MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6973880669 · doi:10.57757/iugg23-1008

The differential precession of Earth’s fluid and solid cores

2023· article· en· W6973880669 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueIUGG 2023 · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGeomagnetism and Paleomagnetism Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInner corePrecessionNutationCore–mantle boundaryMantle (geology)Outer coreDissipationDissipative system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<!--!introduction!--> The Earth's spin axis is inclined by 23.4 degrees with respect to the ecliptic normal and precesses in space with a period of 26 kyr. The fluid core and solid inner core precess at slightly different angles. We compute their differential precession angles on the basis of an elastically deforming Earth and dissipative torques inferred from nutation observations. We show that the precession angle of the fluid core is larger than that of the mantle by 1.714 arcsec and lags behind it by 0.0124 arcsec. The precession angle of the spin (and figure) axis of the inner core is smaller than that of the mantle by 1.861 arcsec and trails behind it by 3.660 arcsec. These correspond to differential velocities ( Δv) at the core mantle boundary (CMB) and inner core boundary (ICB) of 2.11 and 2.21 mm/s, to associated boundary layer Reynolds (Re) numbers of 247 and 258, and to dissipation (D) equal to 4.6 and 14.5 GW. Re at the CMB has remained approximately constant in the past 4 Gyr. At the ICB, Δv, Re and D have all increased since inner core formation. Our results suggest that, for the whole of Earth's history, dissipation from the misaligned precession of the fluid and solid cores has contributed only a small fraction of the total heat flux out of the core and has not provided an important power source for maintaining the geodynamo.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueIUGG 2023Same topicGeomagnetism and Paleomagnetism StudiesFrench-language works237,207