Experimental and analytical modeling of basaltic ash explosions at Mount Etna, Italy, 2001
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The summer 2001 flank eruption of Mount Etna ended with repeated basaltic ash explosions. The explosions were similar to small‐scale Vulcanian blasts and probably originated when a plug of magma at the top of the conduit became overpressurized. We use three independent methods to estimate the overpressure in the plug: (1) To determine the pressure differential required to fragment the plug, we use a shock tube apparatus to heat and pressurize ballistic blocks at temperature T up to 900°C and pressure P up to 25 MPa and rapidly decompress them to ambient conditions; (2) we apply a model to determine the overpressure generated by microlite growth at depth because pyroclasts from the explosions have 35 vol % more microlites than preceding Strombolian product; and (3) we relate the range of ballistic blocks to their exit velocity and, with models for Vulcanian eruptions, the exit velocity to pressure in the conduit. Experiments and ejecta range bracket the overpressure driving the explosions between ∼3 and ∼5 MPa: below 2.5 MPa the blocks would not reach the observed range, but above 5 MPa the existing blocks with 20% porosity would not survive the explosions. Crystallization of 35 vol % microlites at a depth of ∼100 m increases the pressure in the plug to ∼6 MPa above atmospheric, enough to drive the explosions, with a possible contribution from deeper volatiles. Combining the different methods, we also constrain the exsolved water at fragmentation at ∼0.05 wt % and provide inferences on how the explosions came to an end.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".