Moon meteoritic seismic hum: Steady state prediction
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We use three different statistical models describing the frequency of meteoroid impacts on Earth to estimate the seismic background noise due to impacts on the lunar surface. Because of diffraction, seismic events on the Moon are typically characterized by long codas, lasting 1 h or more. We find that the small but frequent impacts generate seismic signals whose codas overlap in time, resulting in a permanent seismic noise that we term the “lunar hum” by analogy with the Earth's continuous seismic background seismic hum. We find that the Apollo era impact detection rates and amplitudes are well explained by a model that parameterizes (1) the net seismic impulse due to the impactor and resulting ejecta and (2) the effects of diffraction and attenuation. The formulation permits the calculation of a composite waveform at any point on the Moon due to simulated impacts at any epicentral distance. The root‐mean‐square amplitude of this waveform yields a background noise level that is about 100 times lower than the resolution of the Apollo long‐period seismometers. At 2 s periods, this noise level is more than 1000 times lower than the low noise model prediction for Earth's microseismic noise. Sufficiently sensitive seismometers will allow the future detection of several impacts per day at body wave frequencies.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it