J Geod (2005) 79: 93102
DOI 10.1007/s00190-005-0446-1
O R I G I N A L A RT I C L E
J. L. Awange E. W. Grafarend Y. Fukuda
S. Takemoto
The application of commutative algebra to geodesy:
two examples
Received: 16 June 2003 / Accepted: 31 January 2005 / Published online: 14 May 2005
Springer-Verlag 2005
Abstract Algebra, in particular commutative algebra, is
applied here to provide a general unified solution to nonlinear
systems of equations encountered in geodesy. Starting with
the Abelian group, the polynomial ring is defined and
used to form generators of ideals. By applying Buchber-
ger or polynomial resultant algorithms, these generators are
reduced to simple structures often comprising a univariate
polynomial in one of the unknowns. The advantage of the
proposed unified approach is that it provides exact solutions
to geodetic nonlinear systems of equations without the tra-
ditional requirements of linearization, iterations or approx-
imate starting values. The commutative algebraic approach
therefore alleviates the need for isolated exact solutions to
various geodetic nonlinear systems of equations. The proce-
dure is applied to GPS meteorology to compute refraction
angles, and Helmerts one-to-one mapping of topographical
points onto the reference ellipsoid.
Keywords Commutative algebra Polynomial ring
Groebner basis Polynomial resultant Ideal GPS
meteorology Helmerts projection
1 Introduction
Algebra was widely applied in fields such as robotics (for
kinematic modelling of robots), engineering (for offset sur-
face construction in solid modelling), computer science (for
automated theorem proving), and computer-aided design
(CAD). An interested reader can find more elaborate liter-
J. L. Awange (B)
Maseno University, School of Environment and Earth Sciences,
P.O.Box 333, Maseno, Kenya.
E-mail: jawange@yahoo.co.uk
Y. Fukuda S. Takemoto
Department of Geophysics, Kyoto University,
Kitashirakawa Oiwake-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto City,
Kyoto 606-8502, Japan
E. W. Grafarend
Department of Geodesy and GeoInformatics
Geschwister-Scholl str.24D, 70174 Stuttgart, Germany
ature on commutative algebra in textbooks such as Cox et al.
(1998), Becker and Weispfenning (1998), McCoy and Janusz
(2001), Lauritzen (2003) and Irving (2004). A well-known
application of algebra to geodesy could perhaps be the use
of Legendre polynomials in spherical harmonic expansion
studies. A more recent application of algebra to geodesy is
evidenced in Lannes and Durand (2003) who propose a new
approach to differential GPS based on algebraic graph theory.
The present contribution proposes the application of com-
mutative algebra to provide a unified solution to nonlinear
systems of equations encountered in geodetic practice.
In geodesy, nonlinear systems of equations are often
encountered in several applications since they relate the obser-
vations (measurements) to the unknown parameters to be
determined. When the number of observations and the num-
ber of unknowns are equal, the unknown parameters may
be obtained by solving explicitly (in a closed form) nonlin-
ear systems of equations relating observations to unknown
parameters.
Because of the difficulty in obtaining reliable closed form
procedures, approximate numerical methods were adopted
in practice. Such procedures depend on some approximate
starting values, linearization and iterations. In some cases,
the solutions of numerical methods are unstable and the iter-
ations may fail to converge. For example, Cox et al. (1998,
pp. 2832) illustrate that systems of equations with exact
solutions become vulnerable to small errors introduced dur-
ing root-finding. When extending the partial solution to the
complete solutions of the system, errors may accumulate and
thus become too large. If the partial solution was derived by
iterative procedures, then the errors incurred during the root-
finding may blow up during the extension of the partial
solution to the complete solution (back substitution).
In some applications, symbolic rather than numerical
solutions are desired. In such cases, explicit procedures are
usually employed. The resulting symbolic expressions often
consist of univariate polynomials relating unknown parame-
ters (unknown variables) to known variables (observations).
By inserting known values into these univariate polynomials,
numerical solutions are readily computed for the unknown
94
Fig. 1 Tetrahedron for closed form 3D-resection
variables. Advantages of explicit solutions have been listed
by Merrit (1949). In geodesy for example, the minimum dis-
tance mapping (MDM) problem (Grafarend and Lohse 1991)
relates a point on the Earths topographical surface uniquely
(one-to-one) to a point on the international reference ellip-
soid. The solution of such an optimization problem requires
that the equations be solved explicitly.
The drawback experienced with explicit solutions was
partly because the methods required extensive computations
for the results to be obtained, and partly because the resulting
symbolic expressions were too large and required computers
with large storage capacity. Until recently, computers could
hardly handle large computations due to lack of fast central
processing units (CPUs), shortage of random access mem-
ory (RAM) and limited hard disk storage capacity. The other
setback experienced by explicit procedures was that some
of the methods, especially those from algebraic fields, were
formulated based on theoretical concepts that were hard to
realize or comprehend without the help of computers. For a
long time, these setbacks hampered progress of the explicit
procedures.
The advances made in computer technology in recent
years, however, have led to improvements in explicit compu-
tational procedures, which hitherto were difficult to achieve.
Apart from the improvements in the existing computational
procedures, new computational techniques are continuously
being added with the aim of optimizing computational speed
and efficiency. The commutative algebraic method discussed
herein lies in this category. With the proposed unified com-
mutative algebraic approach to geodetic nonlinear systems of
equations, this contribution hopes to alleviate the laborious
task of having to develop exact solution for each individual
nonlinear system of geodetic equations that is encountered
in practice.
The proposed procedure is applied in this study to solve
the problems of bending (refraction) angles in GPS meteo-
rology and Helmerts projection of topographical points to
the international reference ellipsoid. We organize the pre-
sentation as follows: in Sect. 2, we present the unified com-
mutative algebraic solution together with Theorem 2.1 that
allows us to convert geodetic nonlinear systems of equations
into algebraic (polynomials). Section 3 applies the proposed
procedure to solve nonlinear problems encountered in GPS
meteorology and topographic mapping.
J. L. Awange et al.
2 A unified commutative algebraic solution
In geodesy, we normally work with a set of finite polynomi-
als P over the field of real numbers R in a finite number n of
different variables expressed as
P = R[x1 , . . . , xn ]. (1)
Consider a 3D resection problem where horizontal and
vertical directions were measured from an unknown station
P1 to three known stations {P1 , P2 , P3 } in Fig. 1.
The measured directions are then converted to the dimen-
sionless space angles and related to the unknown distances
{x1 , x2 , x3 } through nonlinear systems of polynomial equa-
tions (e.g., Grafarend et al. 1989, Eq. 1.30, p. 128)
2
x1 + 2a12 x1 x2 + x22 + aoo = 0
2
x2 + 2b23 x2 x3 + x32 + boo = 0 (2)
x32 + 2c31 x3 x1 + x12 + coo = 0,
Equation (2) has some common features from the point of
view of modern commutative algebra. All three equations
in Eq. (2) are polynomials in three variables or unknowns
{x1 , x2 , x3 }, which here stand for unknown distances. The
coefficients of these variables are constants from the field of
reals R.
Using the basic properties of the usual addition (+) and
multiplication (*), we can formulate the following axioms:
a, b, c R
In modern algebra, any set with the axioms {G1+, G2+,
G3+} or {G1, G2, G3} is said to be a group. In addi-
tion, if the group operation is commutative, then the group is
called an Abelian group. Examples of groups include:
(a) The group of integers Z under addition.
(b) The group of non-zero rational numbers Q under multi-
plication.
(c) The set of rotations about the origin in the Euclidean
plane under the operation of composite functions.
The elements of the first two examples are numbers, and
being group with respect to the selected operations is self-
evident. In the third example, the element of group is not a
number, but a rotational operation, and the group operation
The application of commutative algebra to geodesy: two examples 95

