MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046922644 · doi:10.1029/2008jb006077

Viscosity of the asthenosphere from glacial isostatic adjustment and subduction dynamics at the northern Cascadia subduction zone, British Columbia, Canada

2009· article· en· W2046922644 on OpenAlexaffabout
T. S. James, Evan J. Gowan, Ikuko Wada, Kelin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsthenosphereGeologySubductionPost-glacial reboundLithosphereMantle (geology)SlabGeophysicsMantle wedgeSeismologyGlacial periodTectonicsGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Late glacial sea level curves located in the Cascadia subduction zone (CSZ) fore arc in southwestern British Columbia show that glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) was rapid when the Cordilleran Ice Sheet collapsed in the late Pleistocene. GIA modeling with a linear Maxwell rheology indicates that the observations can be equally well fit across a wide range of asthenospheric thicknesses, provided that the asthenospheric viscosity is varied from 3 × 10 18 Pa s for a thin (140 km) asthenosphere to 4 × 10 19 Pa s for a thick (380 km) asthenosphere. Present‐day vertical crustal motion predicted by the GIA models shows rates of a few tenths of a millimeter per year, consistent with previous analyses. The model viscosities largely pertain to the viscosity of the oceanic mantle beneath the subducting Juan de Fuca slab but include a contribution from the mantle wedge above the slab. For comparison, effective viscosities for the upper mantle due to the tectonic regime (subduction) were computed using the strain rates and temperatures of an independent geodynamic model of the CSZ with a wet olivine power law rheology. The effective viscosities agree well with GIA model viscosities of 10 19 Pa s or less, corresponding to an asthenosphere of 100 or 200 km thickness. The agreement suggests a significant role for power law flow in the GIA response. Regardless of the microphysical mechanisms responsible for the GIA response, the viscosity values inferred from GIA can be applied to studies of the megathrust earthquake cycle because both processes take place on comparable time scales.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.674

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations105
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207