Evaluation of W0 in Canada using tide gauges and GOCE gravity field models
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The existing Canadian Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1928 (CGVD28) does not meet the needs of the modern user in terms of accuracy and accessibility. As a result, Canada plans to implement a geoid-based and global navigation satellite system (GNSS)-accessible vertical datum by 2013. One of the primary concerns in realizing this new vertical datum is to determine a W0 value that will represent the potential of the zero height surface. The objective of this study is to evaluate W0 by averaging the potential of points on the mean sea water surface utilizing tide gauge recordings and gravity field and steady-state ocean circulation explorer (GOCE)-based global geopotential models. In order to assess the performance of the GOCE-based models for the computation of W0, the models are extended with the high resolution gravitational model EGM2008 . Regional gravimetric geoid models are also used for the estimation of W0. Additionally, local sea surface topography models are utilized in order to validate the W0 results at the tide gauges. Excluding the Arctic coast, the W0 values obtained from both tide gauges and oceanic sea surface topography models are not statistically different from the International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service (IERS) 2010 global conventional value 62636856.00 m 2 /s 2 .
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it