Luminous Shapes with Unusual Motions as Potential Predictors of Earthquakes: A Historical Summary of the Validity and Application of the Tectonic Strain Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For centuries and on every continent discrete shapes of lights with unusual motions have preceded earthquakes. The numbers of these lights per interval within a region have been strongly correlated with the amount of seismic energy subsequently released within that region. These temporal intervals range between 3 months and 6 months for areas more than 500 kmin radius and less than a month for smaller radii. Other analyses have shown that the same tectonic strain associated with earthquakes is also associated with the display of luminous events before those earthquakes. This strain can be precipitated by injections of fluids into the crust, natural changes in hydrological loads on rivers, or, purposeful displacement of water into reservoirs. The strengths of the associations are sufficient to allow modest forecasting of earthquakes within the boundaries of the region and the temporal interval of analysis. More accurate utilization of these phenomena as prognosticators of specific earthquakes will require a re-evaluation of the manner by which these data are systematically recorded and interpreted.
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 | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".