MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111400084 · doi:10.1785/gssrl.76.6.743

ShakeMap for the MN 5.4, 6 March 2005 Riviere-du-Loup, Quebec Earthquake

2005· article· en· W2111400084 on OpenAlexaffabout
SanLinn I. Kaka, G. M. Atkinson

Bibliographic record

VenueSeismological Research Letters · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersU.S. Geological Survey
KeywordsGeologySeismologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the beginning of June 2004, near-real-time ShakeMaps have been produced in Ontario for earthquakes of M > 2.8 and are posted at http://www.shakemap.carleton.ca/ within minutes of occurrence. ShakeMaps, originally conceived by Wald et al. (1999), provide rapid online assessment of locations, shaking intensities, and expected levels of damage to specific areas, The Nuttli magnitude ( M N ) 5.4 earthquake which occurred 17 km southwest of Riviere-du-Loup, Quebec on 6 March 2005 was the first moderate, well recorded event since the implementation of the Ontario ShakeMap project. It provided a good opportunity to evaluate the performance of ShakeMap in eastern Canada. The ShakeMap location and moment magnitude, based on the ground-motion centroid, are very close to traditional estimates of these parameters. ShakeMap intensities agree with the preliminary observed intensity results collected based on felt reports submitted online. Recorded ground-motion parameters from this earthquake agree very well with the predictions of empirical ground-motion relations developed for ShakeMap applications by Kaka and Atkinson (2005a), as well as with relations developed by Atkinson and Boore (1995).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.364
Threshold uncertainty score0.791

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.260 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeismological Research LettersSame topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207