MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110768304 · doi:10.5194/se-4-373-2013

Can vesicle size distributions assess eruption intensity during volcanic activity?

2013· article· en· W2110768304 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSolid Earth · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersArgonne National LaboratoryBasic Energy SciencesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Department of EnergyOffice of ScienceAgence Nationale de la RechercheNational Science Foundation
KeywordsStrombolian eruptionPower lawVolcanoGeologyMagmaScoriaSeismologyGeophysicsPyroclastic rockMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. We studied three-dimensional (3-D) vesicle size distributions by X-ray microtomography in scoria collected during the relatively quiescent Phase II of the April–May 2010 eruption at Eyjafjallajökull volcano, Iceland. Our goal was to compare cumulative vesicle size distributions (VSDs) measured in these samples with those found in Stromboli volcano, Italy. Stromboli was chosen because its VSDs are well-characterized and show a correlation with eruption intensity: typical Strombolian activity produces VSDs with power-law exponents near 1, whereas larger and more energetic vulcanian-type explosions and Plinian eruptions produce VSDs with power-law exponents near 1.5. The first hypothesis to be tested was whether or not the samples studied in this work would contain VSDs similar to normal Strombolian products, display higher power-law exponents, or be described by exponential functions. Before making this comparison, we tested a second hypothesis, which was that the magma–water interactions in the Eyjafjallajökull eruption might have a significant effect on the VSDs. We performed 1 bar bubble-growth experiments in which the samples were inundated with water and compared them to similar control experiments without water inundation. No significant differences between the VSDs of the two sets of experiments were found, and the second hypothesis is not supported by the experimental evidence. The Phase II Eyjafjallajökull VSDs are described by power-law exponents of ~0.8, typical of normal Strombolian eruptions, and support the first hypothesis. The comparable VSDs and behavior of Phase II of the Eyjafjallajökull 2010 eruption to Stromboli are interpreted to be a reflection of similar conduit systems in both volcanoes that are being constantly fed by the ascent of mingled/mixed magma from depth. Such behavior implies that continued activity during Phase II of the Eyjafjallajökull eruption could be expected and would have been predicted, had our VSDs been measured in real time during the eruption. However, the products studied show no peculiar feature that could herald the renewed eruption intensity observed in the following Phase III of the eruption.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0160.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.192 · 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