MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150777094 · doi:10.1002/2014jb011084

Crustal deformation and stress transfer during a propagating earthquake sequence: The 2013 Cook Strait sequence, central New Zealand

2014· article· en· W2150777094 on OpenAlexafffund
Ian Hamling, E. D’Anastasio, Laura Wallace, Susan Ellis, Mahdi Motagh, Sergey Samsonov, N. Palmer, Sigrún Hreinsdóttir

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Solid Earth · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
FundersCanadian Space AgencyMinistry of Economy, Trade and IndustryNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsGeologySinistral and dextralSeismologyForeshockBayTectonicsGeodesySlip (aerodynamics)AftershockOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The 2013 Cook Strait earthquake sequence began on 18 July 2013 with two foreshocks of M w 5.7 and M w 5.8 and culminated in the M w 6.6 Cook Strait and Lake Grassmere events on 21 July and 16 August, respectively. Located ∼50 km south of New Zealand's capital, Wellington, the earthquakes generated the most significant ground shaking in the Wellington and Marlborough regions in recent decades. During the first event, located under Cook Strait, continuously recording GPS instruments across central New Zealand recorded up to 5 cm of horizontal displacement. Modeling suggests that the rupture was 25 km long with up to 90 cm of dextral strike slip. The second event, located 20 km to the southwest, caused displacements of up to 25 cm at GPS sites located around the Clifford bay area. In addition, two interferograms from RADARSAT‐2 and TerraSAR‐X showed up to 30 cm of line‐of‐sight displacement in the vicinity of Lake Grassmere. Modeling indicates predominantly dextral strike slip of up to 2.1 m. Coulomb Stress changes induced by the earlier foreshocks suggest that the Cook Strait event was triggered by the preceding events and that the Lake Grassmere event was subsequently triggered by the Cook Strait earthquake.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 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

Citations57
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Solid EarthSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207