Compilation of the new detailed geoid model HKGEOID-2022 for the Hong Kong territories

References

• Abbak, R. A., L. E. Sjöberg, A. Ellmann, and A. A. Ustun. 2012. Precise gravimetric geoid model in mountainous areas with scarce gravity data – A case study in Central Turkey. Studia Geophysica et Geodaetica 56 (4):909–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11200-011-9001-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abbak, R. A., and A. Ustun. 2015. A software package for computing a regional gravimetric geoid model by the KTH method. Earth Science Informatics 8 (1):255–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12145-014-0149-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abdalla, A. 2009. Determination of a gravimetric geoid model of Sudan using the KTH method. MSc thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
   Google Scholar
• Abdalla, A., and D. Fairhead. 2011. A new gravimetric geoid model for Sudan using the KTH method. Journal of African Earth Sciences 60 (4):213–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2011.02.012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abdalla, A., and R. Tenzer. 2011. The evaluation of the New Zealand’s geoid model using the KTH method. Geodesy and Cartography 37 (1):5–14. https://doi.org/10.3846/13921541.2011.558326.
   Google Scholar
• Ågren, J. 2004. Regional geoid determination methods for the era of satellite gravimetry. Doctoral dissertation, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
   Google Scholar
• Ågren, J., L. E. Sjöberg, and R. Kiamehr. 2009. The new gravimetric quasigeoid model KTH08 over Sweden. Journal of Applied Geodesy 3 (3):143–53.
   Google Scholar
• Electronic and Geophysical Services Ltd. 1991. Regional gravity survey of Hong Kong, Final Report, Job Number HK50190, Hong Kong.
   Google Scholar
• Ellmann, A. 2001. Least squares modification of Stokes’ formula with applications to the Estonian geoid. Licentiate thesis, Report No. 1056, Division of Geodesy, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.
   Google Scholar
• Ellmann, A. 2004. The geoid for the Baltic countries determined by the least squares modification of Stokes formula. PhD thesis, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Division of Geodesy, Stockholm.
   Google Scholar
• Ellmann, A. 2005. Computation of three stochastic modifications of Stokes formula for regional geoid determination. Computers & Geosciences 31 (6):742–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eshagh, M., and S. Ebadi. 2013. Geoid modelling based on EGM08 and recent Earth gravity models of GOCE. Earth Science Informatics 6 (3):113–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, R. B. 1990. Hong Kong gravity observation in July 1990 with BGS Lacoste and Romberg meter No. 97 and international connections to IGSN 71. Report, British and Geology Survey, Hong Kong, China.
   Google Scholar
• Förste, C., S. Bruinsma, O. Abrikosov, S. Rudenko, J.-M. Lemoine, J.-C. Marty, K. H. Neumayer, and R. Biancale. 2016. EIGEN-6S4: EIGEN-6S4 A time-variable satellite-only gravity field model to d/o 300 based on LAGEOS, GRACE and GOCE data from the collaboration of GFZ Potsdam and GRGS Toulouse. V. 2.0 [dataset]. GFZ Data Services. https://doi.org/10.5880/icgem.2016.008.
   Google Scholar
• Fotopoulos, G. 2003. An analysis on the optimal combination of geoid, orthometric and ellipsoidal height data. PhD thesis, UCGE Reports No. 20185, Department of Geomatics Engineering, University of Calgary.
   Google Scholar
• Fotopoulos, G. 2005. Calibration of geoid error models via a combined adjustment of ellipsoidal, orthometric and gravimetric geoid height data. Journal of Geodesy 79 (1–3):111–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guo, D.-M., H.-Z. Xu, and M. Chen. 2017. Precise geoid determination over Hong Kong from heterogeneous data sets using a hybrid method. Marine Geodesy 40 (2–3):160–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heiskanen, W. A., and H. Moritz. 1967. Physical Geodesy. New York, London and San Francisco: W H Freeman and Co.
   Google Scholar
• Hinze, W. J. 2003. Bouguer reduction density, why 2.67? Geophysics 68 (5):1559–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janak, J., and P. Vaníček. 2005. Mean free-air gravity anomalies in the mountains. Studia Geophysica et Geodaetica 49 (1):31–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11200-005-1624-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiamehr, R. 2006. A strategy for determining the regional geoid by combining limited ground data with satellite-based global geopotential and topographical models: A case study of Iran. Journal of Geodesy 79 (10–11):602–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-005-0009-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotsakis, C., and M. G. Sideris. 1999. On the adjustment of combined GPS/levelling/geoid networks. Journal of Geodesy 73 (8):412–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001900050261.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luo, Z., J. Ning, Y. Chen, and Z. Yang. 2005. High precision geoid models HKGEOID-2000 for Hong Kong and SZGEOID-2000 for Shenzhen, China. Marine Geodesy 28 (2):191–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490410590953758.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molodensky, M. S., V. F. Eremeev, and M. I. Yurkina. 1962. Methods for study of the external gravitational field and figure of the Earth (transl. from Russian 1960). Israel Program for Scientific Translations, Jerusalem, 248pp.