Axiom Addition Multiplication

(a, b) =: a + b (a, b) =: a b
1 Associativity G1+ : (a + b) + c G1 : (a b) c
= a + (b + c) = a (b c)
(additive associativity) (multiplicative associativity)
2 Identity G2+ : a + 0 = a G2 : a 1 = a
(additive identity, (multiplicative identity,
neutral element) neutral element)
3 Inverse G3+ : a + (a) = 0 G3 : a a1 = 1
(additive inverse) (multiplicative inverse)
4 Commutativity G4+ : a + b = b + a G4 : a b = b a
(additive commutativity, (multiplicative commutativity,
Abelian axiom) Abelian axiom)

Axiom Comments
1 dist. D1 +; a (b + c) = a b + a c Left and Right
(a + b) c = a c + b c additive distributivity w.r.t
internal multiplication

is the composition of two rotations. This example shows that
the elements of a group may be of any nature, provided that
the group operation is properly defined.
Furthermore, we know that in the case of the first two
examples, apart from the group operations, there are other
operations too. These operations are connected with each
other in the so-called distributive property, which can be pos-
tulated as follows:
The algebraic structure that holds these properties is called
a commutative ring. The set of real numbers is a simple
example of a ring with respect to usual addition and mul-
tiplication 
operations. If two polynomials
 be given such that
f1 (x) = ai x i and f2 (x) = bj x j , then two binary
i j
addition and multiplication operations can be defined
on these polynomials such that:
 element of ideal I . We now search for solutions {x1 , . . . , xn }
(a) Addition: f1 (x) + f2 (x) = ck x k ,
k where every element of I gets 0. This is equivalent to express-
ck = ak + bk , ck R
 the resection problem in Sect. 2.2 becomes
(b) Multiplication: f1 (x).f2 (x) = ck x k , ck
k
= ai bj , ck R.
i+j =k
With these operations, polynomials form a commutative ring,
which is often called a polynomial ring. Designated P , a
polynomial ring is represented by n unknown variables xi
over R and is expressed as P := R [x1 , . . ., xn ] . Polynomial
rings behave much the same as a ring of numbers and can
be manipulated as seen above. Their derivatives follow Leib-
nizs rule and are defined via linearity. For polynomial rings,
ideals {I } are defined. An ideal is constructed by a family
of generators consisting of the set of linear combinations of
these generators with polynomial coefficients. Let f1 , . . . , fs
and c1 , . . . , cs be polynomials in R [x1 , . . . , xn ], then
< f1 , . . . , fs >
 s  f2 = 2y 2 x 2 ,

