MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062717515 · doi:10.1130/l286.1

Temporal variations in Holocene slip rate along the central Garlock fault, Pilot Knob Valley, California

2014· article· en· W2062717515 on OpenAlexafffund
W. M. Rittase, Eric Kirby, Eric V. McDonald, J. Douglas Walker, John Gosse, Joel Q.G. Spencer, A. J. Herrs

Bibliographic record

VenueLithosphere · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersMcGill UniversityPurdue UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsHoloceneGeologySlip (aerodynamics)AlluviumAlluvial fanQuaternaryFault (geology)PleistoceneGeodetic datumSeismologyPaleontologyGeodesy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Average geologic slip rates along the central Garlock fault, in eastern California, are thought to have been relatively steady at 5–7 mm/yr since at least the Late Pleistocene, yet present-day rates inferred from geodetic velocity fields are indistinguishable from zero. We evaluate the possibility of non-steady slip over millennial timescales using displaced Late Holocene alluvium along the central Garlock fault in Pilot Knob Valley. Truncation of a Late Holocene alluvial fan deposit against a shutter ridge requires a minimum of 30–37 m of displacement since deposition of the fan; maximum allowable displacement is 43–50 m. The extent of soil development atop the fan surface and optically stimulated luminescence ages bracket fan deposition between 3.5 and 4.5 ka. Together, these data require that slip rates during the Late Holocene were ∼7–14 mm/yr, with a preferred rate of ∼11–13 mm/yr. Our results, in conjunction with previous estimates of displacement over the past ∼15 ka, require significant temporal variations in strain release along the Garlock fault and confirm previous suggestions that interactions among fault systems in eastern California give rise to alternating periods of fault activity and quiescence.

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 score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.249

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations34
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLithosphereSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207