Displacement analysis of the GPS station of Sampali, Indonesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The displacement of the SAMP GPS station located in Medan City, Indonesia, is analyzed by means of an on-line point positioning method, the Canadian Spatial Reference System-Precise Point Positioning (CSRS-PPP). Based on the comparison of the results obtained with those from previous studies, we propose that CSRS-PPP can be applied to analyses of the displacement of a GPS station. Previous studies have focused solely on the “Sumatra-Andaman Islands Earthquake of December 26, 2004”; in contrast, we provide here an in-depth analysis of the crustal movements at the SAMP station for an expanded period of 2.5 years. CSRS-PPP, an Internet data processing service of the Department of Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), was used to process the data obtained at the SAMP station from January 2004 to July 2006. The data show a clear displacement in the southwestern direction from December 26, 2004 to March 28, 2005 when two major earthquakes occurred. However, after the midpoint of 2005, the data show displacement at a regular speed. In particular, the “Sumatra-Andaman Islands Earthquake (M w = 9.0) of December 26, 2004” led to a displacement of 0.1387 m (dn = −0.0122 m, de = −0.1382 m) to the southwest. The earthquake (M w = 8.7) that occurred on March 28, 2005 led to a displacement of 0.1921 m (dn = −0.1400 m, de = −0.1315 m) to the southwest. Starting from December 26, 2004, displacement to the southwest continued. From April 2005, however, the speed of the displacement gradually slowed down. The dn variation shows a displacement at a regular rate (−55.69 mm/year) from April 28, 2005 to July 2006, while the de variation shows a displacement at a regular rate (−23.66 mm/year) from July 5, 2005 to July 2006.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".