Investigating the Effect of Mantle Flow and Viscosity Structure on Surface Velocities in Alaska Using 3‐D Geodynamic Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We utilize 3‐D finite element geodynamic models, incorporating long‐term kinematic estimates of upper plate motion, to better understand the roles that viscosity structure and mantle tractions play in generating plate motions and continental interior deformation in Alaska. Surface deformation in the Pacific‐North American plate boundary zone in Alaska and northwest Canada is strongly influenced by the complex interactions between flat‐slab subduction, gravitational collapse and mantle tractions. Predictions of long‐term tectonic block motion derived from recent Global Positioning System datasets (GPS) reveal surface motions atypical of other continental convergent plate boundary zones. Specifically, in northern and northwestern Alaska, southeastward motion is observed directed back toward the plate boundary. Geodynamic models that incorporate a southeastward directed long‐wavelength mantle traction of ∼2.5–3.8 MPa best replicate surface velocities in Alaska. These mantle tractions, in conjunction with the collision of the Yakutat microplate, appear to drive the uplift and deformation in the Mackenzie Mountains. Furthermore, the extent of the northward motion in southern and central Alaska is controlled by the location of the leading edge of the Yakutat flat slab.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".