Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Comparison of 3 absolute gravimeters based on different methods for the e-MASS project

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1008.2884 v2 pith:JGOA4Y4U submitted 2010-08-17 physics.atom-ph physics.geo-ph

Comparison of 3 absolute gravimeters based on different methods for the e-MASS project

A. Louchet-Chauvet , S. Merlet , Q. Bodart , A. Landragin , F. Pereira Dos Santos , H. Baumann , G. D'Agostino , C. Origlia This is my paper
classification physics.atom-ph physics.geo-ph
keywords absolutecomparisondifferentgravimetersmethodsthreeaccelerationapril
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

We report on the comparison between three absolute gravimeters that took place in April 2010 at Laboratoire National de M\'etrologie et d'Essais. The three instruments (FG5#209 from METAS, Switzerland, IMGC-02 from INRIM, Italy, and CAG from LNE-SYRTE, France) rely on different methods: optical and atomic interferometry. We discuss their differences as well as their similarities. We compare their measurements of the gravitational acceleration in 4 points of the same pillar, in the perspective of an absolute determination of g for a watt balance experiment

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.