Finding concealed active faults: Extending the southern Whidbey Island fault across the Puget Lowland, Washington
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The southern Whidbey Island fault zone (SWIF), as previously mapped using borehole data, potential field anomalies, and marine seismic reflection surveys, consists of three subparallel, northwest trending strands extending ∼100 km from near Vancouver Island to the northern Puget Lowland. East of Puget Sound, the SWIF makes landfall between the cities of Seattle and Everett but is concealed beneath a thick mantle of young glacial deposits and vegetation. A ∼20‐km‐wide, northwest trending swath of subparallel, low‐amplitude aeromagnetic anomalies crosses this region of the Puget Lowland and is on strike with the SWIF. The most prominent aeromagnetic anomaly, the Cottage Lake lineament, extends at least 18 km and lies approximately on strike with the SWIF on Whidbey Island. Subtle scarps and topographic lineaments on Pleistocene surfaces, visible on high‐resolution lidar topography at a number of locations along the SWIF, lie on or near these magnetic anomalies. In the field, scarps exhibit northeast‐side‐up and vertical relief of 1 to 5 m. Excavations across several lidar scarps lying on or near magnetic anomalies show evidence for multiple folding and faulting events since deglaciation, most likely above buried reverse/oblique faults. Excavations in areas away from magnetic anomalies do not show evidence of tectonic deformation. In total, paleoseismological evidence suggests that the SWIF produced at least four earthquakes since deglaciation about 16,400 years ago, the most recent less than 2700 years ago.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".