MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032665145 · doi:10.1121/1.4787147

Infrasound associated with stratospheric ash injection, window-shattering explosions, and incandescent avalanches at Tungurahua Volcano, Ecuador

2006· article· en· W2032665145 on OpenAlexaff
Milton Garcés, David Fee, S. McNamara, D. McCormack, Henry E. Bass

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfrasoundVolcanoPyroclastic rockVolcanic ashGeologyAtmosphere (unit)SeismologyExplosive eruptionEnvironmental scienceVulcanian eruptionMeteorologyAcousticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On July 14, 2006, Tungurahua volcano in Ecuador initiated a dramatic eruptive sequence that caused the evacuation of villagers, the destruction of crops, and the reports of ash clouds above 15 km. Acoustic signals have been recorded by the prototype infrasound acoustic-surveillance system (ASHE) currently operating in Ecuador. The infrasonic signals recorded by the ASHE included explosions, pyroclastic flows, and a sustained low frequency vibration of the ground. We present the features of the different types of eruption signals, and discuss the physics of eruptive processes and volcanic ash injection into the atmosphere. We also compare the July 2006 ash-rich eruption sequence with the May 2006 eruptive episode, which injected very little ash into the atmosphere. Results are of significance for the future operational use of acoustic monitoring of volcanic activity for aviation safety.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.183
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207