MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1598984485 · doi:10.1029/2012gc004341

Constraining volcanic inflation at Three Sisters Volcanic Field in Oregon, USA, through microgravity and deformation modeling

2012· article· en· W1598984485 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey Zurek, Glyn Williams‐Jones, Dan Johnson, A.E. Eggers

Bibliographic record

VenueGeochemistry Geophysics Geosystems · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyVolcanoMagmaCrustViscoelasticitySeismologyVolcanismPetrologyDeformation (meteorology)Cabin pressurizationViscosityGeophysicsTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microgravity data were collected between 2002 and 2009 at the Three Sisters Volcanic Complex, Oregon, to investigate the causes of an ongoing deformation event west of South Sister volcano. Three different conceptual models have been proposed as the causal mechanism for the deformation event: (1) hydraulic uplift due to continual injection of magma at depth, (2) pressurization of hydrothermal systems and (3) viscoelastic response to an initial pressurization at depth. The gravitational effect of continual magma injection was modeled to be 20 to 33μGal at the center of the deformation field with volumes based on previous deformation studies. The gravity time series, however, did not detect a mass increase suggesting that a viscoelactic response of the crust is the most likely cause for the deformation from 2002 to 2009. The crust, deeper than 3 km, in the Three Sisters region was modeled as a Maxwell viscoelastic material and the results suggest a dynamic viscosity between 1018to 5 × 1019Pa s. This low crustal viscosity suggests that magma emplacement or stall depth is controlled by density and not the brittle ductile transition zone. Furthermore, these crustal properties and the observed geochemical composition gaps at Three Sisters can be best explained by different melt sources and limited magma mixing rather than fractional crystallization. More generally, low intrusion rates, low crustal viscosity, and multiple melt sources could also explain the whole rock compositional gaps observed at other arc volcanoes.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations18
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeochemistry Geophysics GeosystemsSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207