Timescales of glacial isostatic adjustment in Greenland: is transient rheology required?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY The possibility of a transient rheological response to ice age loading, first discussed in the literature of the 1980s, has received renewed attention. Transient behaviour across centennial to millennial timescales has been invoked to reconcile apparently contradictory inferences of steady-state (Maxwell) viscosity based on two distinct data sets from Greenland: Holocene sea-level curves and Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) derived modern crustal uplift data. To revisit this issue, we first compute depth-dependent Fréchet kernels using 1-D Maxwell viscoelastic Earth models and demonstrate that the mantle resolving power of the two Greenland data sets is highly distinct, reflecting the differing spatial scale of the associated surface loading: the sea-level records are sensitive to viscosity structure across the entire upper mantle while uplift rates associated with post-1000 CE fluctuations of the Greenland Ice Sheet have a dominant sensitivity to shallow asthenosphere viscosity. Guided by these results, we present forward models which demonstrate that a moderate low viscosity zone beneath the lithosphere in Maxwell Earth models provides a simple route to simultaneously reconciling both data sets by significantly increasing predictions of present-day uplift rates in Greenland whilst having negligible impact on predictions of Holocene relative sea-level curves from the region. Our analysis does not rule out the possibility of transient deformation, but it suggests that it is not required to simultaneously explain these two data sets. A definitive demonstration of transient behaviour requires that one account for the resolving power of the data sets in modelling the glacial isostatic adjustment process.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".