 2012;77:G1–11. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2011-0149.1.Search in Google Scholar

18. Santos, D, Silva, J, Martins, C, dos Santos, R, Ramos, L, de Araujo, A. Efficient gravity inversion of discontinuous basement relief. Geophysics 2015;80:1JA–Z63. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2014-0513.1.Search in Google Scholar

19. Wieczorek, M, Phillips, R. Potential anomalies on a sphere: applications to the thickness of the lunar crust. J Geophys Res 1998;103:1715–24. https://doi.org/10.1029/97JE03136.Search in Google Scholar

20. Barbosa, V, Silva, J, Medeiros, W. Gravity inversion of basement relief using approximate equality constraints on depths. Geophysics 1997;62:1745–57. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1444275.Search in Google Scholar

21. Barbosa, V, Silva, J, Medeiros, W. Stable inversion of gravity anomalies of sedimentary basins with non-smooth basement reliefs and arbitrary density contrast variations. Geophysics 1999;64:754–64. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1444585.Search in Google Scholar

22. Barbosa, V, Silva, J, Medeiros, W. Gravity inversion of a discontinuous relief stabilized by weighted smoothness constraints on depth. Geophysics 1999;64:1429–37. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1444647.Search in Google Scholar

23. Sun, J, Li, Y. Adaptive Lp inversion for simultaneous recovery of both blocky and smooth features in a geophysical model. Geophys J Int 2014;197:882–99. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggu067.Search in Google Scholar

24. Heck, B, Seitz, K. A comparison of the tesseroid, prism and point mass approaches for mass reductions in gravity field modelling. J Geodyn 2007;81:121–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-006-0094-0.Search in Google Scholar

25. Grombein, T, Seitz, K, Heck, B. Optimized formulas for the gravitational field of a tesseroid. J Geodyn 2013;87:645–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-013-0636-1.Search in Google Scholar

26. Asgharzadeh, M, von Frese, R, Kim, H, Leftwich, T, Kim, J. Spherical prism gravity effects by Gauss–Legendre quadrature integration. Geophys J Int 2007;169:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2007.03214.x.Search in Google Scholar

27. Wild-Pfeiffer, F. A comparison of different mass elements for use in gravity gradiometery. J Geodyn 2008;82:637–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-008-0219-8.Search in Google Scholar

28. Li, Z, Hao, T, Xu, Y, Xu, Y. An efficient and adaptive approach for modelling gravity effects in spherical coordinates. J Appl Geophys 2011;73:221–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2011.01.004.Search in Google Scholar

29. Kim, J. Estimating classification error rate: repeated cross validation, repeated hold-out and bootstrap. Comput Stat Data Anal 2009;53:3735–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csda.2009.04.009.Search in Google Scholar

30. Chorowicz, J. The East African Rift System. J Afr Earth Sci 2005;43:379–410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2005.07.019.Search in Google Scholar

31. Abebe, B, Acocella, V, Korme, T, Ayalew, D. Quaternary faulting and volcanism in the main Ethiopian rift. J Afr Earth Sci 2007;48:115–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2006.10.005.Search in Google Scholar

32. Beyene, A, Abdelsalam, MG. Tectonics of the Afar depression: a review and synthesis. J Afr Earth Sci 2005;41:41–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2005.03.003.Search in Google Scholar

33. Eagles, G, Gloaguen, R, Ebinger, C. Kinematics of the Danakil microplate. Earth Planet Sci Lett 2002;203:607–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0012-821x(02)00916-0.Search in Google Scholar

34. Sebera, E, Calais, E, Stamps, DS, Delvaux, D, Hartnady, CJH. Present‐day kinematics of the East African rift. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 2014;119:3584–600. https://doi.org/10.1002/2013jb010901.Search in Google Scholar

35. Kroner, A, Stern, RJ. Pan-African orogeny. Encycl Geol 2004;1:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-12-369396-9/00431-7.Search in Google Scholar

36. Persits, F, Ahlbrandt, T, Tuttle, M, Charpentier, R, Brownfield, M, Takahashi, K. Map showing geology, oil and gas fields and geologic provinces of Africa. In: Open-file report 97–470 A. Sioux Falls, SD, USA: U.S. Geological Survey; 2002.Search in Google Scholar

