2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.dib.2019.104762
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Central European GNSS Research Network (CEGRN) dataset

Abstract: The Central European GNSS Research Network (CEGRN) collects GNSS data since 1994 from contributors which today include 42 Institutions in 33 Countries. CEGRN returns a dataset of coordinates and velocities computed according to international standards and the most recent processing procedures and recommendations. We provide a dataset of 1229 positions and velocities resulting from 3 or more repetitions of coordinate measurements of each site over 4 or more years. The velocity data result from a combination of … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
6
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Arrows represent the direction and the amplitude of the horizontal velocities. Upper row from left to right– European Plate Observing System‐UGA solution (Deprez et al., 2019), INGV solution, NGL solution (Blewitt et al., 2018), ETH solution (Sánchez et al., 2018a), MONT solution (Masson et al., 2019b), Bottom row from left to right—KIER solution (Kierulf et al., 2021), CEUR solution (Zurutuza et al., 2019), KREE solution (Kreemer, 2020), BALK solution (D'Agostino et al., 2020), EPND solution (Kenyeres et al., 2019).…”
Section: Gnss Velocity Field Combinationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Arrows represent the direction and the amplitude of the horizontal velocities. Upper row from left to right– European Plate Observing System‐UGA solution (Deprez et al., 2019), INGV solution, NGL solution (Blewitt et al., 2018), ETH solution (Sánchez et al., 2018a), MONT solution (Masson et al., 2019b), Bottom row from left to right—KIER solution (Kierulf et al., 2021), CEUR solution (Zurutuza et al., 2019), KREE solution (Kreemer, 2020), BALK solution (D'Agostino et al., 2020), EPND solution (Kenyeres et al., 2019).…”
Section: Gnss Velocity Field Combinationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This solution provides the vertical and horizontal velocities with their respective uncertainties for 164 GPS stations in Scandinavia. Central Europe Solution (CEUR): This GPS velocity solution (Zurutuza et al., 2019) is derived from weekly solutions of 10 subnetworks processed with Bernese (Dach et al., 2015). The velocity field is obtained from the combination of individual sub‐network velocities through a 7‐parameter Helmert transformation (Watson, 2006).…”
Section: Gnss Velocity Field Combinationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The model uncertainty was estimated as that range of depths such that the resulting line of sight displacements are within 10% of the measured 10.5 cm displacement. Several permanent GNSS stations belonging to the Albanian permanent networks are routinely processed as part of the Densification of the European Permanent Network [17] and of the Central European GNSS Research Network CEGRN [18][19][20] using state of the art processing standards [21]. The time series of the horizontal and vertical coordinates available at http://147.162.183.197/ALBANIA/ show sudden discontinuities across the date of the 2019 event with higher amplitudes for the stations (DUR2 and TIR2) near the epicenter, indicating that the stations were displaced by the main event ( Figure 5 is an example for DUR2).…”
Section: Geodetic Data: Insar and Gnssmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, the coseismic displacement field seems unaffected by landslides or liquefaction zones (from Baize et al (2022)), except for one station near Sisak that was therefore discarded (Figure 2 and Data Set S2 in Supporting Information S1). Interseismic velocities (blue arrows) are plotted relative to stable Eurasia (Zurutuza et al, 2019). Focal mechanisms of historical earthquakes are plotted together with known active or potentially active faults (see Baize et al (2022) and references therein).…”
Section: Benchmark Measurementsmentioning
confidence: 99%