{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02495075508864084, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008535784635587657, 'mean_word_length': 5.626086956521739, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Influence of Bathymetry on Regional Marine Geoid Modeling in Northern Europe

Although Northern Europe has been the target area in many regionwide geoid determination studies, the research has been land-focused, neglecting bathymetry information. With new projects, such as the Baltic Sea Chart Datum 2000, the attention is shifting toward the marine geoid. Hence, consideration for bathymetry has become relevant, the influence of which is studied. In the relatively shallow Baltic Sea, accounting for bathymetry-based residual terrain model reduction during gravity data processing induces marine geoid modeling differences (relative to neglecting bathymetry) mainly within 2 cm. However, the models can deviate up to 3–4 cm in some regions. Rugged Norwegian coastal areas, on the other hand, had modeling improvements around a decimeter. Considering bathymetry may thus help improve geoid modeling outcomes in future Northern Europe geoid determination projects. Besides using the conventional precise GNSS-leveling control points, the paper also demonstrates the usefulness of shipborne GNSS and airborne laser scanning-derived geoidal heights in validating geoid modeling results. A total of 70 gravimetric geoid solutions are presented, for instance, by varying the used reference global geopotential models. According to the comparisons, GOCO05c-based solutions generally perform the best, where modeling agreement with GNSS-leveling control points reached 2.9 cm (standard deviation) from a one-dimensional fit.