A queueing node with 3 servers. Server a is idle, and thus an arrival is given to it to process. Server b is currently busy and will take some time before it can complete service of its job. Server c has just completed service of a job and thus will be next to receive an arriving job.
举个常见的例子:超市收银台就是一个典型的排队系统(虽然还有其他例子,但这个是文献中最常用的)。顾客来到超市,在收银台办理结账,然后离开。由于每个收银员同一时间只能服务一位顾客,所以这是一个单服务窗口的排队系统。如果规定顾客看到收银员正忙就直接离开,这种情况就是无等待空间的排队系统;如果设置了可容纳 n 位顾客的等候区,则称为具有 n 个等待空间的排队系统。
单个队列(也称为排队节点)的行为可以用出生-死亡過程来描述。该过程刻画了队列中任务的到达和离开动态,以及系统中实时的任务数量。如果用 k 表示系统中的任务数量(包括正在处理的和在缓冲区等待的),那么每当有新任务到达时 k 值加1,任务完成离开时 k 值减1。
系统通过“出生”和“死亡”两种事件在不同的 k 值之间转换。对于每个任务,这些转换分别以到达率和离开率发生。在队列系统中,这些速率通常被认为是稳定的,不会随队列中任务数量的变化而改变,因此我们可以采用单位时间内的平均到达率和离开率。基于这一假设,该过程的平均到达率,平均离开率。
A birth–death process. The values in the circles represent the state of the system, which evolves based on arrival rates λi and departure rates μi.A queue with 1 server, arrival rate λ and departure rate μ
The steady state equations for the birth-and-death process, known as the balance equations, are as follows. Here denotes the steady state probability to be in state n.
The first two equations imply
and
.
By mathematical induction,
.
The condition leads to
which, together with the equation for , fully describes the required steady state probabilities.
Single queueing nodes are usually described using Kendall's notation in the form A/S/c where A describes the distribution of durations between each arrival to the queue, S the distribution of service times for jobs, and c the number of servers at the node.[6][7] For an example of the notation, the M/M/1 queue is a simple model where a single server serves jobs that arrive according to a Poisson process (where inter-arrival durations are exponentially distributed) and have exponentially distributed service times (the M denotes a Markov process). In an M/G/1 queue, the G stands for "general" and indicates an arbitrary probability distribution for service times.
Consider a queue with one server and the following characteristics:
: the arrival rate (the reciprocal of the expected time between each customer arriving, e.g. 10 customers per second)
: the reciprocal of the mean service time (the expected number of consecutive service completions per the same unit time, e.g. per 30 seconds)
n: the parameter characterizing the number of customers in the system
: the probability of there being n customers in the system in steady state
Further, let represent the number of times the system enters state n, and represent the number of times the system leaves state n. Then for all n. That is, the number of times the system leaves a state differs by at most 1 from the number of times it enters that state, since it will either return into that state at some time in the future () or not ().
When the system arrives at a steady state, the arrival rate should be equal to the departure rate.
A common basic queueing system is attributed to Erlang and is a modification of Little's Law. Given an arrival rate λ, a dropout rate σ, and a departure rate μ, length of the queue L is defined as:
.
Assuming an exponential distribution for the rates, the waiting time W can be defined as the proportion of arrivals that are served. This is equal to the exponential survival rate of those who do not drop out over the waiting period, giving:
In 1909, Agner Krarup Erlang, a Danish engineer who worked for the Copenhagen Telephone Exchange, published the first paper on what would now be called queueing theory.[9][10][11] He modeled the number of telephone calls arriving at an exchange by a Poisson process and solved the M/D/1 queue in 1917 and M/D/k queueing model in 1920.[12] In Kendall's notation:
M stands for "Markov" or "memoryless", and means arrivals occur according to a Poisson process
D stands for "deterministic", and means jobs arriving at the queue require a fixed amount of service
k describes the number of servers at the queueing node (k = 1, 2, 3, ...)
If the node has more jobs than servers, then jobs will queue and wait for service.
Leonard Kleinrock worked on the application of queueing theory to message switching in the early 1960s and packet switching in the early 1970s. His initial contribution to this field was his doctoral thesis at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1962, published in book form in 1964. His theoretical work published in the early 1970s underpinned the use of packet switching in the ARPANET, a forerunner to the Internet.
Systems with coupled orbits are an important part in queueing theory in the application to wireless networks and signal processing.[19]
Modern day application of queueing theory concerns among other things product development where (material) products have a spatiotemporal existence, in the sense that products have a certain volume and a certain duration.[20]
Problems such as performance metrics for the M/G/k queue remain an open problem.[12][14]
First in first out (FIFO) queue example Also called first-come, first-served (FCFS),[21] this principle states that customers are served one at a time and that the customer that has been waiting the longest is served first.[22]
Service capacity is shared equally between customers.[22]
Priority
Customers with high priority are served first.[22] Priority queues can be of two types: non-preemptive (where a job in service cannot be interrupted) and preemptive (where a job in service can be interrupted by a higher-priority job). No work is lost in either model.[23]
The next job to serve is the one with the smallest remaining processing requirement.[26]
Service facility
Single server: customers line up and there is only one server
Several parallel servers (single queue): customers line up and there are several servers
Several parallel servers (several queues): there are many counters and customers can decide for which to queue
Unreliable server
Server failures occur according to a stochastic (random) process (usually Poisson) and are followed by setup periods during which the server is unavailable. The interrupted customer remains in the service area until server is fixed.[27]
Customer waiting behavior
Balking: customers decide not to join the queue if it is too long
Jockeying: customers switch between queues if they think they will get served faster by doing so
Reneging: customers leave the queue if they have waited too long for service
Arriving customers not served (either due to the queue having no buffer, or due to balking or reneging by the customer) are also known as dropouts. The average rate of dropouts is a significant parameter describing a queue.
Queue networks are systems in which multiple queues are connected by customer routing. When a customer is serviced at one node, it can join another node and queue for service, or leave the network.
For networks of m nodes, the state of the system can be described by an m–dimensional vector (x1, x2, ..., xm) where xi represents the number of customers at each node.
The simplest non-trivial networks of queues are called tandem queues.[28] The first significant results in this area were Jackson networks,[29][30] for which an efficient product-form stationary distribution exists and the mean value analysis[31] (which allows average metrics such as throughput and sojourn times) can be computed.[32] If the total number of customers in the network remains constant, the network is called a closed network and has been shown to also have a product–form stationary distribution by the Gordon–Newell theorem.[33] This result was extended to the BCMP network,[34] where a network with very general service time, regimes, and customer routing is shown to also exhibit a product–form stationary distribution. The normalizing constant can be calculated with the Buzen's algorithm, proposed in 1973.[35]
Networks of customers have also been investigated, such as Kelly networks, where customers of different classes experience different priority levels at different service nodes.[36] Another type of network are G-networks, first proposed by Erol Gelenbe in 1993:[37] these networks do not assume exponential time distributions like the classic Jackson network.
In discrete-time networks where there is a constraint on which service nodes can be active at any time, the max-weight scheduling algorithm chooses a service policy to give optimal throughput in the case that each job visits only a single-person service node.[21] In the more general case where jobs can visit more than one node, backpressure routing gives optimal throughput. A network scheduler must choose a queueing algorithm, which affects the characteristics of the larger network.[38]
Mean-field models consider the limiting behaviour of the empirical measure (proportion of queues in different states) as the number of queues m approaches infinity. The impact of other queues on any given queue in the network is approximated by a differential equation. The deterministic model converges to the same stationary distribution as the original model.[39]
In a system with high occupancy rates (utilisation near 1), a heavy traffic approximation can be used to approximate the queueing length process by a reflected Brownian motion,[40]Ornstein–Uhlenbeck process, or more general diffusion process.[41] The number of dimensions of the Brownian process is equal to the number of queueing nodes, with the diffusion restricted to the non-negative orthant.
Fluid models are continuous deterministic analogs of queueing networks obtained by taking the limit when the process is scaled in time and space, allowing heterogeneous objects. This scaled trajectory converges to a deterministic equation which allows the stability of the system to be proven. It is known that a queueing network can be stable but have an unstable fluid limit.[42]
Queueing theory finds widespread application in computer science and information technology. In networking, for instance, queues are integral to routers and switches, where packets queue up for transmission. By applying queueing theory principles, designers can optimize these systems, ensuring responsive performance and efficient resource utilization.