37. Geological Survey of Ethiopia. Geological map of Ethiopia; scale 1:2,000,000—ministry of mines. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: Geological Survey of Ethiopia; 1996.Search in Google Scholar

38. Geological Survey of Tanzania. Geological and mineral information system. 2019; 2021. https://www.gmis-tanzania.com/ [Accessed 9 Feb 2021].Search in Google Scholar

39. Schlüter, T. Geological atlas of Africa. Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany: Springer; 2006:307 p.Search in Google Scholar

40. Ince, E, Barthelmes, F, Reißland, S, Elger, K, Förste, C, Flechtner, F, et al.. ICGEM – 15 years of successful collection and distribution of global gravitational models, associated services and future plans. Earth Syst Sci Data 2019;11:647–74. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-11-647-2019.Search in Google Scholar

41. Amante, C, Eakins, B. ETOPO1 1 arc-minute global relief model: procedures, data sources and analysis, vol 24. NOAA Technical Memorandum NESDIS NGDC; 2009:19 p.Search in Google Scholar

42. Getachew, T, van der Meijde, M, Nyblade, A, van der Meer, F. A crustal thickness map of Africa derived from a global gravity field model using Euler deconvolution. Geophys J Int 2011;187:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2011.05140.x.Search in Google Scholar

43. Sattam, A. Receiver function studies of crustal structure, composition, and evolution beneath the Afar Depression, Ethiopia [Doctoral dissertations], vol 2248; 2011. Available from https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/doctoral_dissertations/2248.Search in Google Scholar

44. Hammond, J, Kendall, J, Stuart, G, Keir, D, Ebinger, C, Ayele, A, et al.. The nature of the crust beneath the Afar triple junction: evidence from receiver functions. Geochem Geophys Geosyst 2011;12:Q12004. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GC003738.Search in Google Scholar

45. Ahmed, A, Tiberi, C, Leroy, S, Stuart, G, Keir, D, J, Khanbari, K, et al.. Crustal structure of the rifted volcanic margins and uplifted plateau of Western Yemen from receiver function analysis. Geophys J Int 2013;193:1673–90. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggt072.hal-00825194.Search in Google Scholar

46. Globig, J, Fernàndez, M, Torne, M, Vergés, J, Robert, A, Faccenna, C. New insights into the crust and lithospheric mantle structure of Africa from elevation, geoid, and thermal analysis. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 2016;121:389–5424. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JB012972.Search in Google Scholar

47. Laske, G, Masters, G, Ma, Z, Pasyanos, M. Update on CRUST1.0 – 1-degree global model of Earth’s crust. Geophys Res Abstr 2013;5:1.Search in Google Scholar

48. Uieda, L, Barbosa, V. Fast non-linear gravity inversion in spherical coordinates with application to the South American Moho. Geophys J Int 2017;208:162–76. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggw390.Search in Google Scholar

49. Wessel, P, Luis, J, Uieda, L, Scharroo, R, Wobbe, F, Smith, W, et al.. The generic mapping tools version 6. Geochem Geophys Geosyst 2019;20:5556–64. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GC008515.Search in Google Scholar

50. Li, X, Götze, H. Ellipsoid, geoid, gravity, geodesy, and geophysics. Geophysics 2001;66:1660–8. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1487109.Search in Google Scholar

51. Hansen, P. Analysis of discrete ill-posed problems by means of the L-curve. SIAM Rev 1992;34:561–80.10.1137/1034115Search in Google Scholar

52. Wang, T, Gao, S, Yang, Q, Liu, K. Crustal structure beneath the Ethiopian Plateau and adjacent areas from receiver functions: implications for partial melting and magmatic under-plating. Tectonophysics 2021;809:228857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2021.228857.Search in Google Scholar

53. Kibret, B, Ayele, A, Keir, D. Crustal thickness estimates beneath four seismic stations in Ethiopia inferred from p-wave receiver function studies. J Afr Earth Sci 2018;150:264–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2018.11.005.Search in Google Scholar

54. Luelseged, E, Daniel, A, Mohamed, A, Estella, A, Stephen, S. Evolution of the broadly rifted zone in southern Ethiopia through gravitational collapse and extension of dynamic topography. Tectonophysics 2016;699:213–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2016.12.009.Search in Google Scholar

