The heat flow of Venus from global lithosphere strength
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite their similar size and mass, Earth and Venus have very different internal dynamics that reflect contrasting modes of heat loss. On Earth, plate tectonics drive heat loss through lithosphere recycling, with a substantial contribution from hydrothermal circulation through oceanic plates, and a minor contribution from mantle plume (i.e. hot spot) activity. In comparison, the surface of Venus is more homogeneous, has lower relief, and shows abundant evidence of effusive volcanism, and its global dynamics is not well understood. Here, we present the first global heat flow map for Venus, as well as estimates of the total heat loss, obtained from an inversion of geophysical data, including lithospheric effective elastic thickness, crustal thickness, and radioactive heat production. The obtained heat flow is lower and less geographically structured for Venus than for Earth, but with maximum values reaching those typical of magmatically active terrestrial areas. Some previous works obtained widespread heat flow similar to those of active terrestrial regions were affected by the use of excessively high values for the thermal conductivity of lithospheric rocks. The obtained total heat loss is 11-15 TW, similar to estimates of the total radioactive heat production of the planet. Therefore, at present, Venus proportionally dissipates much less heat than Earth.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".