Beyond the technological realm, queueing theory is relevant to everyday experiences. Whether waiting in line at a supermarket or for public transportation, understanding the principles of queueing theory provides valuable insights into optimizing these systems for enhanced user satisfaction. At some point, everyone will be involved in an aspect of queuing. What some may view to be an inconvenience could possibly be the most effective method.
Queueing theory, a discipline rooted in applied mathematics and computer science, is a field dedicated to the study and analysis of queues, or waiting lines, and their implications across a diverse range of applications. This theoretical framework has proven instrumental in understanding and optimizing the efficiency of systems characterized by the presence of queues. The study of queues is essential in contexts such as traffic systems, computer networks, telecommunications, and service operations.
Queueing theory delves into various foundational concepts, with the arrival process and service process being central. The arrival process describes the manner in which entities join the queue over time, often modeled using stochastic processes like Poisson processes. The efficiency of queueing systems is gauged through key performance metrics. These include the average queue length, average wait time, and system throughput. These metrics provide insights into the system's functionality, guiding decisions aimed at enhancing performance and reducing wait times.
References:
Gross, D., & Harris, C. M. (1998). Fundamentals of Queueing Theory. John Wiley & Sons.
Kleinrock, L. (1976). Queueing Systems: Volume I - Theory. Wiley.
Cooper, B. F., & Mitrani, I. (1985). Queueing Networks: A Fundamental Approach. John Wiley & Sons
^Tijms, H.C, Algorithmic Analysis of Queues, Chapter 9 in A First Course in Stochastic Models, Wiley, Chichester, 2003
^Kendall, D. G. Stochastic Processes Occurring in the Theory of Queues and their Analysis by the Method of the Imbedded Markov Chain. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics. 1953, 24 (3): 338–354. JSTOR 2236285. doi:10.1214/aoms/1177728975.
^Hernández-Suarez, Carlos. An application of queuing theory to SIS and SEIS epidemic models. Math. Biosci. 2010, 7 (4): 809–823. PMID 21077709. doi:10.3934/mbe.2010.7.809.
^Kendall, D.G.:Stochastic processes occurring in the theory of queues and their analysis by the method of the imbedded Markov chain, Ann. Math. Stat. 1953
^Pollaczek, F., Problèmes Stochastiques posés par le phénomène de formation d'une queue
^Ramaswami, V. A stable recursion for the steady state vector in markov chains of m/g/1 type. Communications in Statistics. Stochastic Models. 1988, 4: 183–188. doi:10.1080/15326348808807077.
^Morozov, E. Stability analysis of a multiclass retrial system withcoupled orbit queues. Proceedings of 14th European Workshop. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 17. 2017: 85–98. ISBN 978-3-319-66582-5. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-66583-2_6.
^Dimitriou, I. A Multiclass Retrial System With Coupled Orbits And Service Interruptions: Verification of Stability Conditions. Proceedings of FRUCT 24. 2019, 7: 75–82.
^Baskett, F.; Chandy, K. Mani; Muntz, R.R.; Palacios, F.G. Open, closed and mixed networks of queues with different classes of customers. Journal of the ACM. 1975, 22 (2): 248–260. S2CID 15204199. doi:10.1145/321879.321887.
^Bobbio, A.; Gribaudo, M.; Telek, M. S. Analysis of Large Scale Interacting Systems by Mean Field Method. 2008 Fifth International Conference on Quantitative Evaluation of Systems. 2008: 215. ISBN 978-0-7695-3360-5. S2CID 2714909. doi:10.1109/QEST.2008.47.
^Yamada, K. Diffusion Approximation for Open State-Dependent Queueing Networks in the Heavy Traffic Situation. The Annals of Applied Probability. 1995, 5 (4): 958–982. JSTOR 2245101. doi:10.1214/aoap/1177004602.
^Bramson, M. A stable queueing network with unstable fluid model. The Annals of Applied Probability. 1999, 9 (3): 818–853. JSTOR 2667284. doi:10.1214/aoap/1029962815.
The study of geodesics on an ellipsoid arose in connection with geodesy
specifically with the solution of triangulation networks. The
figure of the Earth is well approximated by an
oblate ellipsoid, a slightly flattened sphere. A geodesic
is the shortest path between two points on a curved surface, i.e., the analogue
of a straight line on a plane surface. The solution of a triangulation
network on an ellipsoid is therefore a set of exercises in spheroidal
trigonometry (Euler 1755).
If the Earth is treated as a sphere, the geodesics are
great circles (all of which are closed) and the problems reduce to
ones in spherical trigonometry. However, Newton (1687)
showed that the effect of the rotation of the Earth results in its
resembling a slightly oblate ellipsoid and, in this case, the
equator and the meridians are the only
closed geodesics. Furthermore, the shortest path between two points on
the equator does not necessarily run along the equator. Finally, if the
ellipsoid is further perturbed to become a triaxial ellipsoid (with
three distinct semi-axes), then only three geodesics are closed and one
of these is unstable.
The problems in geodesy are usually reduced to two main cases: the
direct problem, given a starting point and an initial heading, find
the position after traveling a certain distance along the geodesic; and
the inverse problem, given two points on the ellipsoid find the
connecting geodesic and hence the shortest distance between them.
Because the flattening of the Earth is small, the geodesic distance
between two points on the Earth is well approximated by the great-circle
distance using the
mean Earth radius—the relative error is
less than 1%. However, the course of the geodesic can differ
dramatically from that of the great circle. As an extreme example,
consider two points on the equator with a longitude difference of
179°59′; while the connecting great circle follows the
equator, the shortest geodesics pass within
180 km of either pole (the
flattening makes two symmetric paths passing close to the poles shorter
than the route along the equator).
Aside from their use in geodesy and related fields such as navigation,
terrestrial geodesics arise in the study of the propagation of signals
which are confined (approximately) to the surface of the Earth, for
example, sound waves in the ocean (Munk & Forbes 1989) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFMunkForbes1989 (幫助) and the
radio signals from lightning (Casper & Bent 1991). Geodesics are
used to define some maritime boundaries, which in turn determine the
allocation of valuable resources as such
oil and mineral rights. Ellipsoidal geodesics also
arise in other applications; for example, the propagation of radio waves
along the fuselage of an aircraft, which can be roughly modeled as a
prolate (elongated) ellipsoid
(Kim & Burnside 1986) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFKimBurnside1986 (幫助).
Geodesics are an important intrinsic characteristic of curved surfaces.
The sequence of progressively more complex surfaces, the sphere, an
ellipsoid of revolution, and a triaxial ellipsoid, provide a useful
family of surfaces for investigating the general theory of surfaces.
Indeed, Gauss's work on the
survey of Hanover, which involved
geodesics on an oblate ellipsoid, was a key motivation for his
study of surfaces
(Gauss 1828). Similarly, the existence of three closed geodesics
on a triaxial ellipsoid turns out to be a general property of
closed, simply connected surfaces; this was
conjectured by Poincaré (1905) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFPoincaré1905 (幫助) and proved by
Lyusternik & Schnirelmann (1929)
(Klingenberg 1982,§3.7).
There are several ways of defining geodesics
(Hilbert & Cohn-Vossen 1952,第220–221頁). A simple definition
is as the shortest path between two points on a surface. However, it is
frequently more useful to define them as paths with zero
geodesic curvature—i.e., the analogue of straight lines on a
curved surface. This definition encompasses geodesics traveling so far
across the ellipsoid's surface (somewhat less than half the
circumference) that other distinct routes require less distance.
Locally, these geodesics are still identical to the shortest distance
between two points.
By the end of the 18th century, an ellipsoid of revolution (the term
spheroid is also used) was a well-accepted approximation to the
figure of the Earth. The adjustment of triangulation networks
entailed reducing all the measurements to a reference ellipsoid and
solving the resulting two-dimensional problem as an exercise in
spheroidal trigonometry (Bomford 1952,Chap. 3).
Fig. 1. A geodesic AB on an ellipsoid of revolution. N is the north pole and EFH lie on the equator.
