MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The rotational stability of an ice-age earth

2005· article· en· W2138154318 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Journal International · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchAdolph C. and Mary Sprague Miller Institute for Basic Research in Science, University of California BerkeleyNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationDavid and Lucile Packard FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsLithosphereGeologyEarth's rotationHydrostatic equilibriumPost-glacial reboundGeophysicsRotation (mathematics)ObservableCrustGeodesyPhysicsGlacial periodSeismologyGeometryMathematicsTectonicsPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predictions of glaciation-induced changes in the Earth's rotation vector exhibit sensitivities to Earth structure that are unique within the suite of long-wavelength observables associated with glacial isostatic adjustment (henceforth GIA), and, despite nearly a quarter of a century of research, these sensitivities remain enigmatic. Previous predictions of present-day true polar wander (TPW) speed driven by GIA have indicated, for example, a strong sensitivity to variations in the thickness of the elastic lithosphere and the treatment (phase or chemical?) of the density discontinuity at 670-km depth. Nakada recently presented results that suggest that the predictions are also sensitive to the adopted rheology of the lithosphere; however, his results have introduced an intriguing paradox. In particular, predictions generated using a model with an extremely high-viscosity lithospheric lid do not converge to results for a purely elastic lithosphere of the same thickness. Mitrovica (as cited by Nakada) has suggested that the paradox originates from an inaccuracy in the traditional rotation theory (e.g. Wu & Peltier) associated with the treatment of the background equilibrium rotating form upon which any load- and rotation-induced perturbations are superimposed. We revisit these issues using a new treatment of the linearized Euler equations governing load-induced rotation perturbations on viscoelastic earth models. We demonstrate that our revised theory, in which the background form of the planet combines a hydrostatic component and an observationally inferred excess ellipticity, resolves the apparent paradox. Calculations using the revised theory indicate that earlier predictions based on earth models with purely elastic lithospheric lids are subject to large errors; indeed, previously noted sensitivities of TPW speed predictions to the thickness and rheology (elastic versus viscous) of the lithosphere largely disappear in the application of the new theory. Significant errors are also incurred by neglecting the stabilizing influence of the Earth's excess ellipticity. Finally, we demonstrate that the contribution from rotational feedback on predictions of present-day rates of change of the geoid (sea surface) and crustal velocities are overestimated by the traditional rotation theory, and this has implications for analyses of ongoing satellite (e.g. GRACE) missions and geodetic GPS surveys.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.872
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.224 · 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