Earth Scientists Can Help People Who Fear Earthquakes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Other| July 01, 2000 Earth Scientists Can Help People Who Fear Earthquakes Maurice Lamontagne; Maurice Lamontagne Geological Survey of Canada 7 Observatory Crescent Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0Y3 maurice@seismo.nrcan.gc.ca (613) 995-0600 (M.L.) Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Sylvie La Rochelle Sylvie La Rochelle Psychologist, Member of the Ordre des psychologues du Qudbec 639 Gaines Drive Gloucester, Ontario K1J 7W7 (S.L.R.) Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Seismological Research Letters (2000) 71 (4): 461–463. https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.71.4.461 Article history first online: 09 Mar 2017 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Search Site Citation Maurice Lamontagne, Sylvie La Rochelle; Earth Scientists Can Help People Who Fear Earthquakes. Seismological Research Letters 2000;; 71 (4): 461–463. doi: https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.71.4.461 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Refmanager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentBy SocietySeismological Research Letters Search Advanced Search Earth scientists are sometimes confronted with people's fear of earthquakes as expressed in letters or phone calls or during media interviews. At the Geological Survey of Canada (GSC), a steady increase of inquiries about earthquakes has been noticed over the last few years. People contact the Seismicity Section after a felt event, after a media interview, or often simply after visiting our Web site. Some of the messages or phone calls have an emotional content. In these communications, people can express their fear or their anxiety when dealing with a real, or a perceived, earthquake. In our opinion, Earth scientists... You do not have access to this content, please speak to your institutional administrator if you feel you should have access.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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 teacher head, 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".