Inverting interpolated receiver functions with surface wave dispersion and gravity: Application to the western U.S. and adjacent Canada and Mexico
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We use P wave receiver functions from the western U.S. and adjacent regions to construct a receiver function wavefield interpolation scheme that helps to equalize the lateral sampling of the receiver functions and the surface wave dispersion and to greatly simplify the receiver functions. Spatial interpolation and smoothing suppress poorly sampled and difficult to interpret back azimuthal variations and allow the extraction of the first‐order features in the receiver function wavefield, including observations from several ray parameter ranges. We combine the interpolated receiver functions with Rayleigh wave dispersion estimates and surface gravity observations to estimate the 3‐D shear wave speed beneath the region. Speed variations in the 3‐D model correlate strongly with expected geologic variations and illuminate broad‐scale features of the western U.S. crust and upper mantle. The model is smooth, self‐consistent, and demonstrates the compatibility of the interpolated receiver functions and dispersion observations.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".