The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
A new glacial isostatic adjustment model for Antarctica: calibrated and tested using observations of relative sea-level change and present-day uplift rates: A new GIA model for Antarctica
Open accessAbstract
We present a glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) model for Antarctica. This is driven by a new deglaciation history that has been developed using a numerical ice-sheet model, and is constrained to fit observations of past ice extent. We test the sensitivity of the GIA model to uncertainties in the deglaciation history, and seek earth model parameters that minimize the misfit of model predictions to relative sea-level observations from Antarctica. We find that the relative sea-level predictions are fairly insensitive to changes in lithospheric thickness and lower mantle viscosity, but show high sensitivity to changes in upper mantle viscosity and constrain this value (95 per cent confidence) to lie in the range 0.8–2.0 × 1021 Pa s. Significant misfits at several sites may be due to errors in the deglaciation history, or unmodelled effects of lateral variations in Earth structure. When we compare our GIA model predictions with elastic-corrected GPS uplift rates we find that the predicted rates are biased high (weighted mean bias = 1.8 mm yr−1) and there is a weighted root-mean-square (WRMS) error of 2.9 mm yr−1. In particular, our model systematically over-predicts uplift rates in the Antarctica Peninsula, and we attempt to address this by adjusting the Late Holocene loading history in this region, within the bounds of uncertainty of the deglaciation model. Using this adjusted model the weighted mean bias improves from 1.8 to 1.2 mm yr−1, and the WRMS error is reduced to 2.3 mm yr−1, compared with 4.9 mm yr−1 for ICE-5G v1.2 and 5.0 mm yr−1 for IJ05. Finally, we place spatially variable error bars on our GIA uplift rate predictions, taking into account uncertainties in both the deglaciation history and modelled Earth viscosity structure. This work provides a new GIA correction for the GRACE data in Antarctica, thus permitting more accurate constraints to be placed on current ice-mass change.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 67 · Cited by 332
Metadata
- Authors
- Whitehouse, P. L., Bentley, M. J., Milne, G. A., King, M. A., & Thomas, I. D.
- Venue
- Geophysical Journal International
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2012-06-27
- Volume
- 190
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1464-1482
- ISSN
- 0956-540X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2108434249
- Cited by
- 332
- References
- 67
- FWCI
- 16.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A new glacial isostatic adjustment model for Antarctica: calibrated and tested using observations of relative sea-level change and present-day uplift rates: A new GIA model for Antarctica. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-246x.2012.05557.x
- The paper
- Whitehouse, P. L., Bentley, M. J., Milne, G. A., King, M. A., & Thomas, I. D. (2012). A new glacial isostatic adjustment model for Antarctica: calibrated and tested using observations of relative sea-level change and present-day uplift rates: A new GIA model for Antarctica. Geophysical Journal International. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246x.2012.05557.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.