How Significant is the Dynamic Component of the North American Vertical Datum?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract One of the main current geodetic activities in North America is the definition and establishment of a geoid-based vertical datum that will replace the official CGVD28 and NAVD88 datums in Canada and the USA, respectively. The new datum will also have a time-dependent (dynamic) component required by the targeted one-centimetre accuracy of the datum. Heights of the levelling benchmarks are subject to temporal changes, which contribute to the degradation of the accuracy of the datum and increase the misfit of the geoid heights determined gravimetrically and by GNSS/levelling. The zero level surface, i.e., the geoid, also changes with time, most significantly due to postglacial rebound, climate-induced loss of polar ice masses and mountain glaciers, and hydrology variations. In this study, we examine the possible changes of the datum due to the aforementioned factors. We are mostly concerned with postglacial rebound as it can contribute more than 1 mm per year and more than 1 cm per decade to the geoid change. We also assess the significance of the temporal geoid and benchmark height changes and show that, compared to its current accuracy, the geoid change is only significant after a decade mostly in the flat areas of central Canada.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".