MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110082266 · doi:10.1029/2002gl015986

Prolonged post‐seismic deformation of the 1960 great Chile earthquake and implications for mantle rheology

2002· article· en· W2110082266 on OpenAlexaff
Giorgi Khazaradze, Kelin Wang, J. Klotz, Yan Hu, J. He

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologySeismologySubductionMantle (geology)Deformation (meteorology)Slip (aerodynamics)GeophysicsTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contemporary crustal deformation of the southern Andean margin shows an interesting feature: While nearly all coastal GPS sites move landward, consistent with inter‐seismic deformation near a locked subduction fault, sites 300–400 km landward of the rupture region of the M w 9.5 1960 Chile earthquake are moving in the opposite direction. We attribute the seaward motion of these inland sites to a prolonged crustal deformation due to mantle stress relaxation following the 1960 great earthquake. In order to reproduce the observed seaward motion using a three‐dimensional finite element model we need to incorporate a mantle viscosity of about 3 × 10 19 Pa s. The possibility that the seaward motion is caused by a silent slip event on the plate interface at large depths cannot be completely excluded, and our analysis provides a working model for future field tests.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations90
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207