GPS Solut (2017) 21:13–22

DOI 10.1007/s10291-016-0545-x

REVIEW ARTICLE

Uncovering common misconceptions in GNSS Precise Point

Positioning and its future prospect
Suelynn Choy1 • Sunil Bisnath2 • Chris Rizos3

Received: 1 February 2016 / Accepted: 11 May 2016 / Published online: 21 May 2016
Ó Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Abstract Within the last decade, GNSS Precise Point technique—considered by many as the future of satellite
Positioning (PPP) has generated unprecedented interest positioning and navigation. Given the upcoming modern-
among the GNSS community and is being used for a ization and deployment of GNSS satellites over the next
number of scientific and commercial applications today. few years, it would be appropriate to address the potential
Similar to the conventional relative positioning technique, impacts of these signals and constellations on the future
PPP could provide positioning solutions at centimeter-level prospect of PPP.
precision by making use of the precise carrier phase mea-
surements and high-accuracy satellite orbits and clock Keywords Precise Point Positioning (PPP)
Ambiguity
corrections provided by, for example, the International resolution (AR)
Global Navigation Satellite Systems
GNSS Service. The PPP technique is attractive as it is (GNSS)
RTK
Convergence time
computationally efficient; it eliminates the need for
simultaneous observations at both the reference and rover
receivers; it also eliminates the needs for the rover receiver Introduction
to operate within the vicinity of the reference receiver; and
it provides homogenous positioning quality within a con- In recent years, the Global Navigation Satellite Systems
sistent global frame anywhere in the world with a single (GNSS) Precise Point Positioning (PPP) technique has
GNSS receiver. Although PPP has definite advantages for increasingly gained interest and widespread adoption
many applications, its merits and widespread adoption are within the GNSS community. A number of governmental,
significantly limited by the long convergence time, which academic and commercial PPP services have been estab-
restricts the use of the PPP technique for many real-time lished to support scientific and commercial Position,
GNSS applications. We provide an overview of the current Navigation and Timing (PNT) applications. In March 2012,
performance of PPP as well as attempt to address some the first international symposium on PPP organized by the
of the common misconceptions of this positioning German Federal Agency for Cartography and Geodesy
(BKG) was held in Frankfurt am Main, Germany. The
symposium brought together experts from universities,
& Suelynn Choy governments and the private sector to discuss technical
[email protected] issues relating to PPP. It was a great success, with 180
1
participants from more than 30 countries. In the following
School of Science, RMIT University,
GPO BOX 2476V, Melbourne, VIC 3001, Australia
year in June 2013, the International Association of Geo-
2
desy (IAG) in partnership with Natural Resources Canada
Department of Earth and Space Science and Engineering,
(NRCan), the International GNSS Service (IGS) and York
York University, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, ON M3J 1P3,
Canada University hosted a second international PPP workshop in
3 Ottawa, Canada. Such workshop activity is indicative of
School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The
University of New South Wales (UNSW), Sydney, the prominence given to PPP as a powerful PNT technique
NSW 2052, Australia for next-generation satellite navigation.

123
14 GPS Solut (2017) 21:13–22

For three decades, relative (or differential) positioning the use of ancillary data such as atmospheric information
has been the dominant precise positioning and data pro- derived from regional reference stations networks to aid
cessing technique. In relative positioning, the coordinates integer ambiguity resolution and re-convergence; the
of a point are determined relative to another reference point importance of PPP ‘‘infrastructure’’ that allow precise
with known coordinates. This eliminates or reduces most orbits and satellite clocks to be determined; as well as the
GNSS observation errors that are spatially correlated at data dissemination mechanisms which are mandatory for
both the unknown and reference points, thus providing real-time PPP. Given the upcoming modernization of GPS
high-accuracy positioning solutions. Originally, the signals and the deployment of other GNSS and Regional
implementation of this relative positioning technique for Navigation Satellite Systems (RNSS) satellites, it is nec-
many commercial applications involved one reference essary to speculate on the potential benefits and challenges
station and one or more rover receivers operating in a local of these additional signals and constellations in the context
area, in real time. Centimeter- to submeter-level position- of multi-GNSS PPP.
ing accuracy can be obtained, with the accuracy mainly
dependent on whether the pseudorange and/or carrier phase
observations are used, and in the case of the latter, whether Common misconceptions in PPP
ambiguity resolution was successful. Carrier phase pro-
cessing provides the most accurate positioning results, in This section addresses some of the common misconcep-
real-time and in dynamic mode, in a technique known as tions in PPP, e.g., how good a PPP solution is and whether
‘‘Real-Time Kinematic’’ (RTK). RTK is now, and has been phase ambiguity resolution in PPP could speed up the long
for many years, the industry standard procedure for precise convergence time. It will also elucidate possible technical
positioning and navigation applications such as machine limitations and prospects of using PPP technique in real-
control, precision farming, surveying and mapping (Rizos time PNT applications.
et al. 2012). But this technique was soon augmented to a
regional network of reference stations that permitted the How good is a standard PPP solution?
extension of the service coverage area in the so-called
network-RTK mode. The metrics used to assess the quality of the PPP estimates
PPP emerged as an alternate GNSS positioning tech- are: accuracy, precision and convergence time. In PPP,
nique in the late 1990s (Zumberge et al. 1997). PPP in the there is minimal difference between accuracy and precision
standard mode utilizes dual-frequency pseudorange and as the residual biases are typically at centimeter level
carrier phase observations from single GNSS rover recei- owing to the rigorous error modeling in PPP. The con-
vers and requires precise satellite orbits, clock corrections vergence time is defined as the time required for the
(and other error modeling) to generate high-accuracy position or ambiguity estimates to reach a specific level of
positioning solutions. The PPP and relative positioning accuracy and does not deviate beyond this level after
approaches were originally established independently of reaching it. In practice, each user often uniquely defines the
each other, to address different purposes. PPP was first level of accuracy for convergence.
developed to enable efficient processing of large global Numerous researches have shown millimeter- to cen-
networks of GNSS data. It quickly emerged that it is also a timeter-level point positioning accuracy can be achieved
viable alternative to the traditional relative positioning for static dual-frequency PPP processing using a 24-hour
technique because it does not have the limitations of the good quality dataset (Colombo et al. 2004; Gao and Shen
latter, such as the need for a nearby reference station and 2002; Hèroux and Kouba 2001; Kouba 2009; Witch-
the associated baseline length constraint. One major ayangkoon 2000; Zumberge et al. 2001). Seepersad and
drawback of PPP, however, is the long solution ‘‘conver- Bisnath (2014) investigated the performance of the stan-
gence time.’’ It can range from tens of minutes to several dard PPP technique in static and kinematic mode using
hours (Bisnath and Gao 2009; Hèroux et al. 2004; Kouba 1-week datasets collected from 300 IGS stations from July
2009). 1, 2012, to July 7, 2012. Dual-frequency ionosphere-free
The motivation for this paper is to extend the work of combination of GPS measurements was used together with
Bisnath and Gao (2009) and Rizos et al. (2012) who the IGS 5-minute final orbits and 30-second clock correc-
described the performance of PPP technique and specu- tion information. The tropospheric delay was estimated as
lated on its future potential. The goal is to provide an part of the adjustment process, and no integer PPP ambi-
insight into the current prospects of PPP and to address guity resolution was attempted in their investigation. The
some of the common misconceptions concerning this IGS accumulated weekly SINEX station coordinates were
positioning technique such as the current performance of used as reference. They concluded that PPP in static mode
PPP; PPP ambiguity resolution (PPP-AR) and validation; could provide positional accuracy of 7 and 13 mm in the

