Comment on “Ocean mass from GRACE and glacial isostatic adjustment” by D. P. Chambers et al.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The modern global theory of the glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) process is a theory that directly addresses the extent to which the geoid of classical geodesy is impacted by this phenomenon. Because the geoid is, by conventional definition, the surface of constant potential that overlaps the surface of the sea in the absence of currents and tides, we may determine the impact of the GIA process upon it only by explicit analysis of the manner in which mass is redistributed among the ocean basins and the level of the sea is thereby influenced. Although the dominant contribution to GIA is that associated with the transfer of mass between the oceans and the continents, there is an additional influence due to the variations in Earth's rotational state. This influence “feeds‐back” onto the geoid. In the recent paper by Chambers et al. (2010), several arguments were presented that question earlier attempts to discuss the consequences of this feedback. These arguments are interesting and we address them in what follows.
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 | 0.007 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.039 | 0.048 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.009 |
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".