Crustal thickness and Moho character of the fast‐spreading East Pacific Rise from 9°42′N to 9°57′N from poststack‐migrated 3‐D MCS data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We computed crustal thickness (5740 ± 270 m) and mapped Moho reflection character using 3‐D seismic data covering 658 km2 of the fast‐spreading East Pacific Rise (EPR) from 9°42′N to 9°57′N. Moho reflections are imaged within ∼87% of the study area. Average crustal thickness varies little between large sections of the study area suggesting regionally uniform crustal production in the last ∼180 Ka. However, individual crustal thickness measurements differ by as much as 1.75 km indicating that the mantle melt delivery has not been uniform. Third‐order, but not fourth‐order ridge discontinuities are associated with changes in the Moho reflection character and/or near‐axis crustal thickness. This suggests that the third‐order segmentation is governed by melt distribution processes within the uppermost mantle while the fourth‐order ridge segmentation arises from midcrustal to upper‐crustal processes. In this light, we assign fourth‐order ridge discontinuity status to the debated ridge segment boundary at ∼9°45′N and third‐order status at ∼9°51.5′N to the ridge segment boundary previously interpreted as a fourth‐order discontinuity. Our seismic results also suggest that the mechanism of lower‐crustal accretion varies along the investigated section of the EPR but that the volume of melt delivered to the crust is mostly uniform. More efficient mantle melt extraction is inferred within the southern half of our survey area with greater proportion of the lower crust accreted from the axial magma lens than that for the northern half. This south‐to‐north variation in the crustal accretion style may be caused by interaction between the melt sources for the ridge and the Lamont seamounts.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".