Analytical approach for the toroidal relaxation of viscoelastic earth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is concerned with post-seismic toroidal deformation in a spherically symmetric, non-rotating, linear-viscoelastic, isotropic Maxwell earth model. Analytical expressions for characteristic relaxation times and relaxation strengths are found for viscoelastic toroidal deformation, associated with surface tangential stress, when there are two to five layers between the core–mantle boundary and Earth's surface. The multilayered models can include lithosphere, asthenosphere, upper and lower mantles and even low-viscosity ductile layer in the lithosphere. The analytical approach is self-consistent in that the Heaviside isostatic solution agrees with fluid limit. The analytical solution can be used for high-precision simulation of the toroidal relaxation in five-layer earths and the results can also be considered as a benchmark for numerical methods. Analytical solution gives only stable decaying modes—unstable mode, conjugate complex mode and modes of relevant poles with orders larger than 1, are all excluded, and the total number of modes is found to be just the number of viscoelastic layers between the core–mantle boundary and Earth's surface—however, any elastic layer between two viscoelastic layers is also counted. This confirms previous finding where numerical method (i.e. propagator matrix method) is used. We have studied the relaxation times of a lot of models and found the propagator matrix method to agree very well with those from analytical results. In addition, the asthenosphere and lithospheric ductile layer are found to have large effects on the amplitude of post-seismic deformation. This also confirms the findings of previous works.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".