It is possible to reduce the various geodesic problems into one of two
types. Consider two points: A at latitude
φ1 and longitude λ1 and
B at latitude φ2 and longitude
λ2 (see Fig. 1). The connecting geodesic
(from A to B) is AB, of length
s12, which has azimuths α1 and
α2 at the two endpoints.[1] The two geodesic problems usually
considered are:
the direct geodesic problem or first geodesic problem, given A, α1, and s12, determine B and α2;
the inverse geodesic problem or second geodesic problem, given A and B, determine s12, α1, and α2.
As can be seen from Fig. 1, these problems involve solving the triangle
NAB given one angle, α1 for the direct
problem and λ12 = λ2 − λ1 for the
inverse problem, and its two adjacent sides.
In the course of the 18th century these problems were elevated
(especially in literature in the German language) to the
principal geodesic problems
(Hansen 1865,第69頁).
For an ellipsoid of revolution, the characteristic constant defining the
geodesic was found by Clairaut (1735). A
systematic solution for the paths of geodesics was given by
Legendre (1806) and
Oriani (1806) (and subsequent papers in
1808 and
1810).
The full solution for the direct problem (complete with computational
tables and a worked out example) is given by Bessel (1825).[2]
Much of the early work on these problems was carried out by
mathematicians—for example, Legendre,
Bessel, and Gauss—who
were also heavily involved in the practical aspects of surveying.
Beginning in about 1830, the disciplines diverged: those with an
interest in geodesy concentrated on the practical aspects such as
approximations suitable for field work, while mathematicians pursued the
solution of geodesics on a triaxial ellipsoid, the analysis of the
stability of closed geodesics, etc.
During the 18th century geodesics were typically referred to as "shortest
lines".[3]
The term "geodesic line" was coined by Laplace (1799b):
Nous désignerons cette ligne sous le nom de ligne géodésique [We
will call this line the geodesic line].
This terminology was introduced into English either as "geodesic line"
or as "geodetic line", for example (Hutton 1811),
A line traced in the manner we have now been describing, or deduced from
trigonometrical measures, by the means we have indicated, is called
a geodetic or geodesic line: it has the property of being
the shortest which can be drawn between its two extremities on the
surface of the Earth; and it is therefore the proper itinerary
measure of the distance between those two points.
In its adoption by other fields "geodesic line", frequently shortened,
to "geodesic", was preferred.[4]
This section treats the problem on an ellipsoid of revolution (both
oblate and prolate). The problem on a triaxial ellipsoid is covered in
the next section.
When determining distances on the earth, various approximate methods are
frequently used; some of these are described in the article on
geographical distance.
Consider an ellipsoid of revolution with equatorial radius
a and polar semi-axis b. Define the
flattening f = (a − b)/a, the eccentricity
e2 = f(2 − f), and the second eccentricity
e′ = e/(1 − f). (In most applications in geodesy, the
ellipsoid is taken to be oblate, a > b; however, the theory
applies without change to prolate ellipsoids, a < b, in
which case f, e2, and e′2 are
negative.)
Let an elementary segment of a path on the ellipsoid have length
ds. From Figs. 2 and 3, we
see that if its azimuth is α, then ds
is related to dφ and dλ by
where φ′ = dφ/dλ and L depends on
φ through ρ(φ) and
R(φ). The length of an arbitrary path between
(φ1, λ1) and (φ2, λ2) is
given by
where φ is a function of λ satisfying
φ(λ1) = φ1 and
φ(λ2) = φ2. The shortest path or geodesic
entails finding that function φ(λ) which minimizes
s12. This is an exercise in the
calculus of variations and the minimizing condition is given by the
Beltrami identity,
Fig. 4. The geometric construction for parametric latitude, β. A point P at latitude φ on the meridian (red) is mapped to a point P′ on a sphere of radius a (shown as a blue circle) by keeping the radius R constant.
Substituting for L and using Eqs. (1) gives
Clairaut (1735) first found this relation,
using a geometrical construction; a similar derivation is presented by
Lyusternik (1964,§10).[5] Differentiating this
relation and manipulating the result gives
(Jekeli 2012,Eq. (2.95))
(see Fig. 4 for the geometrical construction), and Clairaut's
relation then becomes
Fig. 5. Geodesic problem mapped to the auxiliary sphere.
Fig. 6. The elementary geodesic problem on the auxiliary sphere.
This is the sine rule of spherical
trigonometry relating two sides of the triangle NAB (see
Fig. 5), NA = ½π − β1, and
NB = ½π − β2 and their opposite angles
B = π − α2 and A = α1.
In order to find the relation for the third side
AB = σ12, the spherical arc length, and included
angle N = ω12, the spherical longitude, it is
useful to consider the triangle NEP representing a geodesic
starting at the equator; see Fig. 6. In this figure, the
variables referred to the auxiliary sphere are shown with the
corresponding quantities for the ellipsoid shown in parentheses.
Quantities without subscripts refer to the arbitrary point
P; E, the point at which the geodesic crosses
the equator in the northward direction, is used as the origin for
σ, s and ω.
Fig. 7. Differential element of a geodesic on a sphere.
If the side EP is extended by
moving P infinitesimally (see Fig. 7), we
obtain
(3)
Combining Eqs. (1) and (3) gives differential
equations for s and λ
Up to this point, we have not made use of the specific equations for an
ellipsoid, and indeed the derivation applies to an arbitrary surface of
revolution.[7]
Bessel now specializes to an ellipsoid in which
R and Z are related by
where Z is the height above the equator (see Fig. 4).
Differentiating this and setting
dR/dZ = −sinφ/cosφ gives
eliminating Z from these equations, we obtain
This relation between β and φ can be
written as
which is the normal definition of the
parametric latitude
on an ellipsoid. Furthermore, we have
so that the differential equations for the geodesic become
The last step is to use σ as the independent
parameter[8] in both of
these differential equations and thereby to express s and
λ as integrals. Applying the sine rule to the vertices
E and G in the spherical triangle
EGP in Fig. 6 gives
where α0 is the azimuth at E.
Substituting this into the equation for ds/dσ and
integrating the result gives
(4)
where
and the limits on the integral are chosen so that
s(σ = 0) = 0. Legendre (1811,第180頁) pointed out
that the equation for s is the same as the equation for the
arc on an ellipse
with semi-axes b(1 + e′2 cos2α0)1/2 and
b. In order to express the equation for
λ in terms of σ, we write
which follows from Eq. (3) and Clairaut's relation.
This yields
(5)
and the limits on the integrals are chosen
so that λ = λ0 at the equator crossing,
σ = 0.
In using these integral relations, we allow σ to
increase continuously (not restricting it to a range
[−π, π], for example) as the great circle,
resp. geodesic, encircles the auxiliary sphere, resp. ellipsoid. The
quantities ω, λ, and s
are likewise allowed to increase without limit. Once the problem is
solved, λ can be reduced to the conventional range.
This completes the solution of the path of a geodesic using the
auxiliary sphere. By this device a great circle can be mapped exactly
to a geodesic on an ellipsoid of revolution. However, because the
equations for s and λ in terms of the
spherical quantities depend on α0, the mapping is not
a consistent mapping of the surface of the sphere to the ellipsoid or
vice versa; instead, it should be viewed merely as a convenient tool for
solving for a particular geodesic.
There are also several ways of approximating geodesics on an ellipsoid
which usually apply for sufficiently short lines
(Rapp 1991,§6); however, these are typically comparable
in complexity to the method for the exact solution given above
(Jekeli 2012,§2.1.4).
Fig. 8. Meridians and the equator are the only closed geodesics. (For the very flattened ellipsoids, there are other closed geodesics; see Figs. 13 and 14).
Geodesic on an oblate ellipsoid (f = 1/50) with α0 = 45°.
Fig. 9. Latitude as a function of longitude for a single cycle of the geodesic from one northward equatorial crossing to the next.
Fig. 10. Following the geodesic on the ellipsoid for about 5 circuits.
Fig. 11. The same geodesic after about 70 circuits.
Fig. 12. Geodesic on a prolate ellipsoid (f = −1/50) with α0 = 45°. Compare with Fig. 10.
Before solving for the geodesics, it is worth reviewing their behavior.
Fig. 8 shows the simple closed geodesics which consist of the
meridians (green) and the equator (red). (Here the qualification
"simple" means that the geodesic closes on itself without an intervening
self-intersection.) This follows from the equations for the geodesics
given in the previous section.
