MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1584202978 · doi:10.1029/me004p0367

Velocity Changes in the Charlevoix Region, Quebec

2011· book-chapter· en· W1584202978 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Goetz G. R. Buchbinder

Bibliographic record

VenueMaurice Ewing series · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShot (pellet)GeologyShoreMagnitude (astronomy)GeodesySeismologyPhysicsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the seismically active region of Charlevoix, Quebec, seismic travel time experiments have been undertaken from 2 shot points that were recorded at up to 13 stations. Over a period of 1870 days, 12 shots were set off on the northshore and 8 shots on the southshore of the St. Lawrence River. Epicentral distances vary from 12 to 68 km. Significant long term changes in travel time residuals of up to 46 ± 11 ms have been observed. The maximum difference from one shot point to two of the stations is 76 ± 16 ms. A maximum in residual was observed SW of the center of the Charlevoix impact structure in 1976, this maximum spread towards the NE in 1978 and the SW in 1978 and 1979. The relative average shot residuals from the north shore increased from 1974 to 1977 then decreased in 1978 and remained steady through 1979. For the south shore a maximum was observed in 1976 after which it gradually decreased. Two small earthquakes on 31 October 1976 and 5 July 1979, are not likely to have resulted in short term velocity changes, but a magnitude 5.1 event certainly did not. The hypothesis that the vertical component of the earth tide produced changes in travel-time was tested experimentally and rejected. It is concluded that the observed negative changes in velocity, can be explained in terms of the dilatancy-diffusion model. Positive changes in velocity may be due to the closing of cracks.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaurice Ewing series→Same topicearthquake and tectonic studies→French-language works237,207→