Articles | Volume 4, issue 2
Geochronology, 4, 533–549, 2022
Geochronology, 4, 533–549, 2022
Research article
18 Aug 2022
Research article | 18 Aug 2022

Combined linear-regression and Monte Carlo approach to modeling exposure age depth profiles

Yiran Wang and Michael E. Oskin

Related authors

Rapid Holocene bedrock canyon incision of Beida River, North Qilian Shan, China
Yiran Wang, Michael E. Oskin, Youli Li, and Huiping Zhang
Earth Surf. Dynam., 10, 191–208,,, 2022
Short summary

Related subject area

Cosmogenic nuclide dating
Cosmogenic nuclide weathering biases: corrections and potential for denudation and weathering rate measurements
Richard F. Ott, Sean F. Gallen, and Darryl E. Granger
Geochronology, 4, 455–470,,, 2022
Short summary
Cosmogenic nuclide and solute flux data from central Cuban rivers emphasize the importance of both physical and chemical mass loss from tropical landscapes
Mae Kate Campbell, Paul R. Bierman, Amanda H. Schmidt, Rita Sibello Hernández, Alejandro García-Moya, Lee B. Corbett, Alan J. Hidy, Héctor Cartas Águila, Aniel Guillén Arruebarrena, Greg Balco, David Dethier, and Marc Caffee
Geochronology, 4, 435–453,,, 2022
Short summary
Technical note: Accelerator mass spectrometry of 10Be and 26Al at low nuclide concentrations
Klaus M. Wilcken, Alexandru T. Codilean, Réka-H. Fülöp, Steven Kotevski, Anna H. Rood, Dylan H. Rood, Alexander J. Seal, and Krista Simon
Geochronology, 4, 339–352,,, 2022
Short summary
Reconciling the apparent absence of a Last Glacial Maximum alpine glacial advance, Yukon Territory, Canada, through cosmogenic beryllium-10 and carbon-14 measurements
Brent M. Goehring, Brian Menounos, Gerald Osborn, Adam Hawkins, and Brent Ward
Geochronology, 4, 311–322,,, 2022
Short summary
Cosmogenic ages indicate no MIS 2 refugia in the Alexander Archipelago, Alaska
Caleb K. Walcott, Jason P. Briner, James F. Baichtal, Alia J. Lesnek, and Joseph M. Licciardi
Geochronology, 4, 191–211,,, 2022
Short summary

Cited articles

Anderson, R. S., Repka, J. L., and Dick, G. S.: Explicit treatment of inheritance in dating depositional surfaces using in situ 10Be and 26Al, Geology, 24, 47–51, 1996. 
Balco, G.: Production rate calculations for cosmic-ray-muon-produced 10Be and 26Al benchmarked against geological calibration data, Quat. Geochronol., 39, 150–173,, 2017. 
Balco, G., Stone, J. O., Lifton, N. A., and Dunai, T. J.: A complete and easily accessible means of calculating surface exposure ages or erosion rates from 10Be and 26Al measurements, Quat. Geochronol., 3, 174–195,, 2008. 
Braucher, R., Brown, E. T., Bourlès, D. L., and Colin, F.: In situ produced 10Be measurements at great depths: Implications for production rates by fast muons, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 211, 251–258,, 2003. 
Braucher, R., Del Castillo, P., Siame, L., Hidy, A. J., and Bourlés, D. L.: Determination of both exposure time and denudation rate from an in situ-produced 10Be depth profile: A mathematical proof of uniqueness. Model sensitivity and applications to natural cases, Quat. Geochronol., 4, 56–67,, 2009. 
Short summary
When first introduced together with the depth profile technique to determine the surface exposure age, the linear inversion approach has suffered with the drawbacks of not incorporating erosion and muons into calculation. In this paper, we increase the accuracy and applicability of the linear inversion approach by fully considering surface erosion, muogenic production, and radioactive decay, while maintaining its advantage of being straightforward to determine an exposure age.