123
GPS Solut (2017) 21:13–22 15

horizontal and vertical components, respectively, using receivers, thus resulting in the phase ambiguity term being
such a 24-hour dataset. In kinematic mode, the conserva- a real-valued quantity. This is true for any single receiver
tive accuracy of the horizontal positioning component was positioning using carrier phase measurements, which
46 mm and 72 mm in the vertical component. It is explains why PPP requires an extended convergence period
expected that the estimated vertical component will be less to reliably estimate these ‘‘float ambiguities.’’ In contrast,
accurate than the horizontal component due to the satellite in relative positioning the double-differenced ambiguity
geometry as well as the quality of the correction models term, between two receivers and two satellites, has an
used, e.g., tropospheric modeling for estimating the tro- integer nature (hardware-dependent biases have canceled)
pospheric delay. It was also shown in Seepersad and Bis- and consequently can be ‘‘fixed’’ to the correct integer
nath (2014) that the quality of estimated PPP solutions is value, thus enabling instantaneous positioning in real time.
linked to the geographical location of the stations. Some Since 2007, a number of researchers have been making
stations portrayed less accurate position estimates and progress on the challenge of resolving carrier phase
longer convergence time, which may be attributed to the ambiguities in PPP processing. In general, there are two
weak estimation of the wet component of the tropospheric methods: the ‘‘Uncalibrated Hardware Delays’’ method
delay, as well as modeling of other PPP-related errors such (Bertiger et al. 2010; Ge et al. 2007); and the ‘‘Integer-
as solid Earth tides and ocean loading. Recovery-Clocks’’ (Laurichesse et al. 2009) or ‘‘Decoupled
The PPP solutions in static mode were slow to converge, Clock Model’’ (Collins 2008) method. An in-depth dis-
with approximately 20 min required for 95 % of solutions cussion can be found in Geng et al. (2010) and Shi (2012).
to reach a horizontal accuracy of 20 cm or better, and the It has been shown that the ambiguity-fixed position esti-
convergence time was much longer for kinematic pro- mates from these methods are theoretically equivalent
cessing (Seepersad and Bisnath 2014). As a general rule, a (Geng 2010; Shi 2012). The term ‘‘fixed-PPP approach’’ is
minimum of one hour is required for the horizontal solution used here to describe PPP processing with phase ambigu-
from a standard PPP static processing to converge to 5 cm. ities resolved. The benefit of correct integer ambiguity
Table 1 lists the recommended convergence time for static fixing is that it can shorten the convergence time thus
PPP to achieve the required horizontal accuracy. It should potentially improving the accuracy and consistency of PPP
also be noted that the quality of the position estimates is solutions.
very dependent on the observation session length, the Implementation of the fixed-PPP approach requires that
geographical location of the receiver, the number and modeling and processing be standardized at both the ser-
geometry of the visible satellites, user environment (i.e., vice provider and user end (Teunissen and Khodabandeh
the degree of multipath disturbance) and the quality of the 2015). The above-mentioned PPP-AR methods vary in
observations. terms of the strategies used to separate the hardware delays
from integer ambiguities. Therefore, fixed PPP is only
PPP Ambiguity Resolution possible provided the service providers also deliver to users
estimates of the hardware biases, in addition to the satellite
Standard PPP with ‘‘float ambiguities’’ is an adequate orbits and clocks, which are consistent and suited for PPP
technique for long-period static applications, but certainly ambiguity fixing.
not for short observation sessions and/or kinematic opera-
tions. In standard PPP, the carrier phase ambiguity is a
combination of the integer ambiguity term and hardware-
dependent biases originating from the satellites and

