Gravity Variations and Ground Deformations Resulting from Core Dynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Fluid motion within the Earth's liquid outer core leads to internal mass redistribution. This occurs through the advection of density anomalies within the volume of the liquid core and by deformation of the solid boundaries of the mantle and inner core which feature density contrasts. It also occurs through torques acting on the inner core reorienting its non-spherical shape. These in situ mass changes lead to global gravity variations, and global deformations (inducing additional gravity variations) occur in order to maintain the mechanical equilibrium of the whole Earth. Changes in Earth's rotation vector (and thus of the global centrifugal potential) induced by core flows are an additional source of global deformations and associated gravity changes originating from core dynamics. Here, we review how each of these different core processes operates, how gravity changes and ground deformations from each could be reconstructed, as well as ways to estimate their amplitudes. Based on our current understanding of core dynamics, we show that, at spherical harmonic degree 2, core processes contribute to gravity variations and ground deformations that are approximately a factor 10 smaller than those observed and caused by dynamical processes within the fluid layers at the Earth's surface. The larger the harmonic degree, the smaller is the contribution from the core. Extracting a signal of core origin requires the accurate removal of all contributions from surface processes, which remains a challenge. Article Highlights: Dynamical processes in Earth's fluid core lead to global gravity variations and surface ground deformationsWe review how these processes operate, how signals of core origin can be reconstructed and estimate their amplitudesCore signals are a factor 10 smaller than the observed signals; extracting a signal of core origin remains a challenge.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".