MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069146762 · doi:10.1007/978-3-0348-8179-1_7

Reliability of Seismic Moment Tensor Inversions for Induced Microseismicity at Kidd Mine, Ontario

2002· book-chapter· en· W2069146762 on OpenAlexaffabout
C. I. Trifu, V. Shumila

Bibliographic record

VenueBirkhäuser Basel eBooks · 2002
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Apheresis Group
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologySillMicroseismSeismologyMoment tensorShear (geology)SeismometerPillarGeotechnical engineeringPetrologyStructural engineeringEngineeringDeformation (meteorology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel seismic moment tensor inversion approach is applied to microseismic events from the Kidd mine with moment magnitudes ranging between –1.2 and O. Data consist of 35 events recorded on 8 triaxial accelerometers installed underground. Reliable solutions are obtained for 21 events, of which 14 represent pure shear mechanisms, whereas the remaining 7 exhibit a significant positive volumetric component (72–76%), along with some pure shear failure (15–20%). Further analysis indicates that 6 of the events characterized by high volumetric components are located within a sill pillar on the 4,700 level and have subvertical P and subhorizontal T axes. This is in agreement with the presence of tensile cracks close to openings for incipient pillar bursting. The pure shear events are located outside the sill pillar, between the 4,600 and 4,800 levels, and on the 5,600 level within a highly fractured rockmass. For the latter events, the subvertical nodal planes are found to match closely the orientation of subvertical NW-SE fractures aligned parallel to the major faults in the area.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.612
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.166 · 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

Citations15
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBirkhäuser Basel eBooksSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207