MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114441808 · doi:10.1785/gssrl.76.1.99

Empirical Site Response for POLARIS Stations in Southern Ontario, Canada

2005· article· en· W2114441808 on OpenAlexaffabout
C. Murphy, David W. Eaton

Bibliographic record

VenueSeismological Research Letters · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is well known that local geology, particularly overburden, can greatly increase ground shaking during an earthquake; the best method for determining the degree of amplification remains controversial, however. The so-called site response is a localized resonant amplification of seismic wave motion that is largely controlled by the thickness, shear modulus, and viscosity of soft soil layers. Accurate knowledge of site-response spectra is important for understanding potentially destructive amplification that could occur during a large earthquake, as well as for calibration of seismic networks. In the absence of cosited measurements of ground motion in deep bedrock and at the surface, site response must be estimated either by numerical computation, based on detailed knowledge of the properties of near-surface layers, or by empirical means. A number of different empirical methods for determining site response are in common use, with various authors citing advantages of one technique over another. The objectives of this study are twofold. Our first purpose is to report empirical site-response spectra for 18 stations (Table 1) of the recently installed POLARIS seismograph network in southern Ontario, Canada (Atkinson et al. , 2003). This network is equipped with Guralp CMG-ESP three-component broadband seismometers and Nanometrics Libra digitizers. Data are digitally sampled at 100 Hz and transmitted in near real-time via satellite to two data-collection centers in London and Ottawa, Ontario. The Ontario POLARIS stations were deployed commencing in late 2001 and cover a roughly rectangular area within the lower Great Lakes region, with a station spacing of 50-100 km (Figure 1). Near-surface layers at these sites depend on local conditions and range from unweathered Precambrian bedrock to fractured Paleozoic limestone, to thick Quaternary till deposits. As a consequence of the variable near-surface conditions, we observe a wide range of site-response spectra. View this table: TABLE 1 POLARIS Stations in Southern Ontario Used for This …

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)0.003
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations12
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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