w= ci fi , c1 , . . . , cs R [x1 , . . . ., xn ] .
i=1
< f1 , . . . ., fs > is an ideal, and if a subset I R [x1 , . . ., xn ]
is an ideal, it must satisfy the following conditions Cox et al.
(1997, p. 29)
0 I,
If f, g I, then f +g I (i.e. {I } is an additive subgroup
of the additive group of the field R)
If f I and c R [x1 , . . ., xn ], then cf I (i.e. I is
closed under multiplication ring element).
In geodesy, we deal with finitely generated ideals of P
such that
I = g1 P + g2 P + + gn P
=: {g1 , . . . , gn } P , (4)

i.e., every polynomial of the form ci pi , where ci P is
i
ing the generators g1 , . . . , gn of the ideal I equal to 0. Hence
{x12 + 2a12 x1 x2 + x22 + aoo , x22 + 2b23 x2 x3 + x32 + boo , x32
+2c31 x3 x1 + x12 + coo } I. (5)
An easier structure of an ideal is now sought, namely
an easier set of generators. In order to obtain this set, one
employs the Buchberger (2001) algorithm that computes the
Groebner basis. This algorithm strongly depends on the cho-
sen polynomial order and returns a minimal basis with respect
to this chosen polynomial order. In particular, the lexico-
graphic ordering is preferable since it returns a univariate
polynomial as one of its bases. Let us consider an example
of Buchberger (2001)
Consider the polynomials in a set F (x, y) = {f1 , f2 } to
have as their elements
f1 = xy 2y
(6)
(3) where {f1 , f2 } I are the generators of the ideal I . We
now seek a simplified set of generators of this ideal using
96 J. L. Awange et al.

the Buchberger algorithm. This simplified set of generators
is called the Groebner basis, and is computed by reducing the
set formed by Eq. (6) into another set G of F as
G := {2x 2 + x 3 , 2y + xy, x 2 + 2y 2 }. (7) order l = 3 as expected.
In Mathematica software, using the lexicographic order x
comes before y, the Groebner basis can simply be computed
by entering the command (see e.g., Awange and Grafarend
2003b)
GroebnerBasis[F, {x, y}]. (8)
The set G in Eq. (7) contains one set of univariate polyno-
mials 2x 2 + x 3 that can easily be solved using the roots
command in Matlab (e.g., Hanselman and Littlefield 1997,
p. 146) for solutions {x = 0, x = 0, x = 2}, and substituted
in any of the remaining elements of the set to solve for y. The
solutions of G, i.e., the roots {x = 0, x = 0, x = 2}), sat-
isfy those of F . As an alternative to computing the Groebner
basis, the polynomial resultant approach (e.g., Awange and
Grafarend 2003c) could be used to directly solve Eq. (6).
In order to be able to solve nonlinear systems of equations
in geodesy, they have to be expressed as elements of poly-
nomial rings defined above using Theorem 2.1 (i.e., Awange
and Grafarend 2003a).
Theorem 2.1. Given algebraic (polynomial) observational
equations (n observations, where n is the dimension of the
observation space Y) of order l in m variables (unknowns)
(m is the dimension of the parameter space X), the applica-
tion of a least squares solution to the algebraic observation
equations gives (2l 1) as the order of the set of nonlinear
algebraic normal equations. There exist m normal equations
of the polynomial order (2l 1) to be solved.
to make the observational equations algebraic or polyno-
mial, and implement a least squares solution, the objective
function which is of order l = 4 reduces by one to order
l = 3 upon differentiating once. The normal equations are of


The significance of the Theorem 2.1 is that all nonlinear
observation equations of interest are successfully converted
to algebraic or polynomial equations. Finally, the com-
mutative algebraic solution of nonlinear systems of equations
in geodesy is performed in the following steps:
Step 1: Using Theorem 2.1, convert any geodetic nonlinear
system of equations into algebraic (polynomials).
Step 2: Prepare the set of generators of ideal {I }, i.e., equate
the polynomials to 0.
Step 3: With the lexicographic ordering specified, employ
the Buchberger (2001) algorithm to compute the
Groebner basis of the generators in step 2. Alter-
natively, directly solve the systems of equations
formed by the generators using polynomial resul-
tants (e.g., Awange and Grafarend 2003c).
Step 4: From the results of step 3, there exist a univariate
polynomial whose roots can be obtained using, e.g.,
Matlabs roots command.
Step 5: Substitute the roots of step 4 in the other elements of
Groebner basis to obtain solutions to the remaining
variables. The substitution steps could be avoided
by computing a reduced Groebner basis (Cox et al.
1998;Awange 2002) or solving directly for the poly-
nomial resultants of each variable (see Awange and
Grafarend 2003c).