Table 1 Recommended convergence time for static PPP solution to

converge (Seepersad and Bisnath 2013)
Horizontal Accuracy (cm) Recommended
convergence period

20 35 min
10 50 min
5 60 min
2 9h
1 23 h
0.5 24 h
Fig. 1 Average position error of float-PPP and fixed-PPP solutions

123
16 GPS Solut (2017) 21:13–22

Figure 1 shows the average rate of convergence of float- float-PPP processing remains, which constrains the adop-
PPP and fixed-PPP positioning as a function of horizontal tion of the PPP technique for real-time GNSS positioning
and vertical position errors. Similar to the processing and navigation applications. What is even more problem-
strategy adopted by Seepersad and Bisnath (2014), the atic is that this convergence process has to be repeatedly
dataset used was 1 week of data from July 1, 2012, to July applied whenever satellite tracking loss occurs, which
7, 2012, from approximately 300 globally distributed IGS further devalues the practicability of real-time PPP. So the
sites. Only GPS data were processed in static mode, and the problem of convergence for fixed PPP is not only an issue
IGS accumulated weekly SINEX station coordinates were after a receiver’s cold start but also after any interruption of
used as reference. In this instance, both float- and fixed- the measurement due to signal obstruction.
PPP solutions were computed. It can be seen that ambiguity The key to instantaneous AR for short baseline RTK lies
fixing provides an improvement in the horizontal compo- in the a priori knowledge of the ionosphere. In short
nent estimates and to a lesser extent the vertical compo- baseline RTK, the ionospheric delay is almost completely
nent. There is generally little difference between the float corrected for using the nearby reference station observa-
and fixed solutions during the first 15 min of the solutions tions. This significantly enhances the underlying model
and after 6 h. In fact, it is interesting to note that during the strength making rapid ambiguity fixing possible (Teunissen
first 15 min the float solution is slightly better than the 1997). The implication for PPP is that the elimination of
fixed solution, i.e., a specific time period is still required for the ionospheric delay on measurements using traditional
the float solution to converge to ensure correct integer linear combinations is not adequate to facilitate rapid AR.
fixing. In fact, the convergence period for PPP will not be changed
The carrier phase ambiguity is a unique random constant significantly by simply because the ambiguities are integer-
for each continuously tracked station–satellite arc. The valued as seen in previous section.
only direct source of information on its value is from each It has been shown that explicitly estimating and con-
corresponding pseudorange observation. This means that straining the ionosphere within the PPP-AR model can
the ability to derive as estimate of the ambiguity is strongly permit instantaneous ‘‘re-convergence’’ of PPP solutions
influenced by the quality of the pseudorange observations after cycle slips have occurred (Banville and Langley 2009;
and to a lesser extent the carrier phase observations. In Collins and Bisnath 2011; Geng et al. 2010; Zhang and Li
PPP, the convergence period occurs as the solution tran- 2012). When signal lock to a satellite is lost, the iono-
sitions from a pseudorange-only solution to a float ambi- spheric delay estimates are extrapolated from previous
guity carrier phase solution. The pseudorange observations epochs in order to ‘‘constrain’’ the ionosphere until the
are filtered by the smoothly varying carrier phase obser- GNSS signal is re-acquired. This method can be used
vations, which leads to a convergence period after the globally and is effectively independent of any local or
initialization of the solution. This highlights the funda- regional network. However, the efficiency of this method is
mental paradox of PPP-AR in that a substantial conver- somewhat limited and is not suitable, for example, when
gence period is still required. cycle slips occur during large ionospheric fluctuations or
Furthermore, the PPP-AR technique may not necessarily the observation dataset has long data gaps.
be able to consistently resolve the ambiguities correctly, or The second approach, which specifically deals with
to maintain fixed solutions throughout the processing given instantaneous ambiguity fixing after a receiver cold start, is
the inherently weaker model of PPP (Bisnath and Collins to incorporate externally derived ionospheric information
2012). This could significantly degrade the quality of the (Juan et al. 2012). In principle, this information can be
estimated position solution. Some standard ambiguity obtained from ionospheric models such as the Klobuchar
search and validation methods, e.g., the ratio test and their model or the Global Ionospheric Maps (GIMs), which may
empirical thresholds, do not work well for PPP-AR, espe- result in some improvement in ambiguity fixing. However,
cially when the satellite geometry is poor (Collins et al. it still requires a considerable time (more than 10 min) to
2009; Shi 2012). Therefore, rigorous integer ambiguity fix the initial phase ambiguities to integer values. This is
validation methods specifically applicable for PPP remain because GIMs with a nominal accuracy of 2–8 TECU in
an issue to be investigated. the vertical (not slant) direction are not sufficiently accu-
rate to serve as a robust constraint for rapid ambiguity
Is PPP ambiguity resolution a solution to all fixing (1 TECU corresponds to 16.3-cm range error). Fig-
problems? ure 2 shows the errors of single-differenced ionospheric
delays on GPS L1 at MOBS IGS station calculated using
Isolating the phase ambiguities as integer values in PPP post-processed GIMs provided by the IGS on August 13,
does not by itself permit rapid ambiguity resolution (Col- 2014. The L1 ionospheric delay errors varied between
lins and Bisnath 2011). The convergence period of standard 47 cm and 69 cm RMS, which corresponds to 2–3 TECU

