MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1509434854

Mapping the ductile-brittle transition of dome lavas

2010· article· en· W1509434854 on OpenAlexaff
Yan Lavallée, Philip Benson, Michael J. Heap, Kai‐Uwe Hess, A. Flaws, Donald B. Dingwell

Bibliographic record

VenueThe EGU General Assembly · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyBrittlenessSeismologyStrain rateMagmaExplosive materialGeothermal gradientAnisotropyVolcanoMaterials scienceGeophysicsComposite material
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The failure of magma and onset of an explosive eruption is commonly preceded by accelerations in discharge rate and seismic activity. As magma is mechanically forced through the ductile-brittle transition, cracks propagate and coalesce, thereby generating an increasing amount of seismic energy, which can be used to forecast the onset of explosive eruptions. In this study dome lavas from Volcan de Colima (Mexico) are deformed at 930 °C under various stresses (1 to 76 MPa) in a uniaxial press. Crack propagation in the magma is monitored by two acoustic emission sensors and used as a proxy to forecast the time of failure (e.g., Kilburn, J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 2003). We assess the degree of fracture damage and anisotropy of the fracture network in 3-D via high-resolution (30 micron) Neutron Computer Tomography imaging. Tomography images of magmas experimentally deformed in the ductile-brittle transition reveals that at high strain rate, failure occurs rapidly along macroscopic cracks and requires less strain than failure at lower strain rate. The time window to accurately forecast the failure of magma thus diminishes with strain rate.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.780
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.178 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe EGU General AssemblySame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207