Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Reference Models for Lithospheric Geoneutrino Signal

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1907.12184 v1 pith:6HTDNBTM submitted 2019-07-29 physics.geo-ph

Reference Models for Lithospheric Geoneutrino Signal

classification physics.geo-ph
keywords geoneutrinogeophysicalheatsignalcalculatedearthmodelsproduction
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
abstract

Debate continues on the amount and distribution of radioactive heat producing elements (i.e., U, Th, and K) in the Earth, with estimates for mantle heat production varying by an order of magnitude. Constraints on the bulk-silicate Earth's (BSE) radiogenic power also places constraints on overall BSE composition. Geoneutrino detection is a direct measure of the Earth's decay rate of Th and U. The geoneutrino signal has contributions from the local ($\sim$40$\%$) and global ($\sim$35$\%$) continental lithosphere and the underlying inaccessible mantle ($\sim$25$\%$). Geophysical models are combined with geochemical datasets to predict the geoneutrino signal at current and future geoneutrino detectors. We propagated uncertainties, both chemical and physical, through Monte Carlo methods. Estimated total signal uncertainties are on the order of $\sim$20$\%$, proportionally with geophysical and geochemical inputs contributing $\sim$30$\%$ and $\sim$70$\%$, respectively. We find that estimated signals, calculated using CRUST2.0, CRUST1.0, and LITHO1.0, are within physical uncertainty of each other, suggesting that the choice of underlying geophysical model will not change results significantly, but will shift the central value by up to $\sim$15$\%$, depending on the crustal model and detector location. Similarly, we see no significant difference between calculated layer abundances and bulk-crustal heat production when using these geophysical models. The bulk crustal heat production is calculated as $7 \pm2$~terrawatts, which includes an increase of 1~TW in uncertainty relative to previous studies. Future improvements, including uncertainty attribution and near-field modeling, are discussed.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Measurement of reactor antineutrino oscillations with 1.46 ktonne-years of data at SNO+

    hep-ex 2025-11 accept novelty 6.0

    SNO+ measures Δm²₂₁ = (7.93^{+0.21}_{-0.24})×10⁻⁵ eV² from 1.46 ktonne-years of reactor antineutrino data and detects geoneutrinos at 49^{+13}_{-12} TNU.