What is the cause of the accelerated drift of the north magnetic pole: Jerk or reversal?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For the last 20–30 years, the drift velocity of the north magnetic pole (NMP) has increased by a factor of almost 5. It is unclear whether this is the cyclic process, according to which NMP twice changed the direction of its drift (in 1580 and 1860) and should turn once again in approximately 2140, or this acceleration is related to the effect of jerk-69, or the NMP acceleration shows the beginning of geomagnetic field reversal. Both magnetic poles have been drifting poleward (toward each other) beginning from 1860: NMP, in the Western Hemisphere; south magnetic pole (SMP), in the Eastern Hemisphere. Both poles move along the paths typical of the motion of virtual magnetic poles during reversal. The velocity of SMP drift during the period of instrumental measurements slightly decreased: from 8 km/yr at the initial stage to 4 km/yr at the present. A possible cause of NMP drift acceleration and SMP drift deceleration is discussed. It has been indicated that the NMP position can be estimated based on a change in the geomagnetic field horizontal components registered at the nearest observatories. Measurements of the NMP position, which can be performed during the next three-five years, can make it possible to answer the question whether NMP continue accelerating or starts decelerating. It is discussed whether NMP acceleration and an increase in the jerk occurrence frequency are interrelated and whether these facts points to the beginning of reversal.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".