Source - GNSS-RO Indonesia Empirical Study

Scope of this note

This is a starter source scaffold for the Indonesian GNSS Radio Occultation empirical study conducted in April 2026.

Boundary:

  • It is not a completed source extraction.
  • It does not independently verify the numerical results; it documents what the vault contains.
  • It exists to anchor empirical claims in the vault to a recognizable study context.

Why this source note matters

The vault contains a series of research artifacts (LaTeX papers, analysis scripts, figures, CSV data) produced during a systematic GNSS-RO-based study of Indonesian ionospheric conditions. Without a study-level source scaffold, it is unclear which claims are derived from this dataset versus other sources.

Study provenance

FieldValue
ConductedApril 2026
Data sourceSpire Global constellation via UCAR CDAAC
Period5 representative days (Jan–May 2025); later expanded to 8 stratified days
RegionIndonesia geofence: −11.0° to 6.0° N, 95.0° to 141.0° E
SoftwareCustom Python scripts
Paper seriesION-style SBAS ionospheric threat papers (V1–V4)

Key numerical findings

Initial 5-day study

  • 301 Indonesia occultations from 17,909 source files
  • IRI-2020 bias: 66.72 TECU (87.6% mean underestimate)
  • RMSE: 94.34 TECU; R²: −0.73

Expanded 8-day study (V2)

  • 463 intersecting profiles → 208 strict tangent-point profiles → 207 QC-valid profiles
  • RO TEC p95: 166.0 TECU; p99: 341.1 TECU
  • Leave-day-out RMSE: 56.6 TECU; R²: −0.38

Space-weather upgrade (V3)

  • Added GFZ Kp, Kyoto Dst, F10.7, centered-dipole magnetic coordinates
  • Best model R²: 0.42; p99 residual: 120.1 TECU (19.5 m L1)

IGRF upgrade (V4)

  • Replaced centered-dipole with IGRF14 dip-latitude
  • Best model R²: 0.44; p99 residual: 114.2 TECU (18.5 m L1)

Post-sunset coverage gap

  • 18–21 LT strict profiles: 0 in all iterations
  • Flagged as integrity-relevant limitation, not evidence of low risk

Current in-vault references supported by this scaffold

Claims this scaffold does NOT yet support

  • Any claim that the findings generalize beyond the sampled days
  • Any claim that the sampling is sufficient for operational GIVE design
  • Any claim that Spire podTec accuracy is certified for SBAS use
  • Any ranking of Indonesia against other equatorial regions

Immediate audit questions

  • Which specific Spire mission(s) and data product version(s) were used?
  • Were formal UCAR CDAAC quality-control flags applied uniformly?
  • How was the IRI-2020 model invoked (library, API, online tool)?
  • What preprocessing was applied to podTec before TEC extraction?
  • Which LaTeX/paper version is the primary citation target?

Suggested downstream cleanup targets

If this scaffold becomes source-backed, revisit:

Extraction template for next cycle

  • Exact dataset URLs or DOIs
  • Software version and dependency list
  • Sample-size justification
  • Statistical methodology references
  • External validation or peer-review status

See also