MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141894911 · doi:10.1093/gji/ggu369

The rotational feedback on linear-momentum balance in glacial isostatic adjustment

2014· article· en· W2141894911 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Z. Martinec, Jan Hagedoorn

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Journal International · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAngular momentumClassical mechanicsMechanicsViscoelasticityPerturbation (astronomy)PhysicsFigure of the EarthRotation around a fixed axisEarth's rotationCentrifugal forceRotational speedGeodesyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The influence of changes in surface ice-mass redistribution and associated viscoelastic response of the Earth, known as glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA), on the Earth's rotational dynamics has long been known. Equally important is the effect of the changes in the rotational dynamics on the viscoelastic deformation of the Earth. This signal, known as the rotational feedback, or more precisely, the rotational feedback on the sea level equation, has been mathematically described by the sea level equation extended for the term that is proportional to perturbation in the centrifugal potential and the second-degree tidal Love number. The perturbation in the centrifugal force due to changes in the Earth's rotational dynamics enters not only into the sea level equation, but also into the conservation law of linear momentum such that the internal viscoelastic force, the perturbation in the gravitational force and the perturbation in the centrifugal force are in balance. Adding the centrifugal-force perturbation to the linear-momentum balance creates an additional rotational feedback on the viscoelastic deformations of the Earth. We term this feedback mechanism, which is studied in this paper, as the rotational feedback on the linear-momentum balance. We extend both the time-domain method for modelling the GIA response of laterally heterogeneous earth models developed by Martinec and the traditional Laplace-domain method for modelling the GIA-induced rotational response to surface loading by considering the rotational feedback on linear-momentum balance. The correctness of the mathematical extensions of the methods is validated numerically by comparing the polar-motion response to the GIA process and the rotationally induced degree 2 and order 1 spherical harmonic component of the surface vertical displacement and gravity field. We present the difference between the case where the rotational feedback on linear-momentum balance is considered against that where it is not. Numerical simulations show that the resulting difference in radial displacement and sea level change between these situations since the Last Glacial Maximum reaches values of ±25 and ±1.8 m, respectively. Furthermore, the surface deformation pattern is modified by up to 10 per cent in areas of former or ongoing glaciation, but by up to 50 per cent at the bottom of the southern Indian ocean. This also results in the movement of coastlines during the last deglaciation to differ between the two cases due to the difference in the ocean loading, which is seen for instance in the area around Hudson Bay, Canada and along the Chinese, Australian or Argentinian coastlines.

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 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 score0.608
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)0.0000.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.238
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations27
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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