A new approach to assess isostatic compensation of topography in continental domain from GOCE gravity gradients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Estimating how topography is maintained provides insights into the different factors responsible for surface deformations and their relative roles. Here, we develop a new and simple approach to assess the degree of isostatic compensation of continental topography at regional scale from GOCE gravity gradients. We calculate the ratio between the radial gradient observed by GOCE and that calculated from topography only. From analytical and statistical formulations, simple relationships between this ratio and the degree of compensation are obtained under the Airy–Heiskanen isostasy hypothesis. Then, a value of degree of compensation at each point of study area can be easily deduced. We apply our method to the Alaska-Canada Cordillera and validate our results by comparison with a standard isostatic gravity anomaly model and additional geophysical information for this area. Both our GOCE-based results and the isostatic anomaly show that Airy–Heiskanen isostasy prevails for the Yukon Plateau whereas additional mechanisms are required to support topography below the Northwest Territories Craton and the Yakutat collision zone.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".