123
GPS Solut (2017) 21:13–22 17

to improved performance as bandwidth can be optimized

based on the spatial and temporal characteristics of the
errors. However, as it has been already mentioned, PPP
engineered in the traditional sense may never reach the
level of performance of RTK, with its possibility of
instantaneous ambiguity fixing. So, if PPP is scaled down
requiring local/regional atmospheric corrections to be
provided; then, the unique characteristic of PPP as a global
wide-area precise positioning technique is compromised.
Similarly, if SSR-RTK is expanded to a global scale, it is
essentially equivalent to PPP (Collins et al. 2012).
Although it may appear that PPP and RTK are not
mutually exclusive, the utility of these two techniques
could be merged. This is the irony of PPP-RTK technique.
PPP is a unique positioning technique that can truly offer
global solutions without the requirements of local/regional
Fig. 2 Single-differenced ionospheric delay errors on GPS L1 at reference networks, whereas RTK/network-RTK will con-
MOBS IGS station. The errors were calculated from using the vertical
tinue to dominate regional positioning especially when a
TEC values from the post-processed GIMs on August 13, 2014
dense local/regional GNSS infrastructure has already been
established. Integration of these two techniques would lead
of slant TEC (total electron content) errors. The accuracy to improved position accuracy and convergence time, but
with which the ionospheric corrections need to be provided the performance is now dependent on the extent and den-
depends on the wavelength of the GNSS signals used. sity of the reference networks, which is critical for the
Therefore, the required accuracy of the ionospheric cor- provision of accurate atmospheric information to aid rapid
rections must be better than a few centimeters to allow ambiguity fixing. Hence, SSR-RTK is a preferred expres-
rapid-to-instantaneous ambiguity resolution in PPP. sion as it makes a clearer distinction between the standard
Another possible solution is to use externally derived PPP and RTK techniques.
ionospheric delay estimates from a dense regional GNSS
reference network (Li et al. 2010). This approach makes Future prospect of PPP in the context of
possible instantaneous ambiguity fixing within seconds, multi-GNSS
which is equivalent to RTK performance. However, this
approach is only applicable on a local or regional scale With the advent of modernized and other upcoming GNSS
where there is a dense Continuously Operating Reference and RNSS systems, it would be remiss of the authors not to
Station (CORS) network. discuss the potential benefits of these additional constel-
lations on the accuracy and convergence time for PPP.
A hybrid system of PPP and network-RTK? Figure 3 shows results of multi-GNSS float-PPP solutions
at two GNSS reference stations located in Melbourne,
The notion of PPP-RTK was first described by Wübenna Australia, on January 11, 2015. GPS, GLONASS and
et al. (2005). PPP-RTK is a synthesis of the positive BeiDou measurements were post-processed in kinematic
characteristics of PPP and network-RTK (Wübbena et al. PPP mode. Table 2 shows the RMS errors (one sigma) for
2005). Network-RTK solutions can be generalized in two the east, north and up components computed from 7 days
ways, i.e., the most commonly used technique is the use of of GNSS data, January 9, 2015, to January 15, 2015. The
Observation Space Representation (OSR-RTK) such as the convergence criterion for the kinematic PPP is that the
Virtual Reference Station (VRS) and Flächenkorrekturpa- positioning errors reach and remain within ± 20 cm. It can
rameter (FKP) techniques, and the other is State Space be seen that the GPS ? GLONASS ? BeiDou PPP sig-
Representation (SSR-RTK), or loosely termed PPP-RTK nificantly improves the PPP performance compared to the
(Collins et al. 2012). GPS-only solution with an average accuracy improvements
The original concept of PPP was a precise positioning of 20 and 30 % in the horizontal and vertical components,
technique that works solely on SSR corrections determined respectively. The convergence time is shortened by about
from a sparse global network of CORS stations. Instead of 20 % when compared to a single-constellation PPP solu-
lumping all error components together as one error (i.e., tion (Ren et al. 2015). It is also important to note that the
correction), as is the case of OSR-RTK, SSR errors are time series of the multi-GNSS PPP solutions are much
bettered modeled and transmitted individually. This leads more stable than the GPS-only solutions, with much

123
18 GPS Solut (2017) 21:13–22

G GR GB GRB Furthermore, performing PPP with triple-frequency

0.3
observations is now possible with the availability of the L5
E[m]

0 signal being transmitted by the modernized GPS Block IIF

-0.3 satellites along with new satellite constellations such as
Galileo, BeiDou and QZSS (Geng and Bock 2013; Lau-
0.3
richeese 2015; Tegedor and Ovstedal 2013). Triple-fre-
N[m]

0
quency processing has a significant impact on ambiguity
-0.3
convergence time, achieving ambiguity-fixed solutions
0.3 within a few minutes or even shorter. The accuracy of
U[m]

0
triple-frequency PPP is also subsequently improved to
-0.3
about the 10 cm level within a very short period of time
0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400 2800
due to extra-widelane ambiguity resolution, which can be
Epoch[Sample:30s]
completed almost instantaneously (Lauricheese 2015).
0.3 Nevertheless, issues such as interoperability and compati-
E[m]

