Are ARM and TRM analogs? Thellier Analysis of ARM and Pseudo-Thellier Analysis of TRM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We test the possibility of using the pseudo-Thellier method as a means of determining absolute paleointensity. Thellier analysis of anhysteretic remanent magnetization (ARM) and pseudo-Thellier analysis of thermoremanent magnetization (TRM) have been carried out on a large collection of sized synthetic magnetites and natural rocks. In all samples, the intensity of TRM is larger than that of ARM and the ratio R ( =TRM/ARM) is strongly grain size dependent. The best-fit slope (bTA) from pseudo-Thellier analysis of TRM shows a linear correlation with R. The ratio bTA/R yielded approximately correct paleointensities, although uncertainties are larger than in typical Thellier-type determinations. For single-domain and multidomain magnetites, alternating field and thermal stabilities of ARM and TRM are fairly similar. However, for V0.24 Wm magnetite, ARM is both much less intense and less resistant to thermal demagnetization than TRM, reflecting different domain states for the two remanences and resulting in severely non-linear Arai plots for Thellier analysis of ARM.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".