Seismic anisotropy in the continental crust of northwestern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most studies of the seismic structure of continental crust assume that the wave speeds are isotropic at seismic wavelengths. The ability to measure surface wave propagation speed from the cross-correlation of ambient seismic noise provides new opportunities to image the crust and uppermost mantle. We investigate radial anisotropy in the continental crust of northwestern Canada from group-velocity curves of Love and Rayleigh waves obtained from ambient-noise cross-correlation. We test the null hypothesis that the Love and Rayleigh group-speed curves can be simultaneously fit by an earth model containing isotropic seismic velocities throughout the crust. Group velocity is predicted for 200 000 one-dimensional earth models, which are generated by randomly varying the crustal shear velocity and radial anisotropy within a prescribed range. The goodness-of-fit of the predictions is assessed by comparison with two sets of observed dispersion curves that correspond to two tectonically distinct terranes: the Archean/early Proterozoic craton and the transition from craton to Cordillera. The majority of best-fitting models contain VSH > VSV (4–5 per cent) in the middle crust. The finding that the middle/lower crust is seismically anisotropic across a large swath of northwestern Canada, combined with recent observations of anisotropic crust in much of the western United States, suggests that anisotropy may be ubiquitous in the continental crust.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".