MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1637942467 · doi:10.1002/jgrb.50194

The role of viscous magma mush spreading in volcanic flank motion at Kīlauea Volcano, Hawai‘i

2013· article· en· W1637942467 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Christina Plattner, Falk Amelung, S. Baker, Rob Govers, M. P. Poland

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Solid Earth · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Space AgencyUniversity of the PacificUniversity of Hawai'iU.S. Geological SurveyNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGeologyVolcanoMagmaFlankDikeSeismologyRift zoneMagma chamberGeodesyInterferometric synthetic aperture radarTectonicsRiftPetrologySynthetic aperture radar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Multiple mechanisms have been suggested to explain seaward motion of the south flank of Kīlauea Volcano, Hawai‘i. The consistency of flank motion during both waxing and waning magmatic activity at Kīlauea suggests that a continuously acting force, like gravity body force, plays a substantial role. Using finite element models, we test whether gravity is the principal driver of long‐term motion of Kīlauea's flank. We compare our model results to geodetic data from Global Positioning System and interferometric synthetic aperture radar during a time period with few magmatic and tectonic events (2000–2003), when deformation of Kīlauea was dominated by summit subsidence and seaward motion of the south flank. We find that gravity‐only models can reproduce the horizontal surface velocities if we incorporate a regional décollement fault and a deep, low‐viscosity magma mush zone. To obtain quasi steady state horizontal surface velocities that explain the long‐term seaward motion of the flank, we find that an additional weak zone is needed, which is an extensional rift zone above the magma mush. The spreading rate in our model is mainly controlled by the magma mush viscosity, while its density plays a less significant role. We find that a viscosity of 2.5 × 10 17 –2.5 × 10 19 Pa s for the magma mush provides an acceptable fit to the observed horizontal surface deformation. Using high magma mush viscosities, such as 2.5 × 10 19 Pa s, the deformation rates remain more steady state over longer time scales. These models explain a significant amount of the observed subsidence at Kīlauea's summit. Some of the remaining subsidence is probably a result of magma withdrawal from subsurface reservoirs.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.580
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.260 · 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.

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

Citations25
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Solid EarthSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207