MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147873404 · doi:10.4043/12960-ms

East Breaks Slump, Northwest Gulf of Mexico

2001· article· en· W2147873404 on OpenAlexaff
Peter K. Trabant, Philip Watts, Frederick L. Lettieri, George A. Jamieson

Bibliographic record

VenueOffshore Technology Conference · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsNalcor Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyBathymetrySeafloor spreadingSubmarine pipelineSlumpContinental shelfFault scarpSlumpingSubmarine landslideGeomorphologySeismologyOceanographyLandslideTectonicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The East Breaks slump in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico was mapped using 2D and 3D seismic and multibeam bathymetry data. Its morphology extends over a large area of the seafloor and comprises a tremendous volume of sediments. Detailed seafloor bathymetry shows a rough surface with evidence of friction-induced drag folds. Volume of the slumped material is 50-60 cubic kilometers with a maximum thickness of 70 meters. An eroded chute and accumulation zone extends 160 km down slope from the shelf break and encompasses an area of 3,200 km2; the main depositional lobe is located 145 km downslope of the head scarp. This volume of displaced material would have generated a tsunami wave on the order of 7.6 meters above sea level that would have impacted the entire south Texas coast. The occurrence of a slump of similar magnitude at the present shelf edge could become a hazard to deep-water hydrocarbon production facilities and coastal communities as a result of mass slope failure and tsunami impact of the coastline. Introduction Evidence of large shelf edge slumps of recent age (past 30,000 years) is ubiquitous throughout the world. Large scale slumps described to date include the Walker-Massingill slump originating near the Mississippi River Delta and extending hundreds of kilometers across the Mississippi Fan (1), and the Storegga Slide offshore Norway (2). The presence of the East Breaks slump in the northwest corner of the GOM has been recognized since the 1960's when it was identified by the petroleum industry and subsequently surveyed by the U.S.G.S EEZ mapping program in 1985. While these initial studies recognized the feature as the product of mass wasting, no detailed mapping or sampling programs have yet been undertaken and the feature remains a mere curiosity. However, it has all the properties of induced mass gravity flows and slumps that could have serious impact on the petroleum industry's deep-water field development. In parallel with petroleum exploration activities, 3D seismic data sets have been acquired throughout most of the northern Gulf of Mexico and these data sets can provide an effective tool for investigating recent geological depositional features including mass slope failures. This paper describes the dimensions and morphology of the East Breaks slump extracted from 3D seismic and looks at the effect slope failures might have on present day subsea production facilities and coastal towns. Previous Studies The presence of a large shelf edge slump in the northwest corner of the GOM has been recognized since the 1960's (5). Petroleum industry research labs mapped the slump's overall extent in the 1960's (3 & 4), and the USGS using sparker and the Gloria long-range side scan sonar systems in the mid 1980's (6). While these studies recognized the feature to be the product of slope failure and mass wasting, no detailed mapping with modern tools or sampling programs have been undertaken. Its head scarp is situated within the northwest corner of the Gulf of Mexico where it is identified by a 20 km indentation of the shelf edge along the 150-meter isobath

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.198 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOffshore Technology ConferenceSame topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207