Characterization of Active Faulting Beneath the Strait of Georgia, British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
subject to megathrust earthquakes, deep intraslab events, and earthquakes in the continental crust. Of the three types of earthquakes, the most poorly understood are the crustal events. Despite a high level of seismicity, there is no obvious correlation between the historical crustal earthquakes and the mapped surface faults of the region. On 24 June 1997, a ML 4.6 earthquake occurred 3–4 km beneath the Strait of Georgia, 30 km to the west of Vancouver, British Columbia. This well-recorded earthquake was preceded by 11 days by a felt foreshock (ML 3.4) and was followed by numerous small aftershocks. This earthquake sequence occurred in one of the few regions of persistent shallow seismic activity in southwestern British Columbia, thus providing an ideal opportunity to attempt to characterize an active near-surface fault. We have computed focal mechanisms and utilized a waveform cross-correlation and joint hypocentral determination routine to obtain accurate relative hypocenters of the mainshock, foreshock, and 53 small aftershocks in an attempt to image the active fault and the extent of rupture associated with this earthquake sequence. Both P-nodal and CMT focal mechanisms show thrust faulting for the mainshock and the foreshock. The relocated hypocenters delineate a north-dipping plane at 2–4 km depth, dipping at 53, in good agreement with the focal mechanism nodal plane dipping to the north at 47. The rupture area is estimated to be a 1.3-km-diameter circular area, comparable to that estimated using a Brune rupture model with the estimated seismic moment of 3.17 1015 N m and the stress drop of 45 bars. The temporal sequence indicates a downdip migration of the seismicity along the fault plane. The results of this study provide the first unambiguous evidence for the ori-entation and sense of motion for active faulting in the Georgia Strait area of British Columbia.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".