Systems of Lineaments of Magnetic and Gravity Anomalies in the Zone of Convergent Interaction of the Amur and the Eurasian Tectonic Plates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied the spatial distribution of anomalies of the gravitational and the magnetic fields at the border between the Amur and the Eurasian plates. Methods of statistical analysis showed that the systems of anomalies of geophysical fields fit into the regular spatial structures and are controlled by lineaments of latitude, longitude and diagonal stretch, as well as zones of plastic-elastic flow of rocks (shear-zone). These facts allowed us to establish time of formation of the orthogonal system of geophysical fields anomalies in the strike azimuths (84-3540). As a result of comparing diagonal system of geophysical fields anomalies with spatial distribution of the fields of contemporary seismicity and epicenters of strong earthquakes, an assumption was made that the diagonal system of lineaments fit into zones of tectonic deformation and has been controlling the epicentral fields of contemporary seismicity since the Mesozoic period of seismotectonic activation. The main result of this study is the synthesis of early scientific works and getting new ideas about the spatial distribution of anomalies of geophysical fields. Establishing the sequence of forming isolated systems of anomalies and relationships between geophysical fields and seismicity is the subject of further research.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".