0 bility need to be addressed to allow for successful inte-

-0.3 gration of observations from multiple constellation GNSS
0.3 systems and signals.
N[m]

0
-0.3

0.3
Enabling real-time PPP
U[m]

0
-0.3 In this section, we will look at the two types of critical
0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400 2800
infrastructure that are necessary for implementing real-time
Epoch[Sample:30s] PPP: (a) availability of precise satellite orbit and clock
correction products in real time and (b) dissemination of
Fig. 3 Kinematic PPP processing using multi-GNSS data, i.e., GPS corrections allowing users to operate with comparative
only (G), GPS ? GLONASS (GR), GPS ? BeiDou (GB),
ease.
GPS ? GLONASS ? BeiDou (GRB), for GNSS station BNLA
(top) and WORI (bottom) in Melbourne, Australia, on January 11,
2015 (Ren et al. 2015). These results are float-PPP solutions Availability of precise satellite orbits and clocks

smaller and fewer fluctuations. Li et al. (2015), Chen et al. The IGS has been providing precise satellite orbit and
(2015) and Tegedor et al. (2014) reported similar findings. clock corrections for more than a decade, and these prod-
That is, that the addition of BeiDou, Galileo and GLO- ucts are freely available over the Internet. The IGS orbits
NASS systems to the standard GPS-only scenario could and clocks come in various forms and are delivered with
significantly shorten the convergence time for PPP and some delay, to support post-processed applications. For
improve the positioning accuracy, especially in GNSS- example, the IGS final satellite orbit and clock products are
challenged environments (Chen et al. 2015; Li et al. 2015; of the highest accuracy, but are delivered with a latency of
Tegedor et al. 2014). 12–18 days. Through its Real-Time Service (RTS), the IGS

Table 2 RMS errors and

Station GPS GPS ? GLO GPS ? BDS GPS ? GLO ? BDS
convergence time of the multi-
GNSS PPP kinematic solutions BNLA
based. The RMS values were
computed at one sigma using Time (\20 cm) 85 min 68 min 65 min 45 min
seven days of GNSS data from E (cm) 3.1 3.9 2.1 3.1
January 9, 2015, to January 15, N (cm) 3.3 2.1 2.5 2.0
2015
U (cm) 7.5 7.2 5.6 5.3
WORI
Time (\20 cm) 74 min 45 min 30 min 23 min
E (cm) 2.8 4.0 1.8 3.2
N (cm) 3.4 2.1 2.4 1.8
U (cm) 6.1 5.9 4.8 4.9

123
GPS Solut (2017) 21:13–22 19

extends its capability to support PNT applications requiring space-based transmission using satellites. Currently, the
real-time access to the IGS products and GNSS data corrections enabling real-time PPP, i.e., the IGS-RTS, are
streams. At present, the IGS-RTS provides GPS corrections freely available via the Internet. These corrections are
as official products. The GLONASS products are currently streamed in the RTCM (Radio Technical Commission for
provided as experimental products and will soon be Maritime Services) SSR format. The NTRIP (Networked
included within the service when the RTS reaches its full Transport of RTCM via Internet Protocol) stream transport
operating capability. Other constellations will be added to protocol is used to disseminate the correction data. Some
the portfolio products over time. commercial service providers such as Trimble and Fugro
In addition, the IGS is providing multi-GNSS precise are also providing real-time PPP service in propriety for-
orbit and clock products, through the IGS Multi-GNSS mats, via terrestrial communication links and L-band
Experiment (MGEX) in order to gain experience and communication satellites.
insight into multi-GNSS processing, so as to ultimately Space-based systems are the ideal communications link
support multi-GNSS applications. Five MGEX analysis for SSR correction data transmission, as it does not suffer
centers are presently contributing multi-GNSS products in from the ground-based telecommunication issues of con-
various combinations and sampling rates as shown in nectivity, latency, standards and transmission on different
Table 3 (Montenbruck et al. 2014). The MGEX analysis radio frequencies. Furthermore, the space-based delivery
centers are the Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales (CNES), method is more in line with the view that PPP is a global
Center for Orbit Determination in Europe (CODE), wide-area positioning technique. Ideally, the dissemination
GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam (GFZ), Japan Aerospace of SSR correction data is preferred with a GNSS compat-
Exploration Agency (JAXA), Technische Universität ible signal, to avoid the need for additional communica-
München (TUM). Since 2015, CNES and JAXA real-time tions hardware at the user end to access the SSR
analysis centers are also generating real-time correction corrections. Galileo and QZSS (Quasi-Zenith Satellite
streams enabling multi-GNSS PPP. System) have augmentation signals capable of transmitting
these corrections.
Correction dissemination methods The L6 signal (formerly known as the ‘‘LEX signal’’)
being transmitted by the QZSS is an example of a space-
Another requirement for real-time PPP is the communica- based delivery channel that enables real-time PPP. When
tion channel(s) used to disseminate the correction data. fully deployed in 2023, QZSS will consist of four satellites
These correction data need to be transmitted via a com- in highly inclined elliptical orbits and three geostationary
munication link to users in a standard format and protocol, satellites. The goal of QZSS is to enhance the availability
which would allow GNSS receiver manufacturers to and performance of GNSS over Japan and the region
implement them in their receivers’ firmware. The correc- centered on the 135°E meridian. In addition to the navi-
tion dissemination methods can be grouped into terrestrial gation signals that are interoperable with GPS, QZSS also
based using the Internet or cellular delivery method and transmits two augmentation signals, i.e., L1S (formerly

