MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001293412 · doi:10.1186/bf03352816

Geohazard assessment from satellite magnetic data modeling—with examples from the Arctic Margin along the Canada Basin and the Korean Peninsula along 40°N (latitude) parallel

2008· article· en· W2001293412 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Patrick T. Taylor, Hyung Rae Kim, Jan Kutina, G. Leonard Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth Planets and Space · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSejong University
KeywordsGeologyPeninsulaMagnetic anomalyAnomaly (physics)LatitudeBasin and Range ProvinceTectonicsSeismologyCrustAltitude (triangle)Structural basinPaleontologyGeodesyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Long-wavelength, relative high-amplitude-magnetic anomalies obtained at satellite altitudes have provided an understanding of the nature of the deeper crust of the Earth. We have studied two such long-wavelength anomalies in regions of high stress—one with a large and one with a lower amplitude anomaly. The first feature is on the Canada Basin continental margin in the Northwest and Yukon Territories, Canada (magnetic anomaly range: 19 nT to −6 nT at 350-km altitude). This area is also the focus of significant stress and earthquake activity. We interpret this anomaly and associated tectonic activity with this region’s position at or near the fulcrum of the scissors-like opening of the Canada Basin in the mid-Mesozoic Era. The second is a section along the 40°N (latitude) parallel crossing the Korean Peninsula (magnetic anomaly range: <−2 nT to >3 nT at 350-km altitude), where an east-west fracture zone has been proposed to extend from northeastern China, across the Korean Peninsula, Sea of Japan and (Northern) Japan.

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)0.000
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 score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.763

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations6
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth Planets and SpaceSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207