55. Dugda, M, Nyblade, A. New constraints on crustal structure in eastern Afar from the analysis of receiver functions and surface wave dispersion in Djibouti. In: Yirgu, G, Ebinger, C, Maguire, P, editors. The Afar Volcanic Province within the East African Rift System, vol 259. London: Geological Society; 2014:239–51 pp. Special Publications.10.1144/GSL.SP.2006.259.01.19Search in Google Scholar

56. Maguire, P, Keller, G, Klemperer, S, Mackenzie, G, Keranen, K, Harder, S, et al.. Crustal structure of the northern Main Ethiopian Rift from the EAGLE controlled source survey; a snapshot of incipient lithospheric break-up. Geol Soc London 2006;259:269–91. https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.2006.259.01.21.Search in Google Scholar

57. Stuart, G, Bastow, I, Ebinger, C. Crustal structure of the northern Main Ethiopian Rift from receiver function studies. In: Yirgu, G, Ebinger, C, Maguire, P, editors. The Afar volcanic province within the East African Rift System, vol 259. London: Geological Society; 2006:253–67 pp. Special Publications.10.1144/GSL.SP.2006.259.01.20Search in Google Scholar

58. Dugda, M, Nyblade, A, Julia, J, Langston, C, Ammon, C, Simiyu, S. Crustal structure in Ethiopia and Kenya from receiver function analysis: implications for rift development in eastern Africa. J Geophys Res 2005;110:B01303. https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JB003065.Search in Google Scholar

59. Girma, W. The lithosphere of the East African Rift and plateau (Afar-Ethiopia-Turkana): insights from integrated 3-D density modelling [Doctoral dissertation]. Germany: Mathematical and Natural Science Faculty of the Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel; 2005:48 p.Search in Google Scholar

60. Tiberi, C, Ebinger, C, Ballu, V, Stuart, G, Oluma, B. Inverse models of gravity data from the Red Sea–Aden–East African rifts triple junction zone. Geophys J Int 2005;163:775–87. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2005.02736.x.Search in Google Scholar

61. Mahatsente, R, Jentzsch, G, Jahr, T. Crustal structure of the Main Ethiopian Rift from gravity data: 3-dimensional modelling. Tectonophysics 1999;313:363–82.10.1016/S0040-1951(99)00213-9Search in Google Scholar

62. Sobh, M, Ebbing, J, Mansi, A, Götze, H. Inverse and 3D forward gravity modelling for the estimation of the crustal thickness of Egypt. Tectonophysics 2019;752:52–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2018.12.002.Search in Google Scholar

63. John, BS. Synopsis of geology of Ethiopia. Search and Discovery Article #70215; 2016.Search in Google Scholar

64. Sternai, P. Surface processes forcing on extensional rock melting. Sci Rep 2020;10:7711. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-63920-w.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

65. Alemu, E. Evaluation of GGMs based on the terrestrial gravity disturbance and Moho depth in Afar, Ethiopia. Artif Satell 2021;56:78–100. https://doi.org/10.2478/arsa-2021-0007.Search in Google Scholar

66. Barthelmes, F. Global Models. In: Grafarend, E, editor. Encyclopedia of geodesy, encyclopedia of earth sciences series. New York: Springer International Publishing; 2014:1–9 pp.Search in Google Scholar

67. Alemu, E. Global geopotential models evaluation based on terrestrial gravity data. J Appl Geod 2023;17:217–36. https://doi.org/10.1515/jag-2022-0051.Search in Google Scholar

68. Lee, J, Kwon, JH. Precision evaluation of recent global geopotential models based on Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)/leveling data on unified control points. J Kor Soc Surv Geod Photog Carto 2020;38:153–63.Search in Google Scholar

69. Borghi, A, Barzaghi, R, Al-Bayari, O, Al-Madani, S. Centimeter precision geoid model for Jeddah region (Saudi Arabia). J Remote Sens 2020;12:2066. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12122066.Search in Google Scholar

70. Lemma, Y, Hailu, A, Desissa, M, Kalberkamp, U. Integrated geophysical surveys to characterize Tendaho geothermal field in north eastern Ethiopia. Bali, Indonesia: World Geothermal Congress, Indonesian Geothermal Association; 2010.10.1190/1.3659042Search in Google Scholar