Table 3 An overview of the

Institution Products Constellation
available IGS MGEX products
as of October 2015 CNES/CLS Satellite orbits and clocks (15 min) GPS ? GLO ? GAL
Satellite and station clocks (30 s)
CODE Satellite orbits and clocks (15 min) GPS ? GLO ? GAL ? BDS ? QZS
Satellite and station clocks (5 min)
Earth orientation parameters (12 h)
Biases (1 d)
GFZ Satellite orbits and clocks (15 min) GPS ? GLO ? GAL ? BDS ? QZS
Satellite and station clocks (30 s/5 min)
Earth orientation parameters (1 d)
Biases (1 d)
JAXA Satellite orbits and clocks (5 min) GPS ? QZS
TUM Satellite orbits and clocks (5 min) GAL ? QZS
Wuhan Univ. Satellite orbits and clocks (15 min) GPS ? GLO ? GAL ? BDS ? QZS
Satellite and station clocks (5 min)
Earth orientation parameters (1 d)

123
20 GPS Solut (2017) 21:13–22

known as ‘‘L1-SAIF’’) and L6. The L1S is compatible with

the aviation-style SBAS (Satellite-Based Augmentation
System), which provides submeter-level accuracy wide-
area differential corrections, as well as integrity for safety-
of-life services. The L6 signal, on the other hand, is
designed to enable high-accuracy real-time positioning.
A joint research project between the Australian Coop-
erative Research Centre for Spatial Information (CRCSI)
and JAXA established between 2013 and 2015 aimed at
evaluating the feasibility of utilizing the QZSS L6 signal to
deliver high-accuracy real-time precise positioning for
Australian PNT users (Choy et al. 2015). The transmission
Fig. 5 Real-time PPP errors in kinematic mode using the QZSS L6
of regional or national messages for precise positioning is corrections. The results were based on data collected from September
of interest for Australia as its ground telecommunication 17, 2013, to September 22, 2013, at the RMIT GNSS reference station
network required for the implementation of the network- located in Melbourne, Australia (Choy et al. 2015)
RTK technique is limited and mainly concentrated in urban
areas. Transmission of GNSS corrections via a satellite link
allows large areas to be serviced. Figure 4 shows the per- Table 4 RMS errors of the real-time kinematic PPP solutions using
formance of static GPS PPP solutions for the RMIT GNSS the QZSS L6 signal
reference station in real time on August 1, 2013, using the QZSS L6 Corrections Horizontal (cm) Up (cm)
L6 signal with precise GPS satellite orbits and clocks
generated by JAXA. Figure 5 shows the accuracy of real- Type 12 (GPS only) 8.9 14.5
time kinematic GPS PPP using the L6 signal. Additional Type 12 (GPS ? GLO ? QZS) 3.8 6.8
information on this project can be found in Choy et al. Series of static GNSS data were collected at the RMIT GNSS refer-
(2015). Table 4 outlines the RMS values of the real- ence station in November 2014 and May 2015, and the data were
time kinematic PPP solutions, i.e., GPS-only and processed in kinematic PPP mode
GPS ? GLONASS ? QZSS, using the QZSS L6 signal.
The results were based on series of real-time GNSS data service will enable instantaneous centimeter-level posi-
collected at a GNSS reference station in November 2014 tioning accuracy in real time for the Japanese coverage
and May 2015 and the data processed in kinematic PPP area.
mode. Note that QZSS began transmission of satellite
corrections for GLONASS and QZSS in 2014. From 2018,
QZSS will transmit on the L6 signal centimeter-level Concluding remarks
‘‘augmentation data’’ generated by Mitsubishi Electric
Corporation and GEO?? to support SSR-RTK. This PPP is an elegant positioning technique that conforms to
the original intention of GPS usage, which is ‘‘single
receiver positioning.’’ PPP can in principle provide posi-
tioning solutions at centimeter-level accuracy anywhere in
the world, without the need of having one or more nearby
reference stations. PPP only requires a small number of
reference stations distributed globally, which makes this
mode of positioning highly attractive from the point of
view of costs and operationally complexity. The PPP
technique is especially useful for positioning and naviga-
tion in remote regions where ground-based CORS infras-
tructure is sparse or unavailable, as well as to cover a wide
area where investment in the establishment and operation
of a dense CORS infrastructure cannot be justified.
Although PPP presents definite advantages, its applicability
is currently limited by the long convergence time, of the
Fig. 4 Real-time PPP errors in static mode using the QZSS L6 (blue)
order of tens of minutes, even with implementation of
and the IGS (CLK-11, green) corrections. The data were collected on
August 1, 2013, at the RMIT GNSS reference station located in ambiguity resolution procedures and multi-GNSS obser-
Melbourne, Australia (Choy et al. 2015) vation processing.