   Google Scholar
• Moritz, H. 1980. Advanced physical geodesy. Wichmann, Karlsruhe, Abacus press turnbridge wells kent.
   Google Scholar
• Nsiah Ababio, A., and R. Tenzer. 2022. The use of gravity data to determine orthometric heights at the Hong Kong territories. Journal Applied Geodesy. https://doi.org/10.1515/jag-2022-0012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pa’suya, M. F., A. H. M. Din, J. C. McCubbine, A. H. Omar, Z. M. Amin, and N. A. Z. Yahaya. 2019. Gravimetric geoid modelling over Peninsular Malaysia using two different gridding approaches for combining free air anomaly. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences 42:515–22. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-4-W16-515-2019.
   Google Scholar
• Rapp, R. H., and N. K. Pavlis. 1990. The development and analysis of geopotential coefficient models to spherical harmonic degree 360. Journal of Geophysical Research 95 (B13):21885–991. https://doi.org/10.1029/JB095iB13p21885.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandwell, D., E. Garcia, K. Soofi, P. Wessel, M. Chandler, and W. H. Smith. 2013. Toward 1-mGal accuracy in global marine gravity from CryoSat-2, Envisat, and Jason-1. The Leading Edge 32 (8):892–9. https://doi.org/10.1190/tle32080892.1.
   Google Scholar
• Sjöberg, L. E. 1984. Least squares modification of Stokes’ and Venning-Meinesz’ formulas by accounting for truncation and potential coefficients errors. Manuscripta Geodaetica 9:209–29.
   Google Scholar
• Sjöberg, L. E. 1991. Refined least squares modification of Stokes’ formula. Manuscripta Geodaetica 16:367–75.
   Google Scholar
• Sjöberg, L. E. 2001. Topographic and atmospheric corrections of gravimetric geoid model determination with special emphasis on the effects of harmonics of degree zero and one. Journal of Geodesy 75 (5–6):283–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001900100174.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sjöberg, L. E. 2003a. A solution to the downward continuation effect on the geoid determination by Stokes’ formula. Journal of Geodesy 77:94–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-002-0306-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sjöberg, L. E. 2003b. Improving modified Stokes formula by GOCE data. Bollettino di Geodesia e Scienze Affini 61 (3):215–25.
   Google Scholar
• Sjöberg, L. E. 2003c. A computational scheme to model geoid by the modified Stokes formula without gravity reductions. Journal of Geodesy 77:255–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-003-0338-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sjöberg, L. E. 2003d. A general model of modifying Stokes formula and its Least squares solution. Journal of Geodesy 77:459–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-003-0346-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sjöberg, L. E. 2004. A spherical harmonics representation of the ellipsoidal correction to the modified Stokes formula. Journal of Geodesy 78:180–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-004-0378-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sjöberg, L. E. 2007. Topographic bias by analytical continuation in physical geodesy. Journal of Geodesy 81 (5):345–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sjöberg, L. E., A. Gidudu, and R. Ssengendo. 2015. The Uganda gravimetric geoid model 2014 computed by the KTH method. Journal of Geodetic Science 5 (1):35–46. https://doi.org/10.1515/jogs-2015-0007.
   Google Scholar
• Sjöberg, L. E., and H. Nahavandchi. 2000. The atmospheric geoid model effects in Stokes’ formula. Geophysical Journal International 140 (1):95–100. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-246x.2000.00995.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tscherning, C. C., and R. H. Rapp. 1974. Closed covariance expressions for gravity anomalies, geoid undulations and deflections the vertical implied by anomaly degree variance models. Reports of the department of geodetic science No. 208, The Ohio State University.
   Google Scholar
• Ulotu, P. 2009. Geoid Model of Tanzania from Sparse and Varying Gravity Data Density by the KTH method. Doctoral dissertation, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
   Google Scholar
• Wu, Y., Z. Luo, W. Chen, and Y. Chen. 2017. High-resolution regional gravity field recovery from Poisson wavelets using heterogeneous observational techniques. Earth, Planets and Space 69 (1):34.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, Z. J., and Y. Chen. 2001. Determination of the Hong Kong gravimetric geoid. Survey Review 36 (279): 23–34. https://doi.org/10.1179/sre.2001.36.279.23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zingerle, P., R. Pail, T. Gruber, and X. Oikonomidou. 2019. The experimental gravity field model XGM2019e [dataset]. GFZ Data Serv. https://doi.org/10.5880/ICGEM.2019.007.
   Google Scholar