Towards the definition of AMS facies in the deposits of pyroclastic density currents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility (AMS) provides a statistically robust technique to characterize the fabrics of deposits of pyroclastic density currents (PDCs). AMS fabrics in two types of pyroclastic deposits (small-volume phreatomagmatic currents in the Hopi Buttes volcanic field, Arizona, USA, and large-volume caldera-forming currents, Caviahue Caldera, Neuquén, Argentina) show similar patterns. Near the vent and in areas of high topographical roughness, AMS depositional fabrics are poorly grouped, with weak lineations and foliations. In a densely welded proximal ignimbrite, this fabric is overprinted by a foliation formed as the rock compacted and deformed. Medial deposits have moderate–strong AMS lineations and foliations. The most distal deposits have strong foliations but weak lineations. Based on these facies and existing models for pyroclastic density currents, deposition in the medial areas occurs from the strongly sheared, high-particle-concentration base of a density-stratified current. In proximal areas and where topography mixes this denser base upwards into the current, deposition occurs rapidly from a current with little uniformity to the shear, in which particles fall and collide in a chaotic fashion. Distal deposits are emplaced by a slowing or stalled current so that the dominant particle motion is vertical, leading to weak lineation and strong foliation.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".