Crustal structure of the Kermadec arc from MANGO seismic refraction profiles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Three active‐source seismic refraction profiles are integrated with morphological and potential field data to place the first regional constraints on the structure of the Kermadec subduction zone. These observations are used to test contrasting tectonic models for an along‐strike transition in margin structure previously known as the 32°S boundary. We use residual bathymetry to constrain the geometry of this boundary and propose the name Central Kermadec Discontinuity (CKD). North of the CKD, the buried Tonga Ridge occupies the fore‐arc with V P 6.5–7.3 km s −1 and residual free‐air gravity anomalies constrain its latitudinal extent (north of 30.5°S), width (110 ± 20 km), and strike (~005° south of 25°S). South of the CKD the fore‐arc is structurally homogeneous downdip with V P 5.7–7.3 km s −1 . In the Havre Trough back‐arc, crustal thickness south of the CKD is 8–9 km, which is up to 4 km thinner than the northern Havre Trough and at least 1 km thinner than the southern Havre Trough. We suggest that the Eocene arc did not extend along the current length of the Tonga‐Kermadec trench. The Eocene arc was originally connected to the Three Kings Ridge, and the CKD was likely formed during separation and easterly translation of an Eocene arc substrate during the early Oligocene. We suggest that the first‐order crustal thickness variations along the Kermadec arc were inherited from before the Neogene and reflect Mesozoic crustal structure, the Cenozoic evolution of the Tonga‐Kermadec‐Hikurangi margin and along‐strike variations in the duration of arc volcanism.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".