For meridians, we have α0 = 0 and Eq. (5)
becomes λ = ω + λ0, i.e., the longitude will
vary the same way as for a sphere, jumping by π each time
the geodesic crosses the pole. The distance, Eq. (4), reduces to
the length of an arc of an ellipse with semi-axes a and
b (as expected), expressed in terms of parametric latitude,
β.
The equator (β = 0 on the auxiliary sphere,
φ = 0 on the ellipsoid) corresponds to
α0 = ½π. The distance reduces to the arc of a
circle of radius b (and nota),
s = bσ, while the longitude simplifies to
λ = (1 − f)σ + λ0. A geodesic that is nearly
equatorial will intersect the equator at intervals of
πb. As a consequence, the maximum length of a
equatorial geodesic which is also a shortest path is πb
on an oblate ellipsoid (on a prolate ellipsoid, the maximum length is
πa).
All other geodesics are typified by Figs. 9 to 11.
Figure 9 shows latitude as a function of longitude for a geodesic
starting on the equator with α0 = 45°. A full
cycle of the geodesic, from one northward crossing of the equator to the
next, is shown. The equatorial crossings are called nodes and the
points of maximum or minimum latitude are called vertices; the
vertex latitudes are given by
|β| = ±(½π − |α0|).
The latitude is an odd, resp. even, function of the longitude about the
nodes, resp. vertices. The geodesic completes one full oscillation in
latitude before the longitude has increased by 360°.
Thus, on each successive northward crossing of the equator (see
Fig. 10), λ falls short of a full circuit of
the equator by approximately 2π f sinα0 (for a
prolate ellipsoid, this quantity is negative and λ
completes more that a full circuit; see Fig. 12). For nearly all
values of α0, the geodesic will fill that portion of
the ellipsoid between the two vertex latitudes (see
Fig. 11).
Two additional closed geodesics for the oblate ellipsoid, b/a = 2/7.
Fig. 13. Side view.
Fig. 14. Top view.
If the ellipsoid is sufficiently oblate, i.e.,
b/a < ½, another class of simple closed geodesics is
possible (Klingenberg 1982,§3.5.19). Two such geodesics
are illustrated in Figs. 13 and 14. Here
b/a = 2/7 and the equatorial azimuth,
α0, for the green (resp. blue) geodesic is chosen to
be 53.175° (resp. 75.192°), so that the geodesic completes 2
(resp. 3) complete oscillations about the equator on one circuit of the
ellipsoid.
Solving the geodesic problems entails evaluating the integrals for the
distance, s, and the longitude, λ,
Eqs. (4) and (5). In geodetic applications, where
f is small, the integrals are typically evaluated as a
series; for this purpose, the second form of the longitude integral is
preferred (since it avoids the near singular behavior of the first form
when geodesics pass close to a pole). In both integrals, the integrand
is an even periodic function of period π. Furthermore, the
term dependent on σ is multiplied by a small quantity
k2 = O(f). As a consequence, the integrals can both be
written in the form
where B0 = 1 + O(f) and Bj = O(fj). Series
expansions for Bj can readily be found and the result
truncated so that only terms which are O(fJ) and larger are
retained.[9]
(Because the longitude integral is multiplied by
f, it is typically only necessary to retain terms up to
O(fJ−1) in that integral.) This prescription is
followed by many authors (Legendre 1806) (Oriani 1806)
(Bessel 1825) (Helmert 1880) (Rainsford 1955) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFRainsford1955 (幫助)
(Rapp 1993). Vincenty (1975a) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFVincenty1975a (幫助) uses J = 3
which provides an accuracy of about 0.1 mm for the WGS84
ellipsoid. Karney (2013) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFKarney2013 (幫助) gives expansions carried out for
J = 6 which suffices to provide full double precision
accuracy for |f| ≤ 1/50. Trigonometric
series of this type can be conveniently summed using
Clenshaw summation.
In order to solve the direct geodesic problem, it is necessary to find
σ given s. Since the integrand in the
distance integral is positive, this problem has a unique root, which
may be found using Newton's method, noting that the required
derivative is just the integrand of the distance integral.
Oriani (1833) instead uses series reversion so that
σ can be found without iteration;
Helmert (1880) gives a similar series.[10] The reverted series
converges somewhat slower that the direct series and, if
|f| > 1/100,
Karney (2013,addenda) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFKarney2013 (幫助) supplements the reverted series with
one step of Newton's method to maintain accuracy.
Vincenty (1975a) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFVincenty1975a (幫助) instead relies on a simpler (but slower)
function iteration to solve for σ.
It is also possible to evaluate the integrals (4) and (5)
by numerical quadrature (Saito 1970) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFSaito1970 (幫助) (Saito 1979) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFSaito1979 (幫助)
(Sjöberg & Shirazian 2012) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFSjöbergShirazian2012 (幫助) or to apply numerical techniques for the
solution of the ordinary differential equations, Eqs. (2)
(Kivioja 1971) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFKivioja1971 (幫助) (Thomas & Featherstone 2005) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFThomasFeatherstone2005 (幫助) (Panou et al. 2013) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFPanou_et_al.2013 (幫助). Such techniques can be used for arbitrary flattening
f. However, if f is small, e.g.,
|f| ≤ 1/50, they do not offer the speed
and accuracy of the series expansions described above. Furthermore, for
arbitrary f, the evaluation of the integrals in terms of
elliptic integrals (see below) also provides a fast and accurate
solution. On the other hand, Mathar (2007) has tackled the
more complex problem of geodesics on the surface at a constant altitude,
h, above the ellipsoid by solving the corresponding
ordinary differential equations, Eqs. (2) with
[ρ, ν] replaced by [ρ + h, ν + h].
Geodesics on an ellipsoid was an early application of
elliptic integrals. In particular,
Legendre (1811) writes the
integrals, Eqs. (4) and (5), as
(6)
(7)
where
and
and F(φ, k), E(φ, k), and
Π(φ, α2, k), are
incomplete elliptic integrals in the
notation of
DLMF (2010,§19.2(ii)).[11][12]
The first formula for the longitude in Eq. (7) follows directly
from the first form of Eq. (5). The second formula in
Eq. (7), due to Cayley (1870), is more
convenient for calculation since the elliptic integral appears in a
small term. The equivalence of the two forms follows from
DLMF (2010,Eq. (19.7.8)).
Fast algorithms for computing elliptic integrals are given by
Carlson (1995) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFCarlson1995 (幫助) in terms of
symmetric elliptic integrals.
Equation (6) is conveniently inverted using
Newton's method. The use of elliptic integrals provides a good
method of solving the geodesic problem for
|f| > 1/50.[13]
The basic strategy for solving the geodesic problems on the ellipsoid is
to map the problem onto the auxiliary sphere by converting
φ, λ, and s, to
β, ω and σ, to solve
the corresponding great-circle problem on the sphere, and to transfer the
results back to the ellipsoid.
In implementing this program, we will frequently need to solve the
"elementary" spherical triangle for NEP in Fig.
6 with P replaced by either A (subscript
1) or B (subscript 2). For this purpose, we can apply
Napier's rules for quadrantal triangles to the triangle NEP
on the auxiliary sphere which give
We can also stipulate that cosβ ≥ 0 and
cosα0 ≥ 0.[14]
Implementing this plan for the direct problem is straightforward. We
are given φ1, α1, and
s12. From φ1 we obtain
β1 (using the formula for the parametric latitude).
We now solve the triangle problem with P = A and
β1 and α1 given to find
α0, σ1, and
ω1.[15] Use
the distance and longitude equations, Eqs. (4) and
(5), together with the known value of λ1, to
find s1 and λ0. Determine
s2 = s1 + s12 and invert the distance equation to find
σ2. Solve the triangle problem with P = B
and α0 and σ2 given to find
β2, ω2, and α2.
Convert β2 to φ2 and substitute
σ2 and ω2 into the longitude
equation to give λ2.[16]
Intermediate points, way-points, on a geodesic can be found by
holding φ1 and α1 fixed and solving
the direct problem for several values of s12. Once the
first waypoint is found, only the last portion of the solution (starting
with the determination of s2) needs to be repeated for
each new value of s12.
