In situ stress magnitudes at the toe of the Nankai Trough Accretionary Prism, offshore Shikoku Island, Japan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Quantifying the orientation and magnitude of tectonic stresses is essential toward understanding deformation and faulting in subduction zones. However, constraints on in situ horizontal stress magnitudes (Shmin and SHmax) are rare. We estimate Shmin and SHmax at Ocean Drilling Program Site 808 at the toe of the Nankai accretionary prism offshore Japan, using coupled constraints from (1) the width of wellbore breakouts together with estimates of rock strength and a model describing stress redistribution at the borehole wall and (2) limits on regional differential stress defined by failure on preexisting faults. Our analysis extends from 175 to 915 m below seafloor (mbsf) and spans the active frontal thrust. For an upper bound on rock unconfined compressive strength (UCS) and assuming hydrostatic formation pore pressure, Shmin and SHmax (referenced to the seafloor) increase from 6.5 MPa at 175 mbsf to 17.4 MPa at 915 mbsf, with the stress state gradually transitioning from a thrust or strike‐slip faulting regime above 800 mbsf to a normal faulting regime below. For cases with higher formation pore pressure, horizontal stresses are slightly lower but follow a similar pattern. We show that estimated Shmin and SHmax are strongly dependent on UCS, breakout width, and friction coefficient, all of which are characterized by uncertainty. Our results suggest that the prism is near thrust failure in the upper ~300 mbsf, but far from failure below. This may be reconciled with active thrusting if thrust faults are locally weaker than the surrounding rock or if SHmax fluctuates during the seismic cycle.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".