MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792569489 · doi:10.1093/gji/ggx519

Inference of viscosity jump at 670 km depth and lower mantle viscosity structure from GIA observations

2017· article· en· W2792569489 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Masao Nakada, Jun’ichi Okuno, Yoshiya Irie

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Journal International · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyJumpMantle (geology)InferenceViscosityGeophysicsGeodesyThermodynamicsPhysicsComputer scienceAstronomyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A viscosity model with an exponential profile described by temperature (T) and pressure (P) distributions and constant activation energy (⁠|$E_{{\rm{um}}}^{\rm{*}}$| for the upper mantle and |$E_{{\rm{lm}}}^*$| for the lower mantle) and volume (⁠|$V_{{\rm{um}}}^{\rm{*}}$| and |$V_{{\rm{lm}}}^*$|⁠) is employed in inferring the viscosity structure of the Earth's mantle from observations of glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA). We first construct standard viscosity models with an average upper-mantle viscosity (⁠|${\bar{\eta }_{{\rm{um}}}}$|⁠) of 2 × 1020 Pa s, a typical value for the oceanic upper-mantle viscosity, satisfying the observationally derived three GIA-related observables, GIA-induced rate of change of the degree-two zonal harmonic of the geopotential, |${\skew5\dot{J}_2}$|⁠, and differential relative sea level (RSL) changes for the Last Glacial Maximum sea levels at Barbados and Bonaparte Gulf in Australia and for RSL changes at 6 kyr BP for Karumba and Halifax Bay in Australia. Standard viscosity models inferred from three GIA-related observables are characterized by a viscosity of ∼1023 Pa s in the deep mantle for an assumed viscosity at 670 km depth, ηlm(670), of (1 − 50) × 1021 Pa s. Postglacial RSL changes at Southport, Bermuda and Everglades in the intermediate region of the North American ice sheet, largely dependent on its gross melting history, have a crucial potential for inference of a viscosity jump at 670 km depth. The analyses of these RSL changes based on the viscosity models with |${\bar{\eta }_{{\rm{um}}}}$| ≥ 2 × 1020 Pa s and lower-mantle viscosity structures for the standard models yield permissible |${\bar{\eta }_{{\rm{um}}}}$| and ηlm (670) values, although there is a trade-off between the viscosity and ice history models. Our preferred |${\bar{\eta }_{{\rm{um}}}}$| and ηlm (670) values are ∼(7 − 9) × 1020 and ∼1022 Pa s, respectively, and the |${\bar{\eta }_{{\rm{um}}}}$| is higher than that for the typical value of oceanic upper mantle, which may reflect a moderate laterally heterogeneous upper-mantle viscosity. The mantle viscosity structure adopted in this study depends on temperature distribution and activation energy and volume, and it is difficult to discuss the impact of each quantity on the inferred lower-mantle viscosity model. We conclude that models of smooth depth variation in the lower-mantle viscosity following |$\eta ( z )\ \propto {\rm{\ exp}}[ {( {E_{{\rm{lm}}}^* + P( z )V_{{\rm{lm}}}^*} )/{\rm{R}}T( z )} ]$| with constant |$E_{{\rm{lm}}}^*$| and |$V_{{\rm{lm}}}^*$| are consistent with the GIA observations.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Journal InternationalSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207