The ease with which the direct problem can be solved results from the
fact that given φ1 and α1, we can
immediately find α0, the parameter in the distance
and longitude integrals, Eqs. (4) and (5). In
the case of the inverse problem, we are given λ12,
but we cannot easily relate this to the equivalent spherical angle
ω12 because α0 is unknown.
Thus, the solution of the problem requires that α0 be
found iteratively. Before tackling this, it is worth understanding
better the behavior of geodesics, this time, keeping the starting point
fixed and varying the azimuth.
Geodesics from a single point (f = 1/10, φ1 = −30°)
Fig. 15. Geodesics, geodesic circles, and the cut locus.
Fig. 17. λ12 as a function of α1 for φ1 = −30° and φ2 = 20°.
Suppose point A in the inverse problem has
φ1 = −30° and λ1 = 0°. Fig.
15 shows geodesics (in blue) emanating
A with α1 a multiple of
15° up to the point at which they cease to be shortest
paths. (The flattening has been increased to
1/10 in order to accentuate the ellipsoidal effects.)
Also shown (in green) are curves of constant s12,
which are the geodesic circles centered A.
Gauss (1828) showed that, on any surface, geodesics and
geodesic circle intersect at right angles. The red line is the
cut locus, the locus of points which have multiple (two in this
case) shortest geodesics from A. On a sphere, the cut
locus is a point. On an oblate ellipsoid (shown here), it is a segment
of the circle of latitude centered on the point antipodal
to A, φ = −φ1. The longitudinal
extent of cut locus is approximately
λ12 ∈ [π − f π cosφ1, π + f π cosφ1]. If
A lies on the equator, φ1 = 0, this relation
is exact and as a consequence the equator is only a shortest geodesic if
|λ12| ≤ (1 − f)π. For a prolate
ellipsoid, the cut locus is a segment of the anti-meridian centered on
the point antipodal to A, λ12 = π,
and this means that
meridional geodesics stop being shortest paths before the antipodal
point is reached.
The solution of the inverse problem involves determining, for a given
point B with latitude φ2 and longitude
λ2 which blue and green curves it lies on; this
determines α1 and s12 respectively.
In Fig. 16, the ellipsoid has been "rolled out" onto a
plate carrée projection. Suppose φ2 = 20°, the
green line in the figure. Then as α1 is varied
between 0° and 180°, the longitude
at which the geodesic intersects φ = φ2 varies between
0° and 180° (see Fig. 17).
This behavior holds provided that
|φ2| ≤ |φ1| (otherwise the
geodesic does not reach φ2 for some values of
α1). Thus, the inverse problem may be solved by
determining the value α1 which results in the given
value of λ12 when the geodesic intersects the circle
φ = φ2.
This suggests the following strategy for solving the inverse problem
(Karney 2013) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFKarney2013 (幫助).
Assume that the points A and B satisfy
(8)
(There is no loss of generality in this assumption, since the symmetries
of the problem can be used to generate any configuration of points from
such configurations.)
First treat the "easy" cases, geodesics which lie on a meridian or the equator. Otherwise...
Guess a value of α1.
Solve the so-called hybrid geodesic problem, given φ1, φ2, and α1 find λ12, s12, and α2, corresponding to the first intersection of the geodesic with the circle φ = φ2.
Compare the resulting λ12 with the desired value and adjust α1 until the two values agree. This completes the solution.
Each of these steps requires some discussion.
1. For an oblate ellipsoid, the shortest geodesic lies on a meridian if
either point lies on a pole or if λ12 = 0 or
±π. The shortest geodesic follows the equator if
φ1 = φ2 = 0 and
|λ12| ≤ (1 − f)π. For a prolate
ellipsoid, the meridian is no longer the shortest geodesic if
λ12 = ±π and the points are close to antipodal
(this will be discussed in the next section). There is no longitudinal
restriction on equatorial geodesics.
with ω12 = λ12. This may be a bad
approximation if A and B are nearly antipodal
(both the numerator and denominator in the formula above become small);
however, this may not matter (depending on how step 4 is handled).
3. The solution of the hybrid geodesic problem is as follows. It starts
the same way as the solution of the direct problem, solving the triangle
NEP with P = A to find α0,
σ1, ω1, and
λ0.[18] Now find
α2 from
sinα2 = sinα0/cosβ2, taking
cosα2 ≥ 0 (corresponding to the first, northward,
crossing of the circle φ = φ2). Next,
σ2 is given by
tanσ2 = tanβ2/cosα2 and
ω2 by
tanω2 = tanσ2/sinα0.[14]
Finally, use the distance and longitude equations, Eqs. (4)
and (5), to find s12 and
λ12.[19]
4. In order to discuss how α1 is updated, let us define
the root-finding problem in more detail. The curve in Fig. 17
shows λ12(α1; φ1, φ2) where we regard
φ1 and φ2 as parameters and
α1 as the independent variable. We seek the value of
α1 which is the root of
where g(0) ≤ 0 and g(π) ≥ 0. In fact,
there is a unique root in the interval α1 ∈ [0, π].
Any of a number of root-finding algorithms can be used to solve such
an equation. Karney (2013) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFKarney2013 (幫助) uses Newton's method, which
requires a good starting guess; however it may be supplemented by a
fail-safe method, such as the bisection method, to guarantee
convergence.
An alternative method for solving the inverse problem is given by
Helmert (1880,§5.13). Let us rewrite the
Eq. (5) as
Helmert's method entails assuming that
ω12 = λ12, solving the resulting problem on
auxiliary sphere, and obtaining an updated estimate of
ω12 using
This fixed point iteration is repeated until convergence.
Rainsford (1955) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFRainsford1955 (幫助) advocates this method and
Vincenty (1975a) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFVincenty1975a (幫助) adopted it in his solution of the inverse
problem. The drawbacks of this method are that convergence is slower
than obtained using Newton's method (as described above) and, more
seriously, that the process fails to converge at all for nearly
antipodal points. In a subsequent report, Vincenty (1975b)
attempts to cure this defect; but he is only partially
successful—the NGS (2012) implementation still includes
Vincenty's fix still fails to converge in some cases.
Lee (2011) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFLee2011 (幫助) has compared 17 methods for solving the inverse
problem against the method given by Karney (2013) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFKarney2013 (幫助).
The shortest distance returned by the solution of the inverse problem is
(obviously) uniquely defined. However, if B lies on the
cut locus of A there are multiple azimuths which yield
the same shortest distance. Here is a catalog of those cases:
φ1 = −φ2 (with neither point at a pole). If α1 = α2, the geodesic is unique. Otherwise there are two geodesics and the second one is obtained by interchanging α1 and α2. (This occurs when λ12 ≈ ±π for oblate ellipsoids.)
λ12 = ±π (with neither point at a pole). If α1 = 0 or ±π, the geodesic is unique. Otherwise there are two geodesics and the second one is obtained by negating α1 and α2. (This occurs when φ1 + φ2 ≈ 0 for prolate ellipsoids.)
A and B are at opposite poles. There are infinitely many geodesics which can be generated by varying the azimuths so as to keep α1 + α2 constant. (For spheres, this prescription applies when A and B are antipodal.)
Various problems involving geodesics require knowing their behavior
when they are perturbed. This is useful in trigonometric adjustments
(Ehlert 1993),
determining the physical properties of signals which follow geodesics,
etc. Consider a reference geodesic, parameterized by s the
length from the northward equator crossing, and a second geodesic a small
distance t(s) away from it. Gauss (1828) showed that
t(s) obeys the
Gauss-Jacobi equation
(9)
Fig. 18. Definition of reduced length and geodesic scale.
where K(s) is the Gaussian curvature at s.
The solution may be expressed as the sum of two independent solutions
where
We shall abbreviate m(s1, s2) = m12, the so-called
reduced length, and M(s1, s2) = M12, the
geodesic scale.[20]
Their basic definitions are illustrated in
Fig. 18. Christoffel (1869) made an extensive study of
their properties. The reduced length obeys a reciprocity relation,
Their derivatives are
Assuming that points 1, 2, and 3, lie on the same geodesic, then the
following addition rules apply (Karney 2013) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFKarney2013 (幫助),
The reduced length and the geodesic scale are components of the
Jacobi field.