Proof. Given nonlinear algebraic equations fi k 3 Two applications

{1 , . . . , m } expressed as
The commutative algebraic algorithm is applied to GPS-
f1 k{1 , . . . , m } meteorology to compute refraction (bending) angles and to
f2 k{1 , . . . , m } Helmerts projection of topographical points onto the refer-

. ence ellipsoid.
(9)
.
.
fn k{1 , . . . , m }. 3.1 GPS-meteorology: solution of bending angles
and the order considered as l, we write the objective function In space-borne GPS meteorology, high-flying GPS satellites
to be minimized as transmit their signals to be received by low-Earth orbiting
f  = f1 + + fn | fi k{1 , . . . , m }
2 2 2
(10) (LEO) satellites. As the GPS signals traverse the atmosphere,
they remotely sense profiles of, e.g., temperature, pressure
and obtain the partial derivatives (first derivatives) of Eq. (10) and water vapour. Ground-based GPS meteorology comprises
with respect to the unknown variables {1 , . . . , m }. The order GPS satellites and ground-based GPS receivers. It is mainly
of Eq. (10), which is l 2 , then reduces to (2l 1) upon differ- involved with the determination of water vapour in the atmo-
entiating the objective function with respect to the variables sphere using the zenith delay.
1 , . . . , m , thus resulting in m normal equations of the poly- Essential for remote sensing using space-borne GPS-
nomial order (2l 1). meteorology is the ability to accurately measure the bend-
Using the example of GPS code pseudoranging or distance ing angle of the signal as it passes through the atmosphere.
equations, the order of the polynomials in the algebraic obser- Radio occultation with GPS takes place when a LEO satellite
vational equations is l = 2. If we take the pseudoranges views a transmitting GPS satellite, setting or rising behind the
squared (distances squared), a necessary procedure in order Earths limb. These signals are bent and retarded causing a
 The application of commutative algebra to geodesy: two examples
Fig. 2 Geometry of GPS occultation
delay in the arrival at the LEO satellite. Figure 2 shows the
occultation geometry. As the signal is bent, the total bending
angle {}, an impact parameter {a}, and a tangent radius {r}
define the ray passing through the atmosphere.
The refraction angle is related to atmospheric
parameters of temperature, pressure and water vapour via the
refractive index. The LEO receiver measures, at the required
sampling rate, the dual-frequency carrier-phases, the C/A and
P-code group delays, and the signal strength. The data is then
processed to remove errors arising from short-term oscillator
instabilities in the satellites and the receivers using at least
one ground station and at least one satellite that is not being
occulted. Once the observations are corrected for possible
sources of errors, the resulting Doppler shift is used to deter-
mine the refraction angle (Fig. 2). For more details, we
refer to Steiner (1998) and Wickert (2002).
The system of nonlinear trigonometric equations for refrac-
tion angles comprise two equations given as
vL cos(L L ) vG cos(G + G )
dLi
= +vL cos(L L )vG cos(G + G )rG sin G
dt
= rL sin L , (11)
where vL , vG are the projected LEO and GPS satellite veloc-
ities in the occultation plane, rL , rG the radius of tangent
points at LEO and GPS, respectively, and dLi /dt is the Dopp-
ler shift (see Fig. 2).
Equation (11) is normally solved using Newtons method
(e.g., Steiner 1998; Wickert 2002). In what follows, we ap-
ply the solution of commutative algebra to solve Eq. (11) in
closed form. First, we apply Theorem 2.1 to convert Eq. (11)
into algebraic (polynomial) form. Let us denote
 g3 = (a54 d12 a5 a63 d2 + a52 a62 d6 a53 a6 d9 )
x = sin G , y = sin L , a1 = vL cos L , a2 = vL sin L
a3 = vG cos G , a4 = vG sin G , a5 = rG , a6 = rL ,
(12)
where the signs of the velocities change depending on the
directions of motion of the satellites. Applying the trigono-
metric addition formulae to Eq. (12) leads to
a1 cos L + a2 y + a3 cos G + a4 x = a
(13)
a5 x + a6 y = 0.
In order to eliminate the trigonometric terms cos L and
cos G appearing in Eq. (13), they are taken to the right-hand
side, and the resulting expression squared is
97
(a2 y + a4 x a)2 = (a1 cos L a3 cos G )2 . (14)
Equation (14) results in an expression having only the trigo-
nometric product 2a1 a3 cos L cos G on the right-hand side
once the squared trigonometric values cos2 L and cos2 G
were replaced by variables {y, x}, and applying the trigo-
nometric Pythagorean theorem of a unit circle. The resulting
expression is arranged so as to have only 2a1 a3 cos L cos G
on the right-hand side. Squaring both sides of the re-arranged
expression and replacing the resulting squared trigonomet-
ric values cos2 L and cos2 G completes the conversion of
Eq. (11) into algebraic form
d1 x 4 + d2 x 3 + d3 x 3 y + d4 x 2 + d5 x 2 y 2 + d6 x 2 y + d7 x
+d8 xy 3 + d9 xy 2 + d10 xy + d00 = 0 (15)
a5 x + a6 y = 0,
where d00 = d11 y 4 + d12 y 3 + d13 y 2 + d14 y + d14 . The
coefficients d1 , ..., d15 are listed in Appendix B. The alge-
braic geometry of Eq. (15) is an intersection of a fourth-order
polynomial (i.e., quartic) and a line (Fig. 3), indicating that
there exist four solutions to the nonlinear system of equations
(Eq. 11).
Next, the commutative algebraic algorithm is used to
compute the Groebner basis of Eq. (15). Note that the polyno-
mials of Eq. (15) are generators of ideal I in Eq. (4). Applying
the reduced Groebner basis (see, e.g., Awange 2002) leads to
univariate polynomials
h4 x 4 + h3 x 3 + h2 x 2 + h1 x + h0 = 0
(16)
g4 y 4 + g3 y 3 + g2 y 2 + g1 y + g0 = 0
with the coefficients as
h4 = (a64 d1 + a54 d11 a5 a63 d3 + a52 a62 d5 a53 a6 d8 )
h3 = (a53 a6 d12 + a64 d2 a5 a63 d6 + a52 a62 d9 )
h2 = (a5 a63 d10 + a52 a62 d13 + a64 d4 )
h1 = (a5 a63 d14 + a64 d7 )
h0 = a64 d1 5
and
g4 = (a64 d1 + a54 d11 a5 a63 d3 + a52 a62 d5 a53 a6 d8 )
g2 = (a53 a6 d10 + a54 d13 + a52 a62 d4 )
g1 = (a54 d14 a53 a6 d7 )
g0 = a54 d15
Four solutions are obtained from Eq. (16) for both x and y
using, e.g., the roots command in Matlab software as x =
roots[ h4 h3 h2 h1 h0 ] and y = roots[ g4 g3 g2 g1 g0 ]. An
alternative solution of Eq. (15) would be by the use of the
Sylvester resultant approach, which leads to identical results
as those of reduced Groebner basis. We refer to Awange et al.
(2004) for the use of the Sylvester resultant approach to solve
Eq. (15).
98 J. L. Awange et al.

