A simple metric to quantify seismicity clustering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The Thirulamai-Mountain (TM) metric was first developed to study ergodicity in fluids and glasses (Thirumalai and Mountain, 1993) using the concept of effective ergodicity, where a large but finite time interval is considered. Tiampo et al. (2007) employed the TM metric to earthquake systems to search for effective ergodic periods, which are considered to be metastable equilibrium states that are disrupted by large events. The physical meaning of the TM metric for seismicity is addressed here in terms of the clustering of earthquakes in both time and space for different sets of data. It is shown that the TM metric is highly dependent not only on spatial/temporal seismicity clustering, but on the past seismic activity of the region and the time intervals considered as well, and that saturation occurs over time, resulting in a lower sensitivity to local clustering. These results confirm that the TM metric can be used to quantify seismicity clustering from both spatial and temporal perspectives, in which the disruption of effective ergodic periods are caused by the agglomeration of events.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".