Kinematics of a diffuse North America–Pacific–Bering plate boundary in Alaska and western Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research Article| September 01, 2011 Kinematics of a diffuse North America–Pacific–Bering plate boundary in Alaska and western Canada E.S. Finzel; E.S. Finzel Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, USA Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar L.M. Flesch; L.M. Flesch Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, USA Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar K.D. Ridgway K.D. Ridgway Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, USA Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Geology (2011) 39 (9): 835–838. https://doi.org/10.1130/G32271.1 Article history received: 21 Mar 2011 rev-recd: 04 Apr 2011 accepted: 08 Apr 2011 first online: 09 Mar 2017 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share MailTo Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Search Site Citation E.S. Finzel, L.M. Flesch, K.D. Ridgway; Kinematics of a diffuse North America–Pacific–Bering plate boundary in Alaska and western Canada. Geology 2011;; 39 (9): 835–838. doi: https://doi.org/10.1130/G32271.1 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 SocietyGeology Search Advanced Search Abstract Inconsistencies between regional seismicity and block tectonic models, the recent recognition of the Bering plate, and the availability of global positioning system data motivated a large-scale kinematic analysis of Alaska and western Canada. We provide a synoptic view of the neotectonics of the region through kinematic modeling of the long-term strain rate and velocity field constrained by geologic and geophysical observations. Our results provide evidence that a wide zone of diffuse deformation defines the boundaries between the North America, Pacific, and Bering plates, and that the relative motion between these plates may be the source for much of the modern deformation. 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".