5 Graphic solution of occultation bending angle

x 10
4

quartic polynomial f(X,Y)=0

3.5 line aX+bY=0

2.5

2
f(X,Y)

1.5

0.5

0.5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
X,Y

Fig. 3 Algebraic curve for the solution of system of nonlinear GPS atmospheric sounding refraction (bending) angle equations

Using Eq. (16), bending angles for CHAMP occultation
number 133 of 3rd May 2002 that occurred from UTC time
13:48:36 to 13:49:51.98 were computed. The results were
compared to those of classical Newtons approach (Steiner
1998). The computation was carried out for heights between
5 km and 40 km. Above 40 km, the bending angles are highly
influenced by the presence residual ionospheric errors and
are normally augmented by model values. Below 5 km, the
presence of water vapour significantly influences the results.
2 
Bending angles between the range of 540 km from satellite
data are more accurate and normally directly assimilated into
(so-called projection lines) that depart from P and intersect
Ea,a,b
2
either not at all or at two points. There is one projec-
tion line that is at minimum distance relating P to p. Fig-
ure 5 is an illustration of such a minimum distance mapping
(MDM).
Such an optimization problem is formulated by means of
the Lagrangean (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 ) as
1 1
(x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 ) := X x2 + x4
2
b2 (x12 + x22 ) + ax32 a 2 b2
numerical weather prediction models (Healey et al. 2003).
Figure 4 shows the deviation of the results between the
algebraic and Newtons iterative approaches. The nonlinear-
ity error, i.e., the error incurred in using iterative Newtons
approach in computing bending angles increases with decreas-
ing atmospheric height. For this occultation, from 40 km to
15 km, the deviation is within 2 104 (degrees) but in-
creases to 7 104 (degrees) for the region below 15 km
with the maximum absolute deviation of 0.00069 . A detailed
analysis of nonlinear GPS meteorology bending angles at
different diurnal solar times was presented in Awange et al.
(2004).
3.2 Helmerts projection of topographical points onto the
reference ellipsoid
In order to relate a point P on the Earths topographical
surface to a point p on the international reference ellip-
soid Ea,a,b
2
, one works with a bundle of half-straight lines
1
= (X x1 )2 + (Y x2 )2 + (Z x3 )2
2
+x4 b2 (x12 + x22 ) + ax32 a 2 b2 .
In the first case, we represent the Euclidean distance be-
tween the points P and p in terms of Cartesian coordinates
of P (X, Y, Z) and p(x1 , x2 , x3 ). The Cartesian coordinates
(x1 , x2 , x3 ) of the projection point P are unknown. The con-
straint that the point p is an element of the ellipsoid-of-
revolution
Ea,a,b
2
:= {x R3 |b2 (x12 + x22 )
+ a 2 x23 a 2 b2 = 0, R+ a > b R+ },
is substituted into the Lagrangean by means of the Lagrange
multiplier x4 , which is also unknown. (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 ) =
arg{(x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 ) = min} is the argument of the mini-
mum of the constrained Lagrangean (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 ). The re-
sult of the minimization procedure is presented by Lemma 3.1.
Lemma 3.1 (Constrained MDM). The functional (x1 , x2 ,
x3 , x4 ) is minimal, if the conditions in Eqs. (17) and (19) hold.
The application of commutative algebra to geodesy: two examples 99

Deviation of bending anlges due to nonlinearity assumption: Same impact parameter p

45

40

35

30
Height(km)

25

20

15

10

5
6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8
Bending angle(degree) x 10
4

Fig. 4 Deviation of computed bending angles due to nonlinearity

((x , x , x , x )) = 0 i = 1, 2, 3, 4. (17)
xi 1 2 3 4
On taking partial derivatives with respect to xi , we have
2
(i) (x = (X x1 ) + b x1 x4 = 0
1)

(ii) = (Y x ) + b2 x x = 0
2 2 4
(x2 )
(18)
2
(iii) (x = (Z x ) + a x x = 0
3)
3 3 4

