Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY The temporal variation in the density structure associated with convective motions in the outer core causes a change in the Earth’s gravity field. Core flows also lead to a gravity change through the global elastic deformations that accompany changes in the non-hydrostatic pressure at the core–mantle boundary (CMB). In this work, we present predictions of the gravity changes from these two processes during the past century. These predictions are built on the basis of flows at the surface of the core that are reconstructed from the observed geomagnetic secular variation. The pressure-induced gravity variations can be reconstructed directly from surface core flows under the assumption of tangential geostrophy; predicted variations in the Stokes coefficients of degree 2, 3 and 4 are of the order of 10 −11 ,3 × 10 −12 and 10 −12 , respectively, with a typical timescale of a few decades. These correspond to changes in gravity of 70, 30 and 15 nGal, and to equivalent geoid height variations of 0.15, 0.05 and 0.02 mm, respectively. The density-induced gravity variations cannot be determined solely from surface core flows, though a partial recovery is possible if flows with important axial gradients dominate the dynamics at decadal timescales. If this is the case, the density-induced gravity signal is of similar amplitude and generally anti-correlated with the pressure-induced signal, thus reducing the overall amplitude of the gravity changes. However, because we expect decadal flows to be predominantly axially invariant, the amplitude of the density-induced gravity changes should be much smaller. Our prediction also allows to determine upper bounds in pressure change at the CMB and density change within the core that have taken place during the past 20 yr such that observed gravity variations are not exceeded; for harmonic degree 2, we find a maximum pressure change of approximately 350 Pa and a maximum departure from hydrostatic density of approximately 1 part in 10 7 . Although the predicted gravity changes from core flows are small, they are at the threshold of detectability with high-precision gravity measurements from satellite missions such as GRACE. The most important challenge to identifying a core signal will be the removal of interannual gravity variations caused by surface processes which are an order of magnitude larger and mask the core signal.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".