MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Glacial isostatic adjustment on a rotating earth

2001· article· en· W2069509807 on OpenAlexaff
J. X. Mitrovica, Glenn A. Milne, J. L. Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Journal International · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeoidPost-glacial reboundGeologyGeodesySpherical harmonicsGeodetic datumEarth's rotationGeophysicsObservableMantle (geology)Polar motionGlacial periodPhysicsGeomorphologyMeasured depth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We extend and complete previous work to compute the influence of perturbations to the rotation vector on a suite of observables associated with glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA). We emphasize observables relevant to present and future geodetic missions (for example, present-day 3-D crustal motions, relative sea-level change and geoid or absolute sea-level variations). Our calculations adopt spherically symmetric, self-gravitating, Maxwell viscoelastic earth models while incorporating realistic mass (ice plus ocean) load and rotation variations. The predicted rotation-induced signals are dominated by the influence of true polar wander (TPW). The spatial geometry of the TPW-induced relative sea level, geoid and radial velocity fields is primarily that of a degree two, order one surface spherical harmonic. The spatial variation of the horizontal velocity vectors is given by the gradient of this harmonic. The peak radial and horizontal velocities are of the order of 0.5 mm yr−1; however, we show that this value is sensitive to the adopted profile of mantle viscosity. We also demonstrate that an accurate prediction of TPW-induced sea level and 3-D crustal deformation rates requires that a realistic number of glacial cycles be incorporated into the ice load history. We conclude that geodetic observations of the GIA process should be analysed using a GIA theory valid for a rotating planet. Finally, we also consider variations in rotation driven by simple present-day polar melting scenarios and predict the influence of these variations on a suite of geophysical observables. We find that the rotational feedback associated with Greenland melting is capable of significantly perturbing both relative and absolute sea-level variations.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations121
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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