English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

As crustal structure models based on seismic and other data are frequently used as a-priori information for further geophysical and geological studies and interpretations (e. g., for gravity inversion), it is important to accurately document their qualities. For instance, the uncertainties in published crustal structures deeply affect the accuracies of produced Moho contour maps. The qualities in seismic crustal models arise from several factors such as the survey method, the spatial resolution of the survey (for example the spacing of the shot points and the recording stations), and the analytical techniques utilized to process the data. It is difficult to determine the uncertainties associated with seismic based crustal depth/Moho depth (MD) models, and even more difficult to use such data for estimating the Moho density contrast (MDC) and its accuracy. However, there is another important observable available today, namely global satellite gravitational data, which are fairly homogeneous v. r. t. accuracy and distribution over the planet. For instance, we find by simple error propagation, using the error covariance matrix of the GOCE TIM5 gravitational model, that this model can determine the MD to a global RMS error of 0.8 km with a resolution of about 1° for a known MDC of 200 kg  /    m    3\text{kg}/{\text{m}^{3}}   . However, the uncertainty in the MDC will further deteriorate the result.

The uncertainty of CRUST1.0: Moho depth and density contrast models