1 2 2
(iv) (x =
) 2
[b (x1 + x22 )] + a 2 x32 a 2 b2 = 0
4

2
(x , x , x , x ) > 0 i, j {1, 2, 3}. (19)
xi xj 1 2 3 4
 
2 Fig. 5 Minimum distance mapping (MDM) of a point P on the
H3 := (x ) Earths topographic surface to a point p on the international reference
xi xj ellipsoid E2a,a,b

1 + b2 x4 0
= 0 1 + b2 x4 0 R33 (20)
0 0 1 + a 2 x4 Equation (17) provides the necessary condition to consti-
tute an extremum: the normal equations are bilinear. Products
eigenvalues
of the unknowns, for instance {x1 x4 , x2 x4 , x3 x4 }, and squares
|H3 I3 | = 0 (21) of the unknowns, for instance {x12 , x22 , x32 } appear. Finally, the
matrix of second derivatives H3 in Eq. (19) is positive defi-

1 = 2 := 1 + b2 x4 = xX = Y
x2
nite, which constitutes the sufficient condition to obtain a

1
(22) minimum. Fortunately, the matrix of second derivatives H3
is diagonal. Using Eqs. (18i)(18iii) together with Eq. (21)
3 := 1 + a 2 x4 = xZ
3 leads to Eq. (22), which are the eigenvalues of the Hesse
100 J. L. Awange et al.

matrix H3 . These values are 1 = 2 = X\x1 , 3 = Z\x3 ,
and must be positive.
Now, we apply the commutative algebra algorithm to
compute the nonlinear system of normal equations (Eqs.
(18i)(18iii)). For this case, we are fortunate that the non-
linear equations are already in polynomial form, and thus
do not require application of Theorem 2.1. The unknown in
these case are the Cartesian coordinates of the point on the
ellipsoid {x1 , x2 , x3 } and the Lagrangian multiplier x4 . Let us
write the ideal of polynomials formed by Eqs. (18i)(18iii)
in lexicographic order x1 > x2 > x3 > x4 (read: x1 before
x2 before x3 before x4 ) as
x1 + b2 x1 x4 X,
x2 + b x2 x4 Y,
2
I deal I :=< >.
2 2 x3 +2 a2 x3 x42 2 Z, 2 2
2
b x1 + b x2 a x3 a b
Expressing the generators of the ideal in Eq. (23) as
f1 := x1 + b2 x1 x4 X,
f2 := x2 + b2 x2 x4 Y,
f3 := x3 + a 2 x3 x4 Z,
f4 := b2 x12 + b2 x22 a 2 x32 a 2 b2 ,
i.e., f1 = f2 = f3 = f4 = 0, the Groebner basis of the
are computed 
generators characteristic for the MDM problem is computed
using the Buchberger algorithm as
GroebnerBasis[{f1 , f2 , f3 , f4 }, {x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 }].
The Groebner basis computation (Eq. 25) leads to 14 ele-
ments presented in Appendix A interpreted as follows:
The first expression is a univariate polynomial of order
four (quartic) in the Lagrange multiplier, i.e.,
4
c4 x4 + c3 x43 + c2 x42 + c1 x4 + co = 0
the values (x1 , x2 , x3 ) = (x, y, z) are finally produced. Once
the Cartesian coordinates on the ellipsoid {x1 , x2 , x3 } are
computed using Eq. (25), they are converted to Gauss ellip-
soidal coordinates {L, B, H } by means of the following closed
form solution ({X, Y, Z} T2 {x1 , x2 , x3 } Ea,a,b 2
to
{L, B, H })

H := (X x1 )2 + (Y x2 )2 + (Z x3 )2 (28)
Y x2 Y y
tan L = = (29)
X x1 Xx
Z x3
tan B = 
(X x1 )2 + (Y x2 )2
Z x3
(23)
=  (30)
(X x)2 + (Y y)2
Here, we replicate the example of Grafarend and Lohse
(1991, p. 108). Given the geometric parameters of the ellip-
soid of revolution: semi-major axis a = 6378137.000 m and
first numerical eccentricity-squared e2 = 0.00669437999013,
from which the semi-minor axis b can be computed. The input
(24) data are Cartesian coordinates of eight points on the surface
of the Earth presented in Table 1.
Using the input data from Table 1, the coefficients of
the univariate polynomial (Eq. 26) are computed as given in
Table 2.
From these coefficients, polynomial roots
using Matlabs roots command as x4 = roots c4 c3 c2 c1 c0 .
The obtained roots are then substituted in Eq. (27) to give
(25) the values of {x3 , x2 , x1 }. The computed results presented in
Table 3 are identical to those obtained by Grafarend and Loh-
se (1991, Table 4, p.108). Once the ellipsoidal Cartesian coor-
dinates are derived, the Jacobi ellipsoidal coordinates (ellip-
soidal longitude L, ellipsoidal latitude B and height H ) can
be computed using Eqs. (28), (29) and (30).

