MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110246618 · doi:10.1029/2012gl054328

Seismic anisotropy of subducting oceanic uppermost mantle from fossil spreading

2012· article· en· W2110246618 on OpenAlexaff
Pascal Audet

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicHigh-pressure geophysics and materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologySubductionMantle (geology)Seismic anisotropyAnisotropySlabSeismologyGeophysicsReceiver functionShear wave splittingMantle wedgeLithosphereTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Identifying the sources of seismic anisotropy in subduction zone forearcs is key to understanding mantle deformation processes. Current models based on the interpretation of shear‐wave splitting measurements favor the flow‐induced alignment of olivine crystals around down‐going slabs or the presence of foliated serpentine minerals due to subduction‐related processes, thereby neglecting fossil slab fabric as a significant source of anisotropy. We use seismic receiver functions to show evidence for strong anisotropy within anhydrous uppermost mantle of subducting oceanic plates in the forearcs of Nankai, Cascadia, Mexico, and Costa Rica subduction zones. Seismic anisotropy models from the inversion of receiver function waveforms are consistent with fossil fabric generated at spreading ridges.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations37
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicHigh-pressure geophysics and materialsFrench-language works237,207