Paleoseismicity: Seismicity Evidence for Past Large Earthquakes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clusters of earthquakes in continental intraplate regions are used to estimate the times and magnitudes of past earthquakes in a model we call “paleoseismicity.” The time of a past earthquake is estimated from an Omori-law decay of the aftershocks with time, while the magnitude of the earthquake is inferred from the length of the current zone of seismic activity. The observed aftershocks of several intraplate earthquakes are used to find the parameters describing the Omorilaw aftershock decay, and these parameters are found to fall in the same range as those for aftershock sequences from California. The paleoseismicity model is shown to be approximately consistent with the current seismicity rates at the New Madrid, Missouri; Charleston, South Carolina; and Charlevoix, Quebec seismic zones. Near Basel in Switzerland, the paleoseismicity model is consistent with the occurrence of the large earthquake there in 1356. However, at Ardennes-Hautes Fagnes, Belgium; Hainaut, Belgium; and Bree, Belgium the paleoseismicity model either underestimates the rate of current seismicity or suggests earthquakes not known in the historic record. The paleoseismicity model may be most applicable to low-strain-rate, intraplate regions where aftershock rates above the background seismicity level can persist for very long periods of time. If many current small earthquakes are aftershocks of past large events, then it may not be appropriate to use earthquake rates from recent seismicity to calculate the seismic hazard in probabilistic analyses.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".