A Time-Term Interpretation of the First-Arrival Data of the 1963 Lake Superior Experiment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first-arrival data of the Lake Superior Experiment of 1963 have been interpreted by the time-term method, which analysis has shown to be well suited to this type of survey, and the results appear to be consistent and meaningful. Approximately 500 first arrivals from head waves generated at the Mohorovičić discontinuity have been reduced to estimates of crustal time terms at more than 100 locations. A much shallower refracting surface, here called the upper refractor, furnished nearly 1000 observations to yield upper-crustal time terms at the same locations. The analysis reveals the material beneath the upper refractor and beneath the M discontinuity to have velocities of 6.63 and 8.10 km/sec, respectively. On the basis of a simple interpretation of the time terms, the surface of the upper refractor is revealed as undulating, coming close to the surface at the edges of the lake, and reaching maximum depths (not exceeding 15 km) to the east and west of the Keweenaw Peninsula. On a similar basis the M discontinuity is revealed as an easterly dipping surface, having a depth of approximately 35 km at the west end of the lake and reaching a maximum depth of about 60 km in the region just west of the Keweenaw Peninsula. Eastward, the time-term values fluctuate but do not increase or decrease systematically.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 it