MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2276946064 · doi:10.1139/cjes-2015-0119

Further studies on the focal mechanism and source rupture process of the 2012 Haida Gwaii, Canada, 7.8 moment magnitude earthquake

2016· article· en· W2276946064 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Dariush Motazedian, Yong Zhang, Shutian Ma, Yun-Tai Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsGeologySeismologySeismic momentSlip (aerodynamics)Moment magnitude scaleThrust faultFocal mechanismTsunami earthquakeAftershockSubductionMagnitude (astronomy)ThrustFault (geology)TectonicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 28 October 2012 Haida Gwaii, British Columbia, Canada, earthquake with a moment magnitude (MW) of 7.8 occurred along an east-dipping poorly known thrust fault beneath the Queen Charlotte Terrace. It was the largest thrust event ever recorded in this dominated by strike-slip motion region. We studied the focal mechanism and the source rupture process for the event. The retrieved geometric parameters of the fault plane were a strike of 329°, dip of 24°, and slip of 114°. The isotropic moment was negative, and its value was about one-fifth of the total seismic moment released. The earthquake ruptured an area of about 160 km × 60 km, and major slip occurred in an area of about 100 km × 60 km. The maximum slip was about 5.8 m. The slip distribution on the fault plane was highly heterogeneous, with four slip patches. The main slip lay on a large zone above the hypocentre to the sea floor. The maximum and average stress drops calculated using the Brune model were 16.5 and 4.6 MPa, respectively. The major rupture occurred about 10 s after the rupture initiation, and lasted about 25 s. During a subducting earthquake, the leading edge of the overriding plate is assumed to spring seaward and upward, while the landward portion is assumed to extend and drop down, and the generated rapid motions set off a tsunami. The falling-down process seems to be consistent with a negative isotropic moment.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.424
Threshold uncertainty score0.852

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences→Same topicearthquake and tectonic studies→French-language works237,207→