Comment on “An Assessment of the ICE‐6G_C (VM5a) Glacial Isostatic Adjustment Model” by Purcell et al.
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The most recently published model of the glacial isostatic adjustment process in the ICE‐NG (VMX) sequence from the University of Toronto, denoted ICE‐6G_C (VM5a), was originally developed to degree and order 256 in spherical harmonics and has been shown to provide accurate fits to a voluminous database of GPS observations from North America, Eurasia, and Antarctica, to time dependent gravity data being provided by the GRACE satellites, and to radiocarbon‐dated relative sea level histories through the Holocene epoch. The authors of the Purcell et al. (2016, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JB012742) paper have suggested this model to be flawed. We have produced a further version of our model, denoted ICE‐6G_D (VM5a), by employing the same BEDMAP2 bathymetry for the Southern Ocean as employed in their analysis which has somewhat reduced the differences between our results. However, significant physically important differences remain, including the magnitude of present‐day vertical crustal motion in the embayments and in the spectrum of Stokes coefficients for present‐day geoid height time dependence which continues to “flatten” at high spherical harmonic degree. We explore the reasons for these differences and trace them to the use by Purcell et al. of a loading history for the embayments that differs significantly from that tabulated for both the original and modified versions of our model.
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 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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it