71. Yu, Y, Song, J, Liu, H, Gao, S. Determining crustal structure beneath seismic stations overlying a low-velocity sedimentary layer using receiver functions. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 2015;120:3208–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JB011610.Search in Google Scholar

72. Ogden, S, Bastow, D, Gilligan, A, Rondenay, S. A reappraisal of the H-κ stacking technique: implications for global crustal 1 structure. Geophys J Int 2019;219:1491–513. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggz364.Search in Google Scholar

73. Chambers, E, Harmon, N, Rychert, C, Gallacher, R, Keir, D. Imaging the seismic velocity structure of the crust and upper mantle in the northern East African Rift using Rayleigh wave tomography. Geophys J Int 2022;156:22–45. https://doi.org/10.31223/X5XK6X.Search in Google Scholar

74. Tenzer, R, Hamayun, H, Novák, P, Gladkikh, V, Vajda, P. Global crust-mantle density contrast estimated from EGM2008, DTM2008, CRUST2.0, and ICE-5G. Pure Appl Geophys 2011;169:1663–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-011-0410-3.Search in Google Scholar

75. Uwe, R. The East African Rift System. Austrian J Earth Sci 2014;107:132–46.Search in Google Scholar

76. Ogden, CS, Bastow, ID, Ebinger, CJ, Ayele, A, Kounoudis, R, Musila, M, et al.. The development of multiple phases of superposed rifting in the Turkana Depression, East Africa: evidence from receiver functions. Earth Planet Sci Lett 2023;609:118088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2023.118088.Search in Google Scholar
Received: 2023-01-23
Accepted: 2023-08-02
Published Online: 2023-08-22
Published in Print: 2024-01-26

© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

You are currently not able to access this content.
You are currently not able to access this content.

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Original Research Articles
  3. Assessing the influence of differential code bias and satellite geometry on GNSS ambiguity resolution through MANS-PPP software package
  4. A novel approach to enhancing the Klobuchar algorithm to mitigate the effect of ionospheric delay errors on static single-frequency receivers
  5. Integrity monitoring of NavIC by parsing broadcast ephemeris
  6. Comparison of L1 and L5 GPS smartphone absolute positioning results
  7. Determination of a gravimetric geoid model for Eastern Province in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
  8. Moho depth estimation of northern of East African Rift System
  9. Investigations of the scan characteristics with special focus on multi-target capability for the 2D laser scanner RIEGL miniVUX-2UAV
  10. An approach for considering the object surface properties in a TLS stochastic model
  11. Comparative analysis of different empirical mode decomposition-kind algorithms on sea-level inversion by GNSS-MR
  12. Preliminary performance analysis of BeiDou-2/GPS navigation systems over the low latitude region
  13. Assessing the performance of IRI-2016 and IRI-2020 models using COSMIC-2 GNSS radio occultation TEC data under different magnetic activities over Egypt
DOI:  doi.org/10.1515/jag-2023-0003
Keywords for this article
cross-validation; forward modelling; gravity disturbance; Moho depth; non-linear inversion; satellite gravity

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Original Research Articles
  3. Assessing the influence of differential code bias and satellite geometry on GNSS ambiguity resolution through MANS-PPP software package
  4. A novel approach to enhancing the Klobuchar algorithm to mitigate the effect of ionospheric delay errors on static single-frequency receivers
  5. Integrity monitoring of NavIC by parsing broadcast ephemeris
  6. Comparison of L1 and L5 GPS smartphone absolute positioning results
  7. Determination of a gravimetric geoid model for Eastern Province in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
  8. Moho depth estimation of northern of East African Rift System
  9. Investigations of the scan characteristics with special focus on multi-target capability for the 2D laser scanner RIEGL miniVUX-2UAV
  10. An approach for considering the object surface properties in a TLS stochastic model
  11. Comparative analysis of different empirical mode decomposition-kind algorithms on sea-level inversion by GNSS-MR
  12. Preliminary performance analysis of BeiDou-2/GPS navigation systems over the low latitude region
  13. Assessing the performance of IRI-2016 and IRI-2020 models using COSMIC-2 GNSS radio occultation TEC data under different magnetic activities over Egypt
Stay updated on our offers and services
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 16.5.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jag-2023-0003/html
Scroll to top button
Morty Proxy This is a proxified and sanitized view of the page, visit original site.