123
GPS Solut (2017) 21:13–22 21

The key to instantaneous convergence for PPP is the References

availability of accurate ionospheric delay corrections. The
requirements on accuracy for these corrections are very Banville S, Langley R (2009) Improving real-time kinematic PPP
with instantaenous cycle-slip correction. In: Proceedings of ION
challenging, which currently mandates a dense well-dis-
GNSS 2009, Institute of Navigation, Savannah, USA. 22–25
tributed CORS infrastructure similar to that of network- September, pp 2470–2478
RTK. The attractiveness of PPP lies in the State Space Bertiger W, Desai S, Haines B, Harvey N, Moore A, Owen S, Weiss J
Representation of errors, which provides a high level of (2010) Single receiver phase ambiguity resolution with GPS
data. J Geodesy 84(5):327–337
flexibility and scalability. Fundamentally in regions where
Bisnath S, Collins P (2012) Recent developments in precise point
CORS infrastructure exists, RTK-like performance could positioning. Geomatica 66(2):375–385
be expected. With improved modeling of ionospheric delay Bisnath S, Gao Y (2009) Current state of precise point positioning and
error, the separation of CORS can be extended, from tens future prospects and limitations. Observing Our Changing Earth,
International Association of Geodesy Symposia, Springer, Ber-
to hundreds of kilometers. Fixed-PPP solutions would then
lin, Heidelberg 133: 615–623
be possible at all times and all locations. However, if this Chen J et al (2015) A simplified and unified model of multi-GNSS
system is expanded to a global scale without a dense CORS precise point positioning. Adv Space Res 55(1):125–134
network, then the performance would fundamentally be Choy S, Harima K, Li Y, Choudhury M, Rizos C, Wakabayashi Y,
Kogure S (2015) GPS Precise Point Positioning with the
equivalent to that of PPP.
Japanese Quasi-Zenith Satellite System LEX augmentation
PPP has come a long way and is capable of delivering corrections. J Navig 68(4):769–783
high-accuracy point positioning solutions in post-process- Collins P (2008) Isolating and estimating undifferenced GPS integer
ing mode, and more recently in real time, as demonstrated ambiguities. In: Proceedings ION NTM 2008, Institute of Naviga-
tion, San Diego, California, USA. 28–30 January, pp 720–732
both in commercial services and by academic researchers.
Collins P, Bisnath S (2011) Issues in ambiguity resolution for Precise
Nonetheless PPP still requires further algorithm develop- Point Positioning. In: Proceedings of ION GNSS 2011, Institute
ment to reduce the convergence time, e.g., triple-frequency of Navigation, Portland, Oregon, USA. 19–23 September,
PPP, as well as to provide quality indicators, along with pp 679–687
Collins P, Henton J, Mireault Y, Heroux P, Schmidt M, Dragert H,
accurate PPP solutions to gain industry acceptance for real-
Bisnath S (2009) Precise point positioning for real-time deter-
time use, especially for safety- and liability critical appli- mination of co-seismic crustal motion. In: Proceedings of ION
cations. What is also interesting now is we are seeing a GNSS 2009, Institute of Navigation, Savannah, USA. 22–25
shift in technological and infrastructure design so as to September, pp 2479–2488
Collins P, Lahaye F, Bisnath S (2012) External ionospheric
broadcast PPP corrections as an inherent value-added ser-
constraints for improved PPP-AR initialisation and a generalised
vice by GNSS satellites, e.g., in the case of QZSS and local augmentation concept. In: Proceedings of ION GNSS 2012,
Galileo, and perhaps also for BeiDou. This evolution would Institute of Navigation, Tennessee, USA. 17–21 September,
be significant as it would enhance the performance of tra- pp 3055–3065
Colombo O, Sutter A, Evans A (2004) Evaluation of precise,
ditional single receiver GNSS positioning, and would bring
kinematic GPS point positioning. In: Proceedings of ION GNSS
immense benefits to our society. 2004, Institute of Navigation, Long Beach, California, USA.
To conclude, PPP and RTK were originally developed 21–24 September, pp 1423–1430
independently of each other in order to support different Gao Y, Shen X (2002) A new method for carrier-phase-based precise
point positioning. Navigation 49(2):109–116
purposes. It is expected that these two modes of positioning
Ge M, Gendt G, Rothacher M, Shi C, Liu J (2007) Resolution of GPS
will likely coexist for many years to come. RTK will carrier-phase ambiguities in precise point positioning (PPP) with
continue to deliver GNSS users with high-accuracy daily observations. J Geodesy 82(7):389–399. doi:10.1007/
instantaneous positioning, while PPP will complement s00190-007-0208-3
Geng J (2010) Rapid integer ambiguity resolution in GPS precise
RTK by providing the flexibility, scalability and efficiency
point positioning. Ph.D., The University of Nottingham
to meet the demand of future PNT applications. Geng J, Bock Y (2013) Triple-frequency GPS precise point
positioning with rapid ambiguity resolution. J Geodesy
Acknowledgments The authors wish to acknowledge the efforts of 87(5):449–460
all the entities contributing to the IGS for providing products for PPP; Geng J, Meng X, Dodson A, Teferle F (2010) Integer ambiguity
Ken Harima from RMIT University, Xiaodong Ren from Wuhan resolution in precise point positioning: method comparison.
University and Paul Collins from Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) J Geodesy 84(9):569–581. doi:10.1007/s00190-010-0399-x
who provided some of the figures and results presented herein; col- Hèroux P et al (2004) products and applications for precise point
leagues who provided insight, data and stimulating discussions that positioning—moving towards real-time. In: Proceedings of ION
greatly assisted in the preparation of this paper. The authors gratefully GNSS 2004 Meeting, Institute of Navigation, Long Beach,
acknowledge the anonymous reviewers for carefully reading the paper California, USA. 21–24 September, pp 1832–1843
and providing constructive comments. This paper was produced as Hèroux P, Kouba J (2001) GPS precise point positioning using IGS
part of the work of the International Association of Geodesy (IAG) orbit products. Phys Chem Earth A 26(6–8):573–578
Working Group 4.5.2: Precise Point Positioning and Network-RTK Juan JM et al (2012) Enhanced precise point positioning for GNSS
and the International Federation of Surveyors (FIG) Working Group users. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote 50(10):4213–4222. doi:10.
5.4: GNSS. 1109/Tgrs.2012.2189888