4 Concluding remark
c4 = a 6 b6

The present study has presented a unified commutative alge-

c3 = (2a 6 b4 + 2a 4 b6 ) braic approach to nonlinear systems of equations in geodesy,

followed by two examples. By converting geodetic nonlin-

c = (a 6 b2 +4a 4 b4 + a 2 b6 a 4 b2 X 2 a 4 b2 Y 2 a 2 b4 Z 2 )
2 ear systems of equations into algebraic (polynomials) via

Theorem 2.1, generators of ideal are formed. These genera-

c = (2a 4 b2 + 2a 2 b4 2a 2 b2 X 2 2a 2 b2 Y 2 2a 2 b2 Z 2 )
1 tors, which are multivariate systems of polynomial equations

co = (a 2 b2 b2 X 2 b2 Y 2 a 2 Z 2 ).
(26) Table 1 Cartesian coordinates of eight topographic test points

Point X(m) Y (m) Z(m)

With the admissible values x4 substituted in linear Eqs. (4),
1 3980192.960 0 4967325.285
(8) and (12) of the computed Groebner basis, i.e., 2 0 0 6356852.314
3 0 0 6357252.314
(1 + a 2 x4 )x3 Z 4 4423689.486 529842.355 4555616.169
5 4157619.145 664852.698 4775310.888

(1 + b2 x4 )x2 Y (27) 6 2125699.324 6012793.226 91773.648

7 5069470.828 3878707.846 55331.828
8 213750.930 5641092.098 2977743.624
(1 + b2 x4 )x1 X,
The application of commutative algebra to geodesy: two examples 101

Table 2 Computed polynomial coefficients

Point c0 c1 c2 c3 c4
1 7.7479e+22 1.3339e+41 1.3515e+55 4.3824e+68 4.4420e+81
2 5.1720e+22 1.3374e+41 1.3529e+55 4.3824e+68 4.4420e+81
3 2.5861e+23 1.3372e+41 1.3529e+55 4.3824e+68 4.4420e+81
4 2.5311e+24 1.3310e+41 1.3507e+55 4.3824e+68 4.4420e+81
5 1.8076e+23 1.3334e+41 1.3513e+55 4.3824e+68 4.4420e+81
6 5.1549e+21 1.3285e+41 1.3493e+55 4.3824e+68 4.4420e+81
7 2.6815e+24 1.3263e+41 1.3488e+55 4.3824e+68 4.4420e+81
8 4.5942e+24 1.3267e+41 1.3493e+55 4.3824e+68 4.4420e+81

Table 3 Computed ellipsoidal cartesian coordinates and the Lagrange factor

Point x1 (m) x2 (m) x3 (m) x4 (m2 )

1 3980099.549 0.000 4967207.921 5.808116e019
2 0.000 0.000 6356752.314 3.867016e019
3 0.000 0.000 6356752.314 1.933512e018
4 4420299.446 529436.317 4552101.519 1.897940e017
5 4157391.441 664816.285 4775047.592 1.355437e018
6 2125695.991 6012783.798 91773.503 3.880221e020
7 5065341.132 3875548.170 55286.450 2.017617e017
8 213453.298 5633237.315 2973569.442 3.450687e017

relating unknown variables to the known constants can be (2b2 Z + b4 x4 Z a 2 Z)x3 + a 4 b6 x43
reduced into simpler structures. When lexicographic ordering

is chosen, these simpler structures often comprise a univariate +(2a 4 b4 + a 2 b6 )x42 + (a 4 b2 + 2a 2 b4

polynomial that is solvable using, e.g., Matlab, Mathematica 3.
a 2 b2 X 2 a 2 b2 Y 2 b4 Z 2 )x4
and Maple computer softwares.

Acknowledgements The first author wishes to acknowledge the sup- +a 2 b2 b2 X 2 b2 Y 2 2b2 Z 2
port of the Japan Society of Promotion of Science (JSPS) for the finan-
cial support that allowed this study at Kyoto University, Japan. The
author is further grateful for the support and the good working atmo- 4. (1 + a 2 x4 )x3 Z
sphere provided by his hosts and co-authors Professors S. Takemoto
and Y. Fukuda of the Department of Geophysics, Graduate School of (a 4 2a 2 b2 + b4 )x32 + (2a 2 b2 Z 2b4 Z)x3 a 4 b6 x42
Science, Kyoto University, Japan. The data used for the GPS mete- 5.
orology example were provided by GeoForschungsZentrum Postdam
(GFZ), Germany. The authors express their utmost appreciation. Spe-
2a 4 b4 x4 a 4 b2 + a 2 b2 X 2 + a 2 b2 Y 2 + b4 Z 2 )
cial thanks to Dr. A. Steiner for the materials and discussions on the
GPS meteorology example. (2b2 a 2 + b4 x4 )x32 a 2 Zx3


+a 4 b6 x43 + (2a 4 b4 + 2a 2 b6 )x42

Appendix A 6.
+(a 4 b2 + 4a 2 b4 a 2 b2 X 2 a 2 b2 Y 2 b4 Z 2 )x
4
Computed Groebner basis for the MDM problem
+2a 2 b2 2b2 X 2 2b2 Y 2 2b2 Z 2
6 6 4
a b x4 + (2a 6 b4 + 2a 4 b6 )x43 + (a 6 b2 + 4a 4 b4 + a 2 b6 2
(X + Y 2 )x2 + a 2 b4 Y x42 + Y (a 2 b2 + b2 x32 b2 Zx3 )x4

a b X a b Y a b Z )x4
4 2 2 4 2 2 2 4 2 2 7.
+Y x32 Y 3 Y Zx3 Y X 2
1.
+(2a 4 b2 + 2a 2 b4 2a 2 b2 X 2 2a 2 b2 Y 2 2a 2 b2 Z 2 )x
4
8. (1 + b2 x4 )x2 Y
+(a b b X b Y a Z ).
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
9. (a 2 x3 b2 x3 + b2 Z)x2 a 2 x3 Y
4
(a Z 2a b Z + b Z)x3 a b x4
2 2 4 6 6 3