Helmert (1880,Eq. (6.5.1.)) solved the Gauss-Jacobi
equation for this case obtaining
where
As we see from Fig. 18 (top sub-figure), the separation of two
geodesics starting at the same point with azimuths differing by
dα1 is m12dα1. On a closed
surface such as an ellipsoid, we expect m12 to oscillate
about zero. Indeed, if the starting point of a geodesic is a pole,
φ1 = ½π, then the reduced length is the radius
of the circle of latitude,
m12 = a cosβ2 = a sinσ12. Similarly, for a
meridional geodesic starting on the equator,
φ1 = α1 = 0, we have
M12 = cosσ12. In the typical case, these
quantities oscillate with a period of about 2π in
σ12 and grow linearly with distance at a rate
proportional to f. In trigonometric adjustments over small
areas, it may be possible to approximate K(s) in
Eq. (9) by a constant K. In this limit, the
solutions for m12 and M12 are the same
as for a sphere of radius 1/√K, namely,
To simplify the discussion of shortest paths in this paragraph we
consider only geodesics with s12 > 0. The point at
which m12 becomes zero is the point
conjugate to the starting point. In order
for a geodesic between A and B, of length
s12, to be a shortest path it must satisfy the
Jacobi condition (Jacobi 1837) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFJacobi1837 (幫助) (Jacobi 1866,§6)
(Forsyth 1927,§§26–27)
(Bliss 1916) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFBliss1916 (幫助), that there is
no point conjugate to A between A and
B. If this condition is not satisfied, then there is a
nearby path (not necessarily a geodesic) which is shorter. Thus,
the Jacobi condition is a local property of the geodesic and is only a
necessary condition for the geodesic being a global shortest path.
Necessary and sufficient conditions for a geodesic being the shortest
path are:
for an oblate ellipsoid, |σ12| ≤ π;
for a prolate ellipsoid, |λ12| ≤ π, if α0 ≠ 0; if α0 = 0, the supplemental condition m12 ≥ 0 is required if |λ12| = π.
The latter condition above can be used to determine whether the shortest
path is a meridian in the case of a prolate ellipsoid with
|λ12| = π. The derivative required to
solve the inverse method using Newton's method,
∂λ12(α1; φ1, φ2) / ∂α1,
is given in terms of the reduced length
(Karney 2013,Eq. (46)) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFKarney2013 (幫助).
Two map projections are defined in terms of geodesics. They are based
on polar and rectangular geodesic coordinates on the surface
(Gauss 1828). The polar coordinate system
(r, θ) is centered on some point A. The
coordinates of another point B are given by
r = s12 and θ = ½π − α1 and
these coordinates are used to find the projected coordinates on a plane
map, x = r cosθ and y = r sinθ. The
result is the familiar azimuthal equidistant projection; in the
field of the differential geometry of surfaces, it is called the
exponential map. Due to the
basic properties of geodesics (Gauss 1828), lines of constant
r and lines of constant θ intersect at
right angles on the surface. The scale of the projection in the radial
direction is unity, while the scale in the azimuthal direction is
s12/m12.
The rectangular coordinate system (x, y) uses a reference
geodesic defined by A and α1 as the
x axis. The point (x, y) is found by traveling
a distance s13 = x from A along the reference
geodesic to an intermediate point C and then turning
½π counter-clockwise and traveling along a
geodesic a distance s32 = y. If A is on the
equator and α1 = ½π, this gives the
equidistant cylindrical projection. If α1 = 0,
this gives the Cassini-Soldner projection.
Cassini's map of France placed
A at the Paris Observatory. Due to the basic
properties of geodesics (Gauss 1828), lines of constant
x and lines of constant y intersect at right
angles on the surface. The scale of the projection in the
y direction is unity, while the scale in the x
direction is 1/M32.
The gnomonic projection is a projection of the sphere where all
geodesics (i.e., great circles) map to straight lines (making it a
convenient aid to navigation).
Such a projection is only possible for surfaces of constant
Gaussian curvature (Beltrami 1865) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFBeltrami1865 (幫助). Thus a projection in
which geodesics map to straight lines is not possible for an ellipsoid.
However, it is possible to construct an ellipsoidal gnomonic projection
in which this property approximately holds
(Karney 2013,§8) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFKarney2013 (幫助). On the sphere, the gnomonic
projection is the limit of a doubly azimuthal projection, a projection
preserving the azimuths from two points A and
B, as B approaches A. Carrying
out this limit in the case of a general surface yields an azimuthal
projection in which the distance from the center of projection is given
by ρ = m12/M12. Even though geodesics are only
approximately straight in this projection, all geodesics through the
center of projection are straight. The projection can then be used to
give an iterative but rapidly converging method of solving some problems
involving geodesics, in particular, finding the intersection of two
geodesics and finding the shortest path from a point to a geodesic.
The Hammer retroazimuthal projection is a variation of the azimuthal
equidistant projection (Hammer 1910). A geodesic is constructed
from a central point A to some other point B.
The polar coordinates of the projection of B are
r = s12 and θ = ½π − α2
(which depends on the azimuth at B, instead of at
A). This can be used to determine the direction from an
arbitrary point to some fixed center. Hinks (1929) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFHinks1929 (幫助) suggested
another application: if the central point A is a beacon,
such as the Rugby Clock, then at an unknown location B
the range and the bearing to A can be measured and the
projection can be used to estimate the location of B.
Geodesics from a single point (f = 1/10, φ1 = −30°)
Fig. 19. The envelope of geodesics from a point A at φ1 = −30°.
Fig. 20. The four geodesics connecting A and a point B, φ2 = 26°, λ12 = 175°.
The geodesics from a particular point A if continued
past the cut locus form an envelope illustrated in Fig. 19.
Here the geodesics for which α1 is a multiple of
3° are shown in light blue. (The geodesics are only
shown for their first passage close to the antipodal point, not for
subsequent ones.) Some geodesic circles are shown in green; these form
cusps on the envelope. The cut locus is shown in red. The envelope is
the locus of points which are conjugate to A; points on the
envelope may be computed by finding the point at which
m12 = 0 on a geodesic (and Newton's method can be used to
find this point). Jacobi (1891) calls this star-like figure
produced by the envelope an astroid.
Outside the astroid two geodesics intersect at each point; thus there
are two geodesics (with a length approximately half the
circumference of the ellipsoid) between A and these points.
This corresponds to the situation on the sphere where there are "short"
and "long" routes on a great circle between two points. Inside the
astroid four geodesics intersect at each point. Four such geodesics are
shown in Fig. 20 where the geodesics are numbered in order of
increasing length. (This figure uses the same position for
A as Fig. 15 and is drawn in the same projection.)
The two shorter geodesics are stable, i.e., m12 > 0,
so that there is no nearby path connecting the two points which is
shorter; the other two are unstable. Only the shortest line (the first
one) has σ12 ≤ π. All the geodesics are tangent
to the envelope which is shown in green in the figure. A similar set of
geodesics for the WGS84 ellipsoid is given in this table
(Karney 2011,Table 1):
The astroid is also the envelope of the family of lines
where γ is a parameter. (These are
generated by the rod of the trammel of Archimedes.) This aids
in finding a good starting guess for α1 for Newton's
method for in inverse problem in the case of nearly antipodal points
(Karney 2013,§5) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFKarney2013 (幫助).
The astroid is the (exterior) evolute of the geodesic circles
centered at A. Likewise, the geodesic circles are
involutes of the astroid.
A geodesic polygon is a polygon whose sides are geodesics. The area of
such a polygon may be found by first computing the area between a
geodesic segment and the equator, i.e., the area of the quadrilateral
AFHB in Fig. 1 (Danielsen 1989) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFDanielsen1989 (幫助). Once this
area is known, the area of a polygon may be computed by summing the
contributions from all the edges of the polygon.
Here we develop the formula for the area S12 of
AFHB following Sjöberg (2006) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFSjöberg2006 (幫助). The area of any
closed region of the ellipsoid is
is the geodesic excess and θj is the exterior angle at
vertex j. Multiplying the equation for Γ
by R22, where R2 is the
authalic radius, and subtracting this
from the equation for T gives[21]
where the value of K for an ellipsoid
has been substituted.
