Figure 1.
Historical marine gravity data along the Polish coast collected in 1971–1981
Figure 2.
Gravity difference between the USSR realization of IGSN71 and ITGRF for the Petrobaltic network (a) and a distribution of the gravity corrections applied to the Petrobaltic data (b)
Figure 3.
Differences between the depths measured and depths from the ETOPO 2022 15″ model for the Zaria (a), Jan Turlejski (b), Petrobaltic (c), and Ustka-Rozewie (d) campaigns
Table 1.
Statistics of the differences of depths measured during the Polish historical gravimetric campaigns and the respective ones obtained from the ETOPO 2022 model [m]
| Gravimetric campaign | Number of points | Min | Max | Mean | Std. dev. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zaria | 1710 | −90.5 | 107.4 | 2.9 | 14.6 |
| Jan Turlejski | 409 | −79.4 | 34.8 | −34.5 | 26.3 |
| Petrobaltic | 8382 | −20.0 | 10.2 | 0.2 | 1.4 |
| Ustka-Rozewie | 717 | −29.3 | 4.9 | −0.7 | 1.4 |
Table 2.
Statistics of the differences between the recalculated Bouguer anomalies for the Polish historical gravimetric campaigns [mGal]
| Gravimetric campaign | Number of crossovers | Min | Max | Mean | Std. dev. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zaria 1971 – Zaria 1972 | 42 | −11.2 | 7.0 | −1.1 | 3.8 |
| Zaria 1971 – Jan Turlejski | 57 | −5.8 | 3.7 | −0.7 | 1.7 |
| Zaria 1971 – Petrobaltic | 221 | −7.3 | 9.7 | 0.7 | 3.6 |
| Zaria 1971 – Ustka-Rozewie | 47 | −3.9 | 4.3 | −1.0 | 2.0 |
| Zaria 1972 – Jan Turlejski | 19 | −1.2 | 9.2 | 1.8 | 3.3 |
| Zaria 1972 – Petrobaltic | 223 | −5.0 | 8.6 | 2.4 | 2.5 |
| Zaria 1972 – Ustka-Rozewie | 13 | −5.1 | 5.4 | −0.9 | 2.9 |
| Jan Turlejski – Petrobaltic | 144 | −9.6 | 1.4 | −2.0 | 1.9 |
| Jan Turlejski – Ustka-Rozewie | 95 | −7.1 | 2.2 | −2.1 | 2.2 |
| Petrobaltic – Ustka-Rozewie | 134 | −1.8 | 8.2 | 0.5 | 1.2 |
Figure 4.
Interpolation errors of free-air anomalies with respect to the size of grid cells
Figure 5.
Gridded free-air anomalies calculated from the measurements of the Zaria (a), Jan Turlejski (b), Petrobaltic (c), and Ustka-Rozewie (d) campaigns
Figure 6.
Gridded Bouguer anomalies calculated from the measurements of the Zaria (a), Jan Turlejski (b), Petrobaltic (c), and Ustka-Rozewie (d) campaigns
Figure 7.
Differences between the gridded free-air anomalies from the Zaria campaign and EGM2008 (a), EIGEN-6c4 (b), and GECO (c) models, respectively [mGals]
Figure 8.
Differences between the gridded free-air anomalies from the Jan Turlejski campaign and EGM2008 (a), EIGEN-6c4 (b), and GECO (c) models, respectively [mGals]
Figure 9.
Differences between the gridded free-air anomalies from the Petrobaltic campaign and EGM2008 (a), EIGEN-6c4 (b), and GECO (c) models, respectively [mGals]
Figure 10.
Differences between the gridded free-air anomalies from the Ustka-Rozewie campaign and EGM2008 (a), EIGEN-6c4 (b), and GECO (c) models, respectively [mGals]
Table 3.
Statistical summary of differences between gridded free-air anomalies calculated from the Polish historical marine gravity measurements and global geopotential models (GGM) [mGal]
| GGM | EGM2008 | EIGEN6c4 | GECO | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Statistics/Campaign | Min | Max | Mean | Std. dev. | Min | Max | Mean | Std. dev. | Min | Max | Mean | Std. dev. |
| Zaria | −13.9 | 6.9 | −4.2 | 2.5 | −13.0 | 8.1 | −3.5 | 2.4 | −13.9 | 8.8 | −3.7 | 2.5 |
| Jan Turlejski | −9.8 | −2.0 | −5.3 | 1.3 | −9.6 | −0.8 | −4.6 | 1.5 | −9.9 | −1.7 | −5.9 | 1.4 |
| Petrobaltic | −6.2 | 5.8 | −1.7 | 1.2 | −7.6 | 6.3 | −1.0 | 1.2 | −7.4 | 5.4 | −1.3 | 1.4 |
| Ustka-Rozewie | −4.9 | 2.5 | −2.3 | 1.0 | −5.4 | 3.0 | −1.7 | 1.3 | −6.1 | 3.8 | −1.7 | 1.5 |