MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Joint seismic, geodynamic and mineral physical constraints on three-dimensional mantle heterogeneity: Implications for the relative importance of thermal versus compositional heterogeneity

2009· article· en· W2101194783 on OpenAlexaff
N. A. Simmons, A. M. Forte, S. P. Grand

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Journal International · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicHigh-pressure geophysics and materials
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMantle (geology)GeologyGeophysicsMantle convectionCore–mantle boundaryScalingGeodynamicsThermalShear (geology)TectonicsSeismologyPhysicsPetrologyLithosphereGeometryThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The joint interpretation of seismic and geodynamic data requires mineral physical parameters linking seismic velocity to density perturbations in the Earth's mantle. The most common approach is to link velocity and density through relative scaling or conversion factors: Rρ/s = dlnρ/dlnVS. However, the range of possible Rρ/s values remains large even when only considering thermal effects. We directly test the validity of several proposed depth-dependent conversion profiles developed from mineral physics studies for thermally-varying properties of mantle materials. The tests are conducted by simultaneously inverting shear wave traveltime data and a diverse suite of convection-related constraints interpreted with viscous-flow response functions of the mantle. These geodynamic constraints are represented by surface spherical harmonic basis functions (up to harmonic degree 16) and they consist of the global free-air gravity field, tectonic plate divergences, dynamic surface topography and the excess ellipticity of the core-mantle boundary (CMB). The tests yield an optimum 1-D thermal Rρ/s profile that is generally compatible with all considered data, with the exception of the dynamic surface topography that is most sensitive to the shallow upper mantle. This result is not surprising given that cratonic roots are known to be compositionally-distinct from the surrounding ambient mantle. Moreover, it is expected that the temperature-dependence of the thermal Rρ/s in the upper mantle is significant due to the temperature-dependence of seismic attenuation or Q. Therefore, a simple 1-D density—velocity relationship is insufficient. To address this problem, we obtained independent estimates of the first-order correction factors to the selected Rρ/s profile within the cratonic roots and in the ambient (thermal) upper mantle. These correction factors, defined as ∂Rρ/s/∂lnVS, are highly negative within the cratons signifying considerable compositional buoyancy. This result confirms that the negative buoyancy associated with the low temperatures in the cratons is significantly counteracted by the composition-induced positive buoyancy resulting in near-neutral buoyancy of the cratonic roots. Within the ambient upper mantle, the correction factors are found to be positive which is consistent with the expected behaviour of the Rρ/s relationship in thermally-varying upper-mantle material. We obtain a significantly greater reconciliation of the global gravity anomalies and dynamic surface topography when applying these laterally-varying corrections compared to a simple 1-D Rρ/s relationship. Inversion for a fully 3-D Rρ/s relationship reveals secondary effects including additional compositional variation within the cratonic roots and the deep-mantle superplume structures. We estimate the relative magnitude of the thermal and compositional (non-thermal) contributions to mantle density anomalies and conclude that thermal effects dominate shear wave and density heterogeneity throughout the non-cratonic mantle. We also demonstrate the potential pitfalls of scaling a purely seismically-derived model to obtain density rather than performing a true joint inversion to obtain velocity and density simultaneously.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations224
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Journal InternationalSame topicHigh-pressure geophysics and materialsFrench-language works237,207