MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127896615 · doi:10.1785/0120060203

Modeling Variable-Stress Distribution with the Stochastic Finite-Fault Technique

2007· article· en· W2127896615 on OpenAlexaff
K. Assatourians, G. M. Atkinson

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of the Seismological Society of America · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFault (geology)Variable (mathematics)Stress (linguistics)Distribution (mathematics)MathematicsGeologyComputer scienceApplied mathematicsMathematical analysisSeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The stochastic finite-fault ground-motion modeling technique is modified to simulate the effects of a variable-stress parameter on the fault. The radiated source spectrum of each subsource that comprises the fault plane is multiplied by a correction spectrum that leaves the low-frequency portion of the spectrum intact and multiplies the high-frequency end of the spectrum by a constant proportional to the stress parameter of each subfault raised to the power of 2/3; this scaling behavior follows from the Brune source model. The modification causes the response spectra and time series of simulated traces to be sensitive to the stress parameter distribution on the fault surface. The approach is implemented using an inversion tool that effectively inverts observed response spectral data to derive the stress parameter distribution on the fault surface. It applies the Levenberg–Marquardt nonlinear inversion method to minimize differences of average (log) response spectra ordinates at high frequencies between observations and simulations at all stations. We perform a number of experiments to study the effects of fault-dip angle, iterations per station, initial guess of the stress distribution, and station distribution on the capabilities of the inversion tool. We also evaluate the ability of the inversion tool to resolve the relative stress parameters of multiple asperities. Application of the inversion tool to the data of the M  6 2004 Parkfield earthquake indicates that an asperity with a high stress parameter is located in the southeast end of the fault, at a depth greater than 4 km; another asperity is located in the center of the fault, but with a lower stress parameter. This distribution is in agreement with results by other researchers.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.945
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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.204
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

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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations30
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of the Seismological Society of AmericaSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207