MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068389466 · doi:10.1029/2001jb000941

Glacial isostatic adjustment and the radial viscosity profile from inverse modeling

2002· article· en· W2068389466 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Georg Kaufmann, Kurt Lambeck

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPost-glacial reboundGeologyMantle (geology)GeoidGeophysicsMantle convectionGravity anomalyGlacial periodLithosphereSeismologyGeomorphologyTectonicsOil fieldPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A formal inverse procedure is used to infer radial mantle viscosity profiles from several observations related to the glacial isostatic adjustment process. The data sets consist of Late Pleistocene and Holocene sea level data from Scandinavia, the Barents Sea, Central Europe, Canada, and the far field, as well as observations of changes in the Earth's rotation and gravitational field, and present‐day uplift and gravity changes in Scandinavia. Inferences of mantle viscosity are robust against assumptions such as the a priori viscosity model and model discretization. However, the quality of ice sheet reconstruction remains crucial for the inverse inference. The importance to discuss regional mantle viscosity models in view of the lateral variability in mantle properties has been evident. Our inference suggests a two order of magnitude increase of mantle viscosity with depth, and volume‐averaged upper and lower mantle viscosities around 7 × 1020 and 2 × 1022 Pa s, respectively. Mantle viscosity does not need to increase sharply across the 660‐km seismic discontinuity. The viscosity profiles suggested are also able to reconcile the large‐scale geoid anomaly related to mantle convection.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations109
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207