MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6898696708 · doi:10.57757/iugg23-3635

Improved Greenland glacial isostatic adjustment models with 3D Earth structure inferred from the joint inversion of regional data sets

2023· article· en· W6898696708 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenuePublication Database GFZ (GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicHigh-pressure geophysics and materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPost-glacial reboundLithosphereGeodetic datumInversion (geology)Ice sheetSea levelData setEarth modelIce-sheet model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<!--!introduction!--> Changes in sea level and vertical land motion associated with glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) are embedded in paleo and geodetic data sets used to constrain the past and future evolution of the Greenland ice sheet. Thus, understanding of ice sheet evolution goes hand in hand with our ability to simulate the GIA signal accurately. We aim to improve the accuracy of Greenland GIA simulations by interrogating regional geophysical data sets to determine better 3-D models of Earth structure in this region. We use a self-consistent Bayesian joint inversion framework (LitMod) to constrain lithosphere and shallow mantle properties and their uncertainty from multiple data sets. The inversion results indicate a high sensitivity to the input seismic dataset, so we incorporate a new, regional high-resolution surface wave dataset based on the two-station interferometry method. In terms of simulating GIA, a key inversion output is the regional temperature field. We sub-sample a high variance set of 25 temperature fields to define 25 models of the lithospheric thickness (LT) and 50 models of sub-lithosphere viscosity structure (using two different scalings). Our results indicate that viscosity and LT vary, respectively, by 3-4 and 2 orders of magnitude across Greenland. So the predicted GIA signal shows significant differences compared to simulations based on the more traditional 1-D (spherically symmetric) viscosity models. We will present results based on these 50 Earth models and two different ice history models and compare them to geological reconstructions of relative sea-level change and GNSS observations of vertical land motion.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.169

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublication Database GFZ (GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences)→Same topicHigh-pressure geophysics and materials→French-language works237,207→