A Tool to Assess the Accuracy of Glacial Isostatic Adjustment Predictions of Present‐Day Crustal Uplift Rates

Abstract Ongoing glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) is detectable in geodetic height time series and changes in the temporal gravity field. Global GIA models are often used to remove these signals from data but quantifying the errors in such models is difficult due to insufficient knowledge of Earth rheology and past ice history. Here we describe how estimates of Earth's temporal gravity field and observed height time series can be used to quantify errors in GIA models. We tested several GIA models in Fennoscandia, Laurentia and Greenland and found spatial coherence in the pattern of errors, with root mean square velocity errors of 1 mm/yr, 2 mm/yr and 5 mm/yr, respectively. Surprisingly, there are substantial similarities in the errors of the models tested. Our diagnostic tool can be used to identify regions where ice histories and/or Earth rheology parameters are deficient in the GIA models.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Geophysical Research Letters
Published
2025-10-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1029/2025gl116421
Primary Topic
Geophysics and Gravity Measurements
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Tool to Assess the Accuracy of Glacial Isostatic Adjustment Predictions of Present‐Day Crustal Uplift Rates

Paul Tregoning, Rebecca McGirr, G. Rodriguez
Geophysical Research Letters
Geophysics and Gravity Measurements
article

A Tool to Assess the Accuracy of Glacial Isostatic Adjustment Predictions of Present‐Day Crustal Uplift Rates

Paul Tregoning, Rebecca McGirr, G. Rodriguez
article en

Abstract

Abstract Ongoing glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) is detectable in geodetic height time series and changes in the temporal gravity field. Global GIA models are often used to remove these signals from data but quantifying the errors in such models is difficult due to insufficient knowledge of Earth rheology and past ice history. Here we describe how estimates of Earth's temporal gravity field and observed height time series can be used to quantify errors in GIA models. We tested several GIA models in Fennoscandia, Laurentia and Greenland and found spatial coherence in the pattern of errors, with root mean square velocity errors of 1 mm/yr, 2 mm/yr and 5 mm/yr, respectively. Surprisingly, there are substantial similarities in the errors of the models tested. Our diagnostic tool can be used to identify regions where ice histories and/or Earth rheology parameters are deficient in the GIA models.

Geophysical Research LettersVol. 52(20)
Australian National University (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 71%
Geophysics and Gravity Measurements
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

A Tool to Assess the Accuracy of Glacial Isostatic Adjustment Predictions of Present‐Day Crustal Uplift Rates — Paul Tregoning, Rebecca McGirr, et al. · Geophysical Research Letters (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS