MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984805061 · doi:10.1029/2011je004042

Investigation of scattering in lunar seismic coda

2012· article· en· W1984805061 on OpenAlexaff
J. F. Blanchette-Guertin, C. L. Johnson, J. F. Lawrence

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCodaSeismogramScatteringAttenuationGeologyAmplitudeSeismologyEjectaMagnitude (astronomy)WaveformPhysicsGeophysicsComputational physicsAstrophysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the intrinsic attenuation and scattering properties of the Moon by parameterizing the coda decay of 369 higher‐quality lunar seismograms from 72 events via their characteristic rise and decay times. We investigate any dependence of the decay times on source type, frequency, and epicentral distance. Intrinsic attenuation, scattering, and possible focusing of energy in a near‐surface, low‐velocity layer all contribute to the coda decay. Although it is not possible to quantify the exact contribution of each of these effects in the seismograms, results suggest that scattering in a near‐surface global layer dominates the records of shallow events (∼0–200 km depth), particularly at frequencies above 2 Hz, and for increasing epicentral distance. We propose that the scattering layer is the megaregolith and that energy from shallow sources encounters more scatterers as it travels longer distances in the layer, increasing the coda decay times. A size distribution of ejecta blocks that has more small‐scale than large‐scale scatterers intensifies this effect for increasing frequencies. Deep moonquakes (700–1100 km depth) exhibit no dependence of the decay time on epicentral distance. We suggest that because of their large depths and small amplitudes, deep moonquakes from any distance sample a similar region near a given receiver. Near‐station structure and geology may also control the decay times of local events, as evidenced by two natural impact records. This study provides constraints and testable hypotheses for waveform modeling of the lunar interior that includes the effects of intense scattering and shallow, low‐velocity layers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations49
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207