Magnitude and symmetry of seismic anisotropy in mica‐ and amphibole‐bearing metamorphic rocks and implications for tectonic interpretation of seismic data from the southeast Tibetan Plateau
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We calibrated the magnitude and symmetry of seismic anisotropy for 132 mica‐ or amphibole‐bearing metamorphic rocks to constrain their departures from transverse isotropy (TI) which is usually assumed in the interpretation of seismic data. The average bulk V p anisotropy at 600 MPa for the chlorite schists, mica schists, phyllites, sillimanite‐mica schists, and amphibole schists examined is 12.0%, 12.8%, 12.8%, 17.0%, and 12.9%, respectively. Most of the schists show V p anisotropy in the foliation plane which averages 2.4% for phyllites, 3.3% for mica schists, 4.1% for chlorite schists, 6.8% for sillimanite‐mica schists, and 5.2% for amphibole schists. This departure from TI is due to the presence of amphibole, sillimanite, and quartz. Amphibole and sillimanite develop strong crystallographic preferred orientations with the fast c axes parallel to the lineation, forming orthorhombic anisotropy with V p ( X ) > V p ( Y ) > V p ( Z ). Effects of quartz are complicated, depending on its volume fraction and prevailing slip system. Most of the mica‐ or amphibole‐bearing schists and mylonites are approximately transversely isotropic in terms of S wave velocities and splitting although their P wave properties may display orthorhombic symmetry. The results provide insight for the interpretation of seismic data from the southeast Tibetan Plateau. The N‐S to NW‐SE polarized crustal anisotropy in the Sibumasu and Indochina blocks is caused by subvertically foliated mica‐ and amphibole‐bearing rocks deformed by predominantly compressional folding and subordinate strike‐slip shear. These blocks have been rotated clockwise 70–90° around the east Himalayan Syntaxis, without finite eastward or southeastward extrusion, in responding to progressive indentation of India into Asia.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".