Great earthquakes on Canada’s west coast: a review This article is one of a series of papers published in this Special Issue on the theme<i>Lithoprobe — parameters, processes, and the evolution of a continent</i>. Geological Survey of Canada Contribution 20090196.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first Lithoprobe transect in 1984 across Vancouver Island had primary objectives to define the structure associated with subduction and constraints on the potential for great thrust earthquakes. The Lithoprobe results and the comprehensive multidisciplinary data collection and analyses that followed provide compelling evidence for past great earthquakes along the Cascadia subduction zone from Vancouver Island to northernmost California, and for present elastic strain build up toward future great events. There is evidence of sudden coastal subsidence up to 2 m and of deep-sea turbidite deposits indicating strong shaking from huge earthquakes at irregular intervals averaging about 500 years, the last in 1700. Precision geodetic measurements define the present buckling of the coastal region, diagnostic of elastic strain accumulation on a locked thrust fault. The landward extent of rupture and, therefore, shaking at coastal cities is constrained by (i) the pattern of elastic strain buildup, (ii) the estimated temperatures on the fault, (iii) the updip limit of episodic tremor and slip (ETS), (iv) the downdip change in reflection character of the thrust, and (v) the magnitude of coastal subsidence in the most recent, 1700, and previous great events. The major earthquakes are very large, M9, rupturing most of the Cascadia margin, but mainly offshore, limiting somewhat the shaking at inland cities but producing large tsunamis. The ETS that occurs at intervals of just over a year appears to involve slow slip on the subduction thrust downdip of the rupture zone that increases stress on the locked zone and may indicate time varying potential for great events.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".