GIGJ: A Crustal Gravity Model of the Guangdong Province for Predicting the Geoneutrino Signal at the JUNO Experiment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Gravimetric methods are expected to play a decisive role in geophysical modeling of the regional crustal structure applied to geoneutrino studies. GIGJ (GOCE Inversion for Geoneutrinos at JUNO) is a 3‐D numerical model constituted by ~46 × 10 3 voxels of 50 × 50 × 0.1 km, built by inverting GOCE (Gravity field and steady‐state Ocean Circulation Explorer) gravimetric data over the 6° × 4° area centered at the JUNO (Jiangmen Underground Neutrino Observatory) experiment, currently under construction in the Guangdong Province (China). The a priori modeling is based on the adoption of deep seismic sounding profiles, receiver functions, teleseismic P wave velocity models, and Moho depth maps, according to their own accuracy and spatial resolution. The inversion method allowed for integrating GOCE data with the a priori information and some regularization conditions through a Bayesian approach and a stochastic optimization. GIGJ fits the highly accurate and homogeneously distributed GOCE gravity data with a ~1 mGal standard deviation of the residuals, compatible with the observation accuracy. GIGJ provides a site‐specific subdivision of the crustal layers masses, of which uncertainties include estimation errors, associated to the gravimetric solution, and systematic uncertainties, related to the adoption of a fixed sedimentary layer. A consequence of this local rearrangement of the crustal layer thicknesses is a ~21% reduction and a ~24% increase of the middle and lower crust geoneutrino signal, respectively. The geophysical uncertainties of geoneutrino signals at JUNO produced by unitary uranium and thorium abundances distributed in the upper, middle, and lower crust are reduced by 77%, 55%, and 78%, respectively. The numerical model is available at this site ( http://www.fe.infn.it/radioactivity/GIGJ ).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".