10. Y x1 Xx2

(2a b + a b )x4 (a b + 2a b a b X
6 4 4 6 2 6 2 4 4 4 2 2
11. Xx1 + a 2 b4 x42 + (a 2 b2 + b2 x32 b2 Zx3 )x4
2.
a 4 b2 Y 2 a 2 b4 Z 2 )x a 4 b2 + a 2 b2 X 2 +x32 Zx3 + Y x2 X2 Y 2
4

+a 2 b2 Y 2 + 2a 2 b2 Z 2 b4 Z 2 12. (1 + b2 x4 )x1 X
102 J. L. Awange et al.

13. (a 2 x3 b2 x3 + b2 Z)x1 a 2 Xx3 Awange JL, Grafarend E (2003b) Groebner basis solution of the three-
dimensional resection problem (P4P). J Geod 77:327337
Awange JL, Grafarend E (2003c) Multipolynomial resultant solution of
14. x12 + a 2 b4 x42 + (2a 2 b2 + b2 x32 b2 Zx3 )x4 the three-dimensional resection problem (P4P). Bollettino di Geo-
+2x32 2Zx3 + x22 X2 Y 2 desia e Science Affini 62:79102
Awange JL, Fukuda Y, Wickert J, Aoyama Y (2004) Analytic solution
of GPS atmospheric sounding refraction angles. Earth Planets Space
56:573587
Appendix B Becker T, Weispfenning V (1998) Grobner bases. A computational ap-
proach to commutative algebra. Graduate text in mathematics 141,
2nd edn. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York
Coefficients d1 , ..., d15 for GPS-meteorology Buchberger B (2001) Grobner bases. A short introduction for system
theorists. In: Moreno-Diaz R et al. (eds): EUROCAST 2001, LNCS
d1 = b42 2178, pp. 119
Cox D, Little J, OShea D (1997) Ideals, varieties, and algorithms. An
d2 = 2b4 b5 introduction to computational algebraic geometry and commutative
d3 = 2b4 b3 algebra. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York
Cox D, Little J, OShea D (1998) Using algebraic geometry. Graduate
d4 = 2b6 b4 + b52 + b72 Text in mathematics 185. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York
d5 = 2b1 b4 + b32 b72 Grafarend E, Lohse P (1991) The minimal distance mapping of the topo-
graphic surface onto the (reference) ellipsoid of revolution. Manu-
d6 = 2b3 b5 + 2b2 b4 scripta Geodaetica 16:92110
d7 = 2b6 b5 Grafarend E, Lohse P, Schaffrin B (1989) Dreidimensional-
er Ruckwartsschnitt. Zeitschrift fur Vermessungswesen 114:61
d8 = 2b1 b3 67,127137,172175,225234,278287
Hanselman D, Littlefield B (1997) The students edition of Matlab. Pren-
d9 = 2b1 b5 + 2b2 b3 tice Hall, New Jersey
d10 = 2b3 b6 + 2b5 b2 Healey S, Jupp A, Offiler D, Eyre J (2003) The assimilation of radio
occultation measurements. In: Reigber C, Luhr H, Schwintzer P (eds)
d11 = b12 First CHAMP mission results for gravity, magnetic and atmospheric
d12 = 2b1 b2 studies, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York
Irving RS (2004) Integers, polynomials and rings. Springer, Berlin Hei-
d13 = 2b1 b6 + b22 + b72 delberg New York
d14 = 2b2 b6 Lannes A, Durand S (2003) Dual algebraic formulation of differential
GPS. J Geod 77:2229
d15 = b62 b72 Lauritzen N (2003) Concrete abstract algebra. From numbers to
Grobner basis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
with McCoy NH, Janusz GJ (2001) Introduction to abstract algebra. Harcout
Academic Press, San Diego
b1 = a12 + a22 Merrit EL (1949) Explicit three-point resection in space. Phot Eng
b2 = 2aa2 15:649665
SteinerAK (1998) High resolution sounding of key climate variables us-
b3 = 2a2 a4 ing the radio occultation technique. Dissertation, Institute for Mete-
b4 = (a32 + a42 ) orology and Geophysics, vol 3, University of Graz
Wickert, J. (2002) Das CHAMP-Radiookkultationsexperiment: algo-
b5 = 2aa4 rithmen, Prozessierungssystem und erste Ergebnisse. Dissertation.
b6 = a 2 a12 a32 Scientific Technical Report STR02/07, GFZ Potsdam
b7 = 2a1 a3

References

Awange JL (2002) Groebner basis solution of planar resection. Survey

Rev 36(285):528543
Awange JL, Grafarend E (2003a) Explicit solution of the overdeter-
mined threedimensional resection problem. J Geod 76:605616