Applying this formula to the quadrilateral AFHB, noting
that Γ = α2 − α1, and performing
the integral over φ gives
where the integral is over the geodesic line (so that φ
is implicitly a function of λ). Converting this into
an integral over σ, we obtain
where
and the notation E12 = α2 − α1 is used for
the geodesic excess.
The integral can be expressed as a series valid for small f
(Danielsen 1989) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFDanielsen1989 (幫助) (Karney 2013,§6 and addendum) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFKarney2013 (幫助).
The area of a geodesic polygon is given by summing S12
over its edges. This result holds provided that the polygon does not
include a pole; if it does 2π R22 must be added to the
sum. If the edges are specified by their vertices, then a
convenient expression
for E12 is
An implementation of Vincenty's algorithm in Fortran is provided by
NGS (2012). Version 3.0 includes Vincenty's treatment of
nearly antipodal points (Vincenty 1975b).
Vincenty's original formulas are used in many
geographic information systems. Except for nearly antipodal points
(where the inverse method fails to converge), this method is accurate to
about 0.1 mm for the WGS84 ellipsoid (Karney 2011,§9).
The algorithms given in Karney (2013) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFKarney2013 (幫助) are included in
GeographicLib (Karney 2014). These are accurate to about
15 nanometers for the WGS84 ellipsoid. Implementations in several
languages (C++, C, Fortran,
Java, JavaScript,
Python, Matlab, and
Maxima) are provided. In addition to solving the
basic geodesic problem, this library can return m12,
M12, M21, and S12. The
library includes a command-line utility, GeodSolve, for
geodesic calculations. As of version 4.9.1, the PROJ.4 library for
cartographic projections uses the C implementation for geodesic
calculations. This is exposed in the command-line utility,
geod, and in the library itself.
The solution of the geodesic problems in terms of elliptic integrals is
included in GeographicLib (in C++ only), e.g., via the -E
option to GeodSolve. This method of solution is about
2–3 times slower than using series expansions; however it
provides accurate solutions for ellipsoids of revolution with
b/a ∈ [0.01, 100] (Karney 2013,addenda) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFKarney2013 (幫助).
Solving the geodesic problem for an ellipsoid of revolution is, from the
mathematical point of view, relatively simple: because of symmetry,
geodesics have a constant of the motion, given by Clairaut's relation
allowing the problem to be reduced to
quadrature. By the early 19th century
(with the work of Legendre, Oriani, Bessel, et al.),
there was a complete understanding of the properties of geodesics on an
ellipsoid of revolution.
On the other hand, geodesics on a triaxial ellipsoid (with 3 unequal
axes) have no obvious constant of the motion and thus represented a
challenging "unsolved" problem in the first half of the 19th
century. In a remarkable paper, Jacobi (1839) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFJacobi1839 (幫助) discovered a
constant of the motion allowing this problem to be reduced to quadrature
also (Klingenberg 1982,§3.5).[22][23]
The key to the solution is expressing the problem in the "right"
coordinate system. Consider the ellipsoid defined by
where (X,Y,Z) are Cartesian coordinates centered on the
ellipsoid and, without loss of generality,
a ≥ b ≥ c > 0.[24]
A point on the surface is specified by a latitude and longitude. The
geographical latitude and longitude (φ, λ) are
defined by
The parametric latitude and longitude (φ′, λ′)
are defined by
Jacobi (1866,§§26–27)
employed the ellipsoidal latitude and longitude
(β, ω) defined by
In the limit b → a, β
becomes the parametric latitude for an oblate ellipsoid, so the use of
the symbol β is consistent with the previous sections.
However, ω is different from the spherical
longitude defined above.[25]
Grid lines of constant β (in blue) and
ω (in green) are given in Fig. 21. In contrast
to (φ, λ) and (φ′, λ′),
(β, ω) is an orthogonal coordinate system: the
grid lines intersect at right angles. The principal sections of the
ellipsoid, defined by X = 0 and Z = 0 are shown in
red. The third principal section, Y = 0, is covered by the
lines β = ±90° and ω = 0° or
±180°. These lines meet at four
umbilical points (two of which are visible in this figure) where the
principal radii of curvature are equal. Here
and in the other figures in this section the parameters of the ellipsoid
are a:b:c = 1.01:1:0.8, and it is viewed in an orthographic
projection from a point above φ = 40°,
λ = 30°.
The grid lines of the ellipsoidal coordinates may be interpreted in three
different ways
They are "lines of curvature" on the ellipsoid, i.e., they are parallel to the directions of principal curvature (Monge 1796).
Finally they are geodesic ellipses and hyperbolas defined using two adjacent umbilical points (Hilbert & Cohn-Vossen 1952,第188頁). For example, the lines of constant β in Fig. 21 can be generated with the familiar string construction for ellipses with the ends of the string pinned to the two umbilical points.
Conversions between these three types of latitudes and longitudes
and the Cartesian coordinates are simple algebraic exercises.
The element of length on the ellipsoid in ellipsoidal coordinates is
given by
Jacobi showed that the geodesic equations, expressed in ellipsoidal
coordinates, are separable. Here is how he recounted his discovery to
his friend and neighbor Bessel (Jacobi 1839,Letter to Bessel) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFJacobi1839 (幫助),
The day before yesterday, I reduced to quadrature the problem of geodesic lines on an ellipsoid with three unequal axes. They are the simplest formulas in the world, Abelian integrals, which become the well known elliptic integrals if 2 axes are set equal.
The solution given by Jacobi (Jacobi 1839) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFJacobi1839 (幫助)
(Jacobi 1866,§28) is
As Jacobi notes "a function of the angle β equals
a function of the angle ω. These two functions are
just Abelian integrals..." Two constants δ and
γ appear in the solution. Typically
δ is zero if the lower limits of the integrals are
taken to be the starting point of the geodesic and the direction of the
geodesics is determined by γ. However, for geodesics
that start at an umbilical points, we have γ = 0 and
δ determines the direction at the umbilical point.
The constant γ may be expressed as
where α is the angle the geodesic makes with lines of
constant ω. In the limit b → a,
this reduces to sinα cosβ = const., the
familiar Clairaut relation. A nice derivation of Jacobi's result is
given by Darboux (1894,§§583–584) where he
gives the solution found by Liouville (1846) for general quadratic
surfaces. In this formulation, the distance along the geodesic,
s, is found using
On a triaxial ellipsoid, there are only 3 simple closed geodesics, the
three principal sections of the ellipsoid given by X = 0,
Y = 0, and Z = 0.[26]
To survey the other geodesics, it is convenient to consider geodesics
which intersect the middle principal section, Y = 0, at right
angles. Such geodesics are shown in Figs. 22–26,
which use the same ellipsoid parameters and the same viewing direction
as Fig. 21. In addition, the three principal ellipses are shown
in red in each of these figures.
If the starting point is β1 ∈ (−90°, 90°),
ω1 = 0, and α1 = 90°, then
γ > 0 and the
geodesic encircles the ellipsoid in a "circumpolar" sense. The geodesic
oscillates north and south of the equator; on each oscillation it
completes slightly less that a full circuit around the ellipsoid
resulting, in the typical case, in the geodesic filling the area bounded
by the two latitude lines β = ±β1. Two examples
are given in Figs. 22 and 23. Figure 22 shows
practically the same behavior as for an oblate ellipsoid of revolution
(because a ≈ b); compare to Fig. 11.
However, if the starting point is at a higher latitude (Fig. 22)
the distortions resulting from a ≠ b are evident. All
tangents to a circumpolar geodesic touch the confocal single-sheeted
hyperboloid which intersects the ellipsoid at β = β1
(Chasles 1846)
(Hilbert & Cohn-Vossen 1952,第223–224頁).
Transpolar geodesics, β1 = 90°, α1 = 180°.
Fig. 24. ω1 = 39.9°.
Fig. 25. ω1 = 9.966°.
If the starting point is β1 = 90°,
ω1 ∈ (0°, 180°), and
α1 = 180°, then
γ < 0 and the geodesic encircles the ellipsoid
in a "transpolar" sense. The geodesic oscillates east and west of the
ellipse X = 0; on each oscillation it completes slightly more
that a full circuit around the ellipsoid resulting, in the typical case,
in the geodesic filling the area bounded by the two longitude lines
ω = ω1 and ω = 180° − ω1.
