Pith. sign in

REVIEW

MICROSCOPE: systematic errors

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

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 2112.10559 v1 pith:2UJI2NEN submitted 2021-12-20 astro-ph.IM gr-qcphysics.app-phphysics.ins-det

MICROSCOPE: systematic errors

classification astro-ph.IM gr-qcphysics.app-phphysics.ins-det
keywords perturbationssystematicerrorserrorinstrumentmicroscopeparameterprecision
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

The MICROSCOPE mission aims to test the Weak Equivalence Principle (WEP) in orbit with an unprecedented precision of 10$^{-15}$ on the E\"otv\"os parameter thanks to electrostatic accelerometers on board a drag-free micro-satellite. The precision of the test is determined by statistical errors, due to the environment and instrument noises, and by systematic errors to which this paper is devoted. Systematic error sources can be divided into three categories: external perturbations, such as the residual atmospheric drag or the gravity gradient at the satellite altitude, perturbations linked to the satellite design, such as thermal or magnetic perturbations, and perturbations from the instrument internal sources. Each systematic error is evaluated or bounded in order to set a reliable upper bound on the WEP parameter estimation uncertainty.

discussion (0)

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