MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2530253103 · doi:10.1002/2016jb013043

Inferences of mantle viscosity based on ice age data sets: Radial structure

2016· article· en· W2530253103 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Solid Earth · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersDivision of Ocean SciencesHarvard UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPost-glacial reboundMantle (geology)GeologyGeopotentialGeodetic datumGeodesyGeophysicsViscositySea levelThermodynamicsPhysicsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We perform joint nonlinear inversions of glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) data, including the following: postglacial decay times in Canada and Scandinavia, the Fennoscandian relaxation spectrum (FRS), late‐Holocene differential sea level (DSL) highstands (based on recent compilations of Australian sea level histories), and the rate of change of the degree 2 zonal harmonic of the geopotential, J 2 . Resolving power analyses demonstrate the following: (1) the FRS constrains mean upper mantle viscosity to be ∼3 × 10 20 Pa s, (2) postglacial decay time data require the average viscosity in the top ∼1500 km of the mantle to be 10 21 Pa s, and (3) the J 2 datum constrains mean lower mantle viscosity to be ∼5 × 10 21 Pa s. To reconcile (2) and (3), viscosity must increase to 10 22 –10 23 Pa s in the deep mantle. Our analysis highlights the importance of accurately correcting the J 2 observation for modern glacier melting in order to robustly infer deep mantle viscosity. We also perform a large series of forward calculations to investigate the compatibility of the GIA data sets with a viscosity jump within the lower mantle, as suggested by geodynamic and seismic studies, and conclude that the GIA data may accommodate a sharp jump of 1–2 orders of magnitude in viscosity across a boundary placed in a depth range of 1000–1700 km but does not require such a feature. Finally, we find that no 1‐D viscosity profile appears capable of simultaneously reconciling the DSL highstand data and suggest that this discord is likely due to laterally heterogeneous mantle viscosity, an issue we explore in a companion study.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.676
Threshold uncertainty score0.756

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.243 · 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