MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131443774 · doi:10.1093/gji/ggt089

On postglacial sea level—III. Incorporating sediment redistribution

2013· article· en· W2131443774 on OpenAlexaff
Adrian V. Dalca, Ken L. Ferrier, J. X. Mitrovica, J. Taylor Perron, Glenn A. Milne, Jessica R. Creveling

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Journal International · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRedistribution (election)GeologyShoreGravitationSedimentSea levelPerturbation (astronomy)OceanographyGeomorphologyPhysicsClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We derive a generalized theory for gravitationally self-consistent, static sea level variations on earth models of arbitrary complexity that takes into account the redistribution of sediments. The theory is an extension of previous work that incorporated, into the governing equations, shoreline migration due to local sea level variations and changes in the geometry of grounded, marine-based ice. In addition, we use viscoelastic Love number theory to present a version of the new theory valid for spherically symmetric earth models. The Love number theory accounts for the gravitational, deformational and rotational effects of the sediment redistribution. As a first, illustrative application of the new theory, we compute the perturbation in sea level driven by an idealized pulse of sediment transport into the Gulf of Mexico. We demonstrate that incorporating a gravitationally self-consistent water load in this case significantly improves the accuracy of sea level predictions relative to previous simplified treatments of the sediment redistribution.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 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

Citations57
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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