If a = b, all meridians are geodesics; the effect of
a ≠ b causes such geodesics to oscillate east and west.
Two examples are given in Figs. 24 and 25. The constriction
of the geodesic near the pole disappears in the limit
b → c; in this case, the ellipsoid becomes a
prolate ellipsoid and Fig. 24 would resemble Fig. 12
(rotated on its side). All tangents to a transpolar geodesic touch the
confocal double-sheeted hyperboloid which intersects the ellipsoid at
ω = ω1.
If the starting point is β1 = 90°,
ω1 = 0° (an umbilical point), and
α1 = 135° (the geodesic leaves the ellipse
Y = 0 at right angles), then
γ = 0 and the geodesic repeatedly
intersects the opposite umbilical point and returns to its starting
point. However, on each circuit the angle at which it intersects
Y = 0 becomes closer to 0° or
180° so that asymptotically the geodesic lies on the
ellipse Y = 0 (Hart 1849) (Arnold 1989,第265頁).
This is shown in Fig. 26. Note that a single geodesic does not
fill an area on the ellipsoid. All tangents to umbilical geodesics
touch the confocal hyperbola which intersects the ellipsoid at the
umbilic points.
Umbilical geodesic enjoy several interesting properties.
Through any point on the ellipsoid, there are two umbilical geodesics.
The geodesic distance between opposite umbilical points is the same regardless of the initial direction of the geodesic.
Whereas the closed geodesics on the ellipses X = 0 and Z = 0 are stable (an geodesic initially close to and nearly parallel to the ellipse remains close to the ellipse), the closed geodesic on the ellipse Y = 0, which goes through all 4 umbilical points, is exponentially unstable. If it is perturbed, it will swing out of the plane Y = 0 and flip around before returning to close to the plane. (This behavior may repeat depending on the nature of the initial perturbation.)
If the starting point A of a geodesic is not an umbilical
point, then its envelope is an astroid with two cusps lying on
β = −β1 and the other two on
ω = ω1 + π (Sinclair 2003) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFSinclair2003 (幫助). The cut locus
for A is the portion
of the line β = −β1 between the cusps
(Itoh & Kiyohara 2004) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFItohKiyohara2004 (幫助).
(Panou 2013) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFPanou2013 (幫助) gives a method for solving the inverse problem for a
triaxial ellipsoid by directly integrating the system of
ordinary differential equations for a geodesic. (Thus, it does not
utilize Jacobi's solution.)
The direct and inverse geodesic problems no longer play the central role
in geodesy that they once did. Instead of solving
adjustment of geodetic networks as a
two-dimensional problem in spheroidal trigonometry, these problem are
now solved by three-dimensional methods (Vincenty & Bowring 1978).
Nevertheless, terrestrial geodesics still play an important role in
several areas:
the method of measuring distances in the FAI Sporting Code (FAI 2013).
By the principle of least action, many problems in physics can be
formulated as a variational problem similar to that for geodesics. Indeed,
the geodesic problem is equivalent to the motion of a particle
constrained to move on the surface, but otherwise subject to no forces
(Laplace 1799a) (Hilbert & Cohn-Vossen 1952,第222頁).
For this reason,
geodesics on simple surfaces such as ellipsoids of revolution or
triaxial ellipsoids are frequently used as "test cases" for exploring new
methods. Examples include:
^
Here α2 is the forward azimuth at B.
Some authors calculate the back azimuth instead; this is given by
α2 ± π.
^
This prompted a courteous note by Oriani (1826) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFOriani1826 (幫助) noting his
previous work, of which, presumably, Bessel was unaware, and also a
thinly veiled accusation of plagiarism from Ivory (1826) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFIvory1826 (幫助)
(his phrase was "second-hand from Germany"), which resulted in an angry
rebuttal by Bessel (1827) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFBessel1827 (幫助).
^Clairaut (1735) uses the circumlocution "perpendiculars to
the meridian"; this refers to Cassini's proposed map projection for
France (Cassini 1735) where one of the coordinates was the
distance from the Paris meridian.
^Kummell (1883) attempted to introduce the word "brachisthode"
for geodesic. This effort failed.
^Laplace (1799a) showed that a particle constrained to move on
a surface but otherwise subject to no forces moves along a geodesic for
that surface. Thus, Clairaut's relation is just a consequence of
conservation of angular momentum for a particle on a surface of
revolution. A similar proof is given by
Bomford (1952,§8.06).
^In terms of β, the element of distance on the ellipsoid
is given by
ds2 = (a2 sin2β2 + b2 cos2β) dβ2 + a2 cos2β dλ2.
^It may be useful to impose the restriction that the
surface have a positive curvature everywhere so that the latitude be
single valued function of Z.
^ Other choices of independent parameter are possible.
In particular many authors use the vertex of a geodesic (the point of
maximum latitude) as the origin for σ.
^ Nowadays, the necessary algebraic manipulations,
expanding in a Taylor series, integration, and performing trigonometric
simplifications, can be carrying using a computer algebra system.
Earlier, Levallois & Dupuy (1952) gave recurrence relations for
the series in terms of Wallis' integrals and
Pittman (1986) describes a similar method.
^Legendre (1806,Art. 13) also gives a series
for σ in terms of s; but this is
not suitable for large distances.
^Despite the presence of i = √−1, the elliptic
integrals in Eqs. (6) and (7) are real.
^Rollins (2010) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFRollins2010 (幫助) obtains different, but equivalent, expressions
in terms of elliptic integrals.
^ 14.014.114.2
When solving for σ, α, or
ω using a formula for its tangent, the quadrant should
be determined from the signs of the numerator of the expression for the
tangent, e.g., using the atan2 function.
^If β1 = 0 and α1 = ±½π, the
equation for σ1 is indeterminate and
σ1 = 0 may be used.
^Because
tanω = sinα0 tanσ, ω
changes quadrants in step with σ. It is therefore
straightforward to express λ2 so that
λ12 indicates how often and in what sense the
geodesic has encircled the ellipsoid.
^Bessel (1825) treated the longitude integral approximately in
order to reduce the number of parameters in the equation from two to one
so that it could be tabulated conveniently.
^If φ1 = φ2 = 0, take
sinσ1 = sinω1 = −0, consistent with the relations
(8); this gives σ1 = ω1 = −π.
^
The ordering in relations (8) automatically results in
σ12 > 0.
^Bagratuni (1962,§17) uses the term "coefficient of
convergence of ordinates" for the geodesic scale.
^Sjöberg (2006) harvtxt模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFSjöberg2006 (幫助) multiplies Γ by
b2 instead of R22. However, this leads to a
singular integrand (Karney 2011,§15).
^
Even though Jacobi and Weierstrass (1861)
use terrestrial geodesics as the motivation for their
work, a triaxial ellipsoid approximates the Earth only slightly better
than an ellipsoid of revolution. A better approximation to the shape of
the Earth is given by the geoid. However, geodesics on a surface of
the complexity of the geoid are partly chaotic
(Waters 2011) harv模板錯誤: 無指向目標: CITEREFWaters2011 (幫助).
^This notation for the semi-axes is incompatible with that used in the
previous section on ellipsoids of revolution, where a and
b stood for the equatorial radius and polar semi-axis.
Thus the corresponding inequalities are a = a ≥ b > 0 for
an oblate ellipsoid and b ≥ a = a > 0 for a prolate
ellipsoid.
^
The limit b → c gives a prolate ellipsoid with
ω playing the role of the parametric latitude.
^
If c/a < ½, there are other simple closed geodesics
similar to those shown in Figs. 13 and 14
(Klingenberg 1982,§3.5.19).
Ehlert, D. Methoden der ellipsoidischen Dreiecksberechnung [Methods for ellipsoidal triangulatioin] (技术报告). Reihe B: Angewandte Geodäsie, Heft Nr. 292. Deutsche Geodätische Kommission. 1993. OCLC 257615376(German). 引文格式1维护:未识别语文类型 (link)
Lyusternik, L. Shortest Paths: Variational Problems. Popular Lectures in Mathematics 13. Translated by P. Collins and R. B. Brown. New York: Macmillan. 1964. MR 0178386. OCLC 1048605. Translation from Russian of Кратчайшие Линии: Вариационные Задачи (Moscow, 1955).