MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977397063 · doi:10.1029/2001jb000390

Modeling of nutation and precession: New nutation series for nonrigid Earth and insights into the Earth's interior

2002· article· en· W1977397063 on OpenAlexaff
P. M. Mathews, T. A. Herring, B. A. Buffett

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNutationGeophysicsGeodesyFigure of the EarthEarth's rotationSeries (stratigraphy)Spherical harmonicsSpeed wobbleLeast-squares function approximationOuter coreGeologyEarth modelInner coreNonlinear systemPhysicsClassical mechanicsMathematical analysisMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The analytical formulation of the theories of nutation and wobble reveals the combinations of basic Earth parameters that govern the nutation‐wobble response of the Earth to gravitational (tidal) forcing by heavenly bodies and makes it possible to estimate several of them through a least squares fit of the theoretical expressions to the high‐precision data now available. This paper presents the essentials of the theoretical framework, the procedure that we used for least squares estimation of basic Earth parameters through a fit of theory to nutation‐precession data derived from an up‐to‐date very long baseline interferometry data set, the results of the estimation and their geophysical interpretation, and the nutation series constructed using the estimated values of the parameters. The theoretical formulation used here differs from earlier ones in the incorporation of anelasticity and ocean tide effects into the basic structure of the dynamical equations of the theory and in the inclusion of electromagnetic couplings of the mantle and the solid inner core to the fluid outer core, though this generalization comes at the cost of making some of the system parameters complex and frequency dependent; it is also more complete, as it takes account of nonlinear terms in these equations, including effects of the time‐dependent deformations produced by zonal and sectorial tides, which had been traditionally neglected in nonrigid Earth theories. Among the geophysical results obtained from our fit are estimates for the dynamic ellipticity e of the Earth ( e = 0.0032845479 with an uncertainty of 12 in the last digit), for the dynamical ellipticity e f of the fluid core (3.8% higher than its hydrostatic equilibrium value, rather than ∼5% as hitherto), and for the two complex electromagnetic coupling constants. Our best estimates for the RMS radial magnetic fields at the core mantle boundary and at the inner core boundary, based on the estimates for these coupling constants, are ~6.9 and 72 gauss, respectively, when the magnetic field configurations are restricted to certain simple classes. The field strength needed at the inner core boundary could be lower if the density of the core fluid at this boundary or the ellipticity of the solid inner core were lower than that for the Preliminary Reference Earth Model. Our estimate for the resonance frequency of the prograde free core nutation mode, with an uncertainty of ∼10%, constitutes the first firm detection of the resonance associated with this mode; the period found is ∼1025 days, double that with electromagnetic couplings ignored. (Throughout this work, “days,” referring to periods, stands for “mean solar days.”) A new nutation series (MHB2000) is constructed by direct solution of the linearized dynamical equations (with our best fit values adopted for all the estimated Earth parameters) for each forcing frequency, and adding on the contributions from the nonlinear terms and other effects not included in the linearized equations. This series gives a considerably better fit to the nutation data than any of the earlier series based on geophysical theory. In particular, the residuals in the out of phase amplitudes of the retrograde 18.6 year and annual nutations, which had long remained at ∼0.5 milliseconds of arc (mas), are now reduced to the level of the uncertainties in the observational estimates, thanks mainly to the role played by the electromagnetic couplings. The largest remaining discrepancy is that in the out of phase prograde 18.6 year nutation, of ∼72 micorseconds of arc (μas). The frequency dependence of the nutation amplitudes cannot be exactly represented through a resonance formula, nor may the resonance frequencies themselves be interpreted as the eigenfrequencies of free modes because of the presence of complex and frequency‐dependent system parameters. Nevertheless, we have constructed a new resonance formula which reproduces our nutation series accurately for almost all nutation frequencies; for the few remaining frequencies, a listing is given of the corrections to be applied in order to reproduce the exact results of the direct solution.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations507
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207