123
22 GPS Solut (2017) 21:13–22

Kouba J (2009) A Guide to using International GNSS Service (IGS) Zumberge J, Webb F, Bar-Sever Y (2001) Precise post processing of
Products. http://igscb.jpl.nasa.gov/components/usage.html GPS data products and services from JPL. In: Proceedings of
Lauricheese D (2015) Handling the biases for improved triple- ION NTM 2001, Institute of Navigation, Long Beach, CA,
frequency PPP convergence. GPS World. April 2015 22–24 January, 250–253
Laurichesse D, Mercier F, Bertias J, Broca P, Cerri L (2009) Integer
ambiguity resolution on undifferenced GPS phase measurements
and its applications to PPP and satellite precise orbit determi- Suelynn Choy is senior lecturer
nation navigation. Navigation 56(2):135–149 of Surveying and Geodesy at
Li X, Zhang X, Ge M (2010) Regional reference network augmented RMIT University, Melbourne,
precise point positioning for instantaneous ambiguity resolution. Australia. Her research interests
J Geodesy 85(3):151–158 are in the areas of GNSS precise
Li X, Zhang X, Ren X, Fritsche M, Wickert J, Schuh H (2015) Precise positioning and atmospheric
positioning with current multi-constellation Global Navigation remote sensing. Suelynn is cur-
Satellite Systems: GPS, GLONASS, Galileo and BeiDou. Sci rently the co-chair of the IAG
Rep UK. doi:10.1038/srep08328 Working Group 4.4.2 on Integer
Montenbruck O, Steigenberger P, Khachikyan R, Weber G, Langley Ambiguity Resolution for
R, Mervart L, Hugentobler U (2014) IGS-MGEX: preparing the Multi-GNSS PPP and PPP-RTK
ground for multi-constellation GNSS science. Inside GNSS, and FIG Working Group 5.4 on
January/February 2014 GNSS.
Ren X, Choy S, Harima K, Zhang X (2015) Multi-constellation GNSS
precise point positioning using GPS, GLONASS and BeiDou in
Australia. In: IGNSS Symposium Gold Coast, Australia, 14–16
July, paper 52
Sunil Bisnath is an Associate
Rizos C, Janssen V, Roberts C, Grinter T (2012) Precise point
Professor of Geomatics Engi-
positioning: is the era of differential GNSS positioning drawing
neering in the Department of
to an end? In: Paper presented at the FIG Working Week 2012,
Earth and Space Science and
Rome, Italy, 6–10 May, paper 5909
Engineering at the Lassonde
Seepersad G, Bisnath S (2013) Integrity monitoring in Precise Point
School of Engineering at York
Positioning. In: Proceedings of ION GNSS 2013, Institute of
University in Toronto, Canada.
Navigation, Nashville, Tennessee, USA. 16–20 September
His research interests over the
Seepersad G, Bisnath S (2014) Challenges in assessing PPP
past two decades focus on pre-
performance. J Appl Geodesy 8(3):205–222
cise GNSS positioning and
Shi J (2012) Precise point positioning integer ambiguity resolution
navigation for a multitude of
with decoupled clocks. Ph.D., University of Calgary
applications. He holds Honors
Tegedor J, Ovstedal O (2013) Triple carrier precise point positioning
B.Sc. and M.Sc. in Surveying
(PPP) using GPS L5. Surv Rev 46(337):288–297. doi:10.1179/
Science from the University of
1752270613Y.0000000076
Toronto and a Ph.D. in Geodesy
Tegedor J, Ovstedal O, Vigen E (2014) Precise orbit determination
and Geomatics Engineering from the University of New Brunswick.
and point positioning using GPS, GLONASS, Galileo and
BeiDou. J Geod Sci 4(1):2081–9943
Teunissen P (1997) On the GPS widelane and its decorrelating Chris Rizos is Professor of
property. J Geodesy 71(9):577–587 Geodesy and Navigation at the
Teunissen P, Khodabandeh A (2015) Review and principles of PPP- University of New South Wales,
RTK methods. J Geodesy 89(3):217–240. doi:10.1007/s00190- Sydney, Australia. Chris is the
014-0771-3 immediate past president of the
Witchayangkoon B (2000) Elements of GPS precise point position- International Association of
ing. Ph.D., The University of Maine, USA Geodesy (IAG) and co-chair of
Wübbena G, Schmitz M, Andreas B (2005) PPP-RTK: precise point the Multi-GNSS Asia Steering
positioning using state-space representation in RTK networks. Committee. Chris is a Fellow of
In: Proceedings of ION GNSS 2005, Institute of Navigation, the IAG, a Fellow and current
Long Beach, California, USA. 13–16 September, pp 2584–2594 president of the Australian
Zhang X, Li X (2012) Instantaneous re-initialization in real-time Institute of Navigation, and a
kinematic PPP with cycle slip fixing. GPS Solut 16(3):315–327 Fellow of the US Institute of
Zumberge J, Heflin M, Jefferson D, Watkins M, Webb F (1997) Navigation.
Precise point positioning for the efficient and robust analysis of
GPS data from large networks. J Geophys Res 102(B3):
5005–5017

123