MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2552763918

THE NEW ENGLAND SEISMIC NETWORK Award Number 04HQAG0020

2006· article· en· W2552763918 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John E. Ebel, Weston Observatory

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSeismology and Earthquake Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservatoryGeological surveySeismologySeismometerGeologyGeophone
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From February 1, 2004 to December 30, 2006 Weston Observatory continued to operate a 12-station regional seismic network to monitor earthquake activity in New England (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont) and vicinity. The purpose of this monitoring is to compile a complete database of earthquake activity in New England to as low a magnitude as possible in order to understand the causes of the earthquakes in the region, to assess the potential for future damaging earthquakes, and to better constrain the patterns of strong ground motions from earthquakes in the region. The NESN coordinates earthquake monitoring in the northeastern U.S. (NEUS) with the Lamont Cooperative Seismic Network (LCSN) of Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory as part of the Advanced National Seismic Network (ANSS) northeast center for earthquake monitoring (ANSS-NE). It also coordinates its activities with the National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC) of the US Geological Survey in Golden, CO and with the Earthquakes Canada group of the Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) in Ottawa, Ontario. At all of the