MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

On post-glacial sea level: I. General theory

2003· article· en· W1995637978 on OpenAlexaffabout
J. X. Mitrovica, Glenn A. Milne

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Journal International · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSea levelShoreGeologyPost-glacial reboundGeodesyGlacial periodGeodetic datumClimatologyOceanographyGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern analyses of sea level changes due to glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) are based on the classic sea level equation derived by Farrell & Clark (1976, Geophys. J.R. astr. Soc., 46, 647–667). The connection between global sea level variations and changes to ocean height that is assumed within this equation breaks down in the presence of a time-varying shoreline geometry. We present a generalized sea level equation that overcomes this difficulty. We also derive analytic expressions for, and present schematic illustrations of, the error in the ocean height change over finite time intervals introduced in published efforts to incorporate shoreline evolution into the theory of GIA-induced sea level change. This comparison includes studies of shoreline migration due to either local sea level changes or the growth and ablation of marine-based ice. We conclude that the theories applied by Johnston (1993, Geophys. J. Int., 114, 615–634), Milne (1998, PhD thesis, University of Toronto, Toronto) and co-workers are more accurate than the procedure advocated by Peltier (1994, Science, 265, 195–201; 1998a, Geophys. Res. Lett., 25, 3955–3958; 1998b, Rev. Geophys., 114, 615–634), although an improvement in the latter has recently been reported (Peltier & Drummond (2002, Geophys. Res. Lett., 29, 10.1029/2001GL014273). Our generalized theory is valid for any Earth model. In a companion paper we derive the equations necessary to treat the special case of a spherically symmetric, linear viscoelastic and rotating Earth, and we quantify errors associated with previous work.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations396
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Journal InternationalSame topicGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207