Journal of Geodynamics 38 (2004) 225–236 Preface to the Global Geodynamics Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I review some features of the Global Geodynamics Project during its initial phase of operation 1997–2003. These fall into three categories: (1) instrumental—the development of the superconducting gravimeters during this time; (2) organizational—how the various SG groups have come together to improve their installations and provide their data; and (3) scientific—what have been some of the notable observational achievements of the project. This overview is then followed by a brief description of some of the new tasks for GGP Phase 2 (2003–2007). © 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Historical introduction The Global Geodynamics Project (GGP) was conceived during the same time that Study of the Earth’s Deep Interior (SEDI) was being planned at the ISECALM (initial acronym for SEDI) Workshop in Trieste, 1986. At that time a number of different areas of geophysics came together to initiate a cooperative and concerted effort to make progress on problems of the deep interior. Melchior11 spoke of the recent improvement between spring gravimeters and superconducting gravimeters (SGs) and Smylie discussed the possibility of detecting core dynamics using the SGs. Smylie and Crossley carried the enthusiasm of the workshop back to Canada where eventually the theoretical geodynamics group (Aldridge, Rochester, Mansinha, Merriam and others) decided to acquire one of the ‘new ’ SGs. The instrument was funded in 1987 and installed in Cantley, Quebec, in 1989. Subsequently the Canadians put forth a proposal for the
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.010 |
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".