MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969148653 · doi:10.1029/2002gl015406

Thermal models of the Middle America Trench at the Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica

2002· article· en· W1969148653 on OpenAlexaff
Robert N. Harris, Kelin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGeologyForearcSubductionTrenchInduced seismicityAccretionary wedgeSeismologyHypocenterHydrothermal circulationSeafloor spreadingThermalPrismPetrologyGeophysicsTectonicsMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present thermal models of the 24 Ma Cocos plate subducting under the Caribbean plate at the Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica. Our modeling incorporates the effect of hydrothermal cooling of the seafloor and the absence of an accretionary prism. Initial geotherms of the incoming plate, representing different effective cooling depths of hydrothermal circulation, affect the thermal structure and temperatures along the main subduction thrust. Excluding the deforming prism results in a higher heat flow immediately landward of the trench than previous models and therefore significant frictional heating is not required. Conductive plate cooling over‐predicts heat flow across the frontal forearc. With no or very low frictional heating, models with hydrothermal cooling to depths of 2 km under‐predicts the heat flow. Comparisons with recently determined hypocenter locations indicate that the updip limit of seismicity is consistent with temperatures between 100°–150°C, but there are large along‐strike variations in both the seismicity and thermal regime.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.320
Threshold uncertainty score0.636

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.178 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations139
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207