“…Its direct impact in the quality of weather forecasting has been found to be positive, but modest (e.g., Mateus et al., 2018), especially in comparison with similar but much higher resolution PWV fields from InSAR (Mateus & Miranda, 2022; Miranda et al., 2019). Unlike InSAR, however, GNSS data can be explored to estimate vertical profiles of water vapor density, and different tomographic algorithms have been proposed (e.g., Bender et al., 2011; Champollion et al., 2004; Flores et al., 2000; Nilsson et al., 2007; Van Baelen et al., 2011, for a review cf., Bender & Dick, 2021), generally combining observations corresponding to the different paths (slants) connecting each station with each available satellite (Slant Integrated Water Vapor, SIWV) with a set of extra data coming from other sensors, and from numerical weather prediction models, with various conditions constraining the variability of water vapor within the tomographic domain. As a result of the complex set of data and constraints required by those algorithms to converge to sensible solutions, the added value of tomography has also been limited, and too sensitive to the quality of its first guess.…”