Comments on the article “Uncertainty and bias in electronic tide-gauge records: 
Evidence from collocated sensors”

Aarup, T.; Wöppelmann, G.; Woodworth, P. L.; Hernandez, F.; Vanhoome, B.; Schöne, T.; Thompson, P. R.

doi:10.1016/j.measurement.2018.12.007

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Add to Basket

Local TagsRelease HistoryDetailsSummary

Released

Journal Article

Comments on the article “Uncertainty and bias in electronic tide-gauge records: Evidence from collocated sensors”

Authors

Aarup, T.
External Organizations;

Wöppelmann, G.
External Organizations;

Woodworth, P. L.
External Organizations;

Hernandez, F.
External Organizations;

Vanhoome, B.
External Organizations;

/persons/resource/tschoene

Schöne, T.
1.2 Global Geomonitoring and Gravity Field, 1.0 Geodesy, Departments, GFZ Publication Database, Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum;

Thompson, P. R.
External Organizations;

External Ressource

No external resources are shared

Fulltext (public)

There are no public fulltexts stored in GFZpublic

Supplementary Material (public)

There is no public supplementary material available

Citation

Aarup, T., Wöppelmann, G., Woodworth, P. L., Hernandez, F., Vanhoome, B., Schöne, T., Thompson, P. R. (2019): Comments on the article “Uncertainty and bias in electronic tide-gauge records: Evidence from collocated sensors”. - Measurement, 135, 613-616.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2018.12.007

Cite as: https://gfzpublic.gfz-potsdam.de/pubman/item/item_3842895

Abstract

This note comments on the article published in Measurement by Stella Pytharouli, Spyros Chaikalis and Stathis C. Stiros (Volume 125, September 2018) entitled “Uncertainty and bias in electronic tide-gauge records: evidence from collocated sensors”. That paper comprises a set of comparisons between sea level data obtained by two or three collocated sensors at 10 sites around the world, using statistical methods akin to the buddy-checking methods that are often used by tide gauge operators. Their paper contains a number of incorrect statements. In addition, its comparison of tide gauge data at the 10 sites, which comprises most of the paper, is flawed in several respects.