Residual polar motion caused by coseismic and interseismic deformations from 1900 to present
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We challenge the perspective that seismicity could contribute to polar motion by arguing quantitatively that, in first approximation and on the average, interseismic deformations can compensate for it. This point is important because what we must simulate and observe in Earth Orientation Parameter time-series over intermediate timescales of decades or centuries is the residual polar motion resulting from the two opposing processes of coseismic and interseismic deformations. In this framework, we first simulate the polar motion caused by only coseismic deformations during the longest period available of instrumental seismicity, from 1900 to present, using both the CMT and ISC-GEM catalogues. The instrumental seismicity covering a little longer than one century does not represent yet the average seismicity that we should expect on the long term. Indeed, although the simulation shows a tendency to move the Earth rotation pole towards 133°E at the average rate of 16.5 mm yr−1, this trend is still sensitive to individual megathrust earthquakes, particularly to the 1960 Chile and 1964 Alaska earthquakes. In order to further investigate this issue, we develop a global seismicity model (GSM) that is independent from any earthquake catalogue and that describes the average seismicity along plate boundaries on the long term by combining information about present-day plate kinematics with the Anderson theory of faulting, the seismic moment conservation principle and a few other assumptions. Within this framework, we obtain a secular polar motion of 8 mm yr−1 towards 112.5°E that is comparable with that estimated from 1900 to present using the earthquake catalogues, although smaller by a factor of 2 in amplitude and different by 20° in direction. Afterwards, in order to reconcile the idea of a secular polar motion caused by earthquakes with our simplest understanding of the seismic cycle, we adapt the GSM in order to account for interseismic deformations and we use it to quantify, for the first time ever, their contribution to polar motion. Taken together, coseismic and interseismic deformations make the rotation pole wander around the north pole with maximum polar excursions of about 1 m. In particular, the rotation pole moves towards about Newfoundland when the interseismic contribution dominates over the coseismic ones (i.e. during phases of low seismicity or, equivalently, when most of the fault system associated with plate boundaries is locked). When megathrust earthquakes occur, instead, the rotation pole is suddenly shifted in an almost opposite direction, towards about 133°E.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".