S. Krauss
Austrian Academy of Sciences
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by S. Krauss.
Earth, Planets and Space | 2012
H. Lammer; M. Güdel; Yuri N. Kulikov; Ignasi Ribas; T. V. Zaqarashvili; Maxim L. Khodachenko; K. G. Kislyakova; Hannes Gröller; P. Odert; M. Leitzinger; Bibiana Fichtinger; S. Krauss; Walter Hausleitner; Mats Holmström; J. Sanz-Forcada; Herbert I. M. Lichtenegger; Arnold Hanslmeier; V. I. Shematovich; Dmitry V. Bisikalo; H. Rauer; M. Fridlund
It is shown that the evolution of planetary atmospheres can only be understood if one recognizes the fact that the radiation and particle environment of the Sun or a planet’s host star were not always on the same level as at present. New insights and the latest observations and research regarding the evolution of the solar radiation, plasma environment and solar/stellar magnetic field derived from the observations of solar proxies with different ages will be given. We show that the extreme radiation and plasma environments of the young Sun/stars have important implications for the evolution of planetary atmospheres and may be responsible for the fact that planets with low gravity like early Mars most likely never build up a dense atmosphere during the first few 100 Myr after their origin. Finally we present an innovative new idea on how hydrogen clouds and energetic neutral atom (ENA) observations around transiting Earth-like exoplanets by space observatories such as the WSO-UV, can be used for validating the addressed atmospheric evolution studies. Such observations would enhance our understanding on the impact on the activity of the young Sun on the early atmospheres of Venus, Earth, Mars and other Solar System bodies as well as exoplanets.
Journal of Geodesy | 2014
Oliver Baur; Heike Bock; Eduard Höck; Adrian Jäggi; S. Krauss; Torsten Mayer-Gürr; Tilo Reubelt; Christian Siemes; Norbert Zehentner
Several techniques have been proposed to exploit GNSS-derived kinematic orbit information for the determination of long-wavelength gravity field features. These methods include the (i) celestial mechanics approach, (ii) short-arc approach, (iii) point-wise acceleration approach, (iv) averaged acceleration approach, and (v) energy balance approach. Although there is a general consensus that—except for energy balance—these methods theoretically provide equivalent results, real data gravity field solutions from kinematic orbit analysis have never been evaluated against each other within a consistent data processing environment. This contribution strives to close this gap. Target consistency criteria for our study are the input data sets, period of investigation, spherical harmonic resolution, a priori gravity field information, etc. We compare GOCE gravity field estimates based on the aforementioned approaches as computed at the Graz University of Technology, the University of Bern, the University of Stuttgart/Austrian Academy of Sciences, and by RHEA Systems for the European Space Agency. The involved research groups complied with most of the consistency criterions. Deviations only occur where technical unfeasibility exists. Performance measures include formal errors, differences with respect to a state-of-the-art GRACE gravity field, (cumulative) geoid height differences, and SLR residuals from precise orbit determination of geodetic satellites. We found that for the approaches (i) to (iv), the cumulative geoid height differences at spherical harmonic degree 100 differ by only
Journal of Geophysical Research | 2015
S. Krauss; Manuela Temmer; Astrid M. Veronig; Oliver Baur; H. Lammer
Solar System Research | 2010
H. Lammer; Arnold Hanslmeier; J. Schneider; I. K. Stateva; M. Barthelemy; A. R. Belu; Dmitry V. Bisikalo; M. Bonavita; V. Eybl; V. Coudé du Foresto; M. Fridlund; R. Dvorak; S. Eggl; Jean-Mathias Grießmeier; M. Güdel; E. W. Günther; Walter Hausleitner; Mats Holmström; E. Kallio; Maxim L. Khodachenko; A. A. Konovalenko; S. Krauss; L. V. Ksanfomality; Yu. N. Kulikov; K. Kyslyakova; M. Leitzinger; R. Liseau; E. Lohinger; P. Odert; E. Palle
{\approx }10~\%
Solar System Research | 2011
V. I. Shematovich; Dmitry V. Bisikalo; S. Krauss; Walter Hausleitner; H. Lammer
Icarus | 2010
Herbert I. M. Lichtenegger; H. Lammer; Jean-Mathias Grießmeier; Yu. N. Kulikov; P von Paris; Walter Hausleitner; S. Krauss; H. Rauer
≈10%; in the absence of the polar data gap, SLR residuals agree by
Annales Geophysicae | 2010
Martin Ampferer; V. V. Denisenko; Walter Hausleitner; S. Krauss; G. Stangl; Mohammed Yahia Boudjada; H. K. Biernat
Annales Geophysicae | 2012
S. Krauss; B. Fichtinger; H. Lammer; Walter Hausleitner; Yu. N. Kulikov; Ignasi Ribas; V. I. Shematovich; Dmitry V. Bisikalo; Herbert I. M. Lichtenegger; T. V. Zaqarashvili; Maxim L. Khodachenko; A. Hanslmeier
{\approx }96~\%
Advances in Space Research | 2012
Andrea Maier; S. Krauss; Walter Hausleitner; Oliver Baur
Proceedings of the 4th International GOCE User Workshop, ESA Publication SP-696 | 2011
Roland Pail; H. Goiginger; Wolf-Dieter Schuh; Eduard Höck; Jan Martin Brockmann; T. Fecher; T. Mayer-Gürr; J. Kusche; Adrian Jäggi; Lars Prange; Daniel Rieser; Walter Hausleitner; Andrea Maier; S. Krauss; Oliver Baur; I. Krasbutter; Thomas Gruber
≈96%. From our investigations, we conclude that real data analysis results are in agreement with the theoretical considerations concerning the (relative) performance of the different approaches.