Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We present a model of the precession dynamics of the Moon that comprises a fluid outer core and a solid inner core. We show that three Cassini states associated with the inner core exist. The tilt angle of the inner core in each of these states is determined by the ratio between the free inner core nutation frequency (ωficn) and the precession frequency Ωp=2π/18.6 year−1. All three Cassini states are possible if |ωficn|>2π/16.4 year−1, but only one is possible otherwise. Assuming that the lowest energy state is favored, this transition marks a discontinuity in the tilt angle of the inner core, transiting from −33° to 17° as measured with respect to the mantle figure axis, where negative angles indicate a tilt toward the orbit normal. Possible Lunar interior density structures cover a range of ωficn, from approximately half to twice as large as Ωp, so the precise tilt angle of the inner core remains unknown, though it is likely large because Ωp is within the resonant band of ωficn. Adopting one specific density model, we suggest an inner core tilt of approximately −17°. Viscoelastic deformations within the inner core and melt and growth at the surface of a tilted inner core, both neglected in our model, should reduce this amplitude. If the inner core is larger than approximately 200 km, it may contribute by as much as a few thousandths of a degree on the observed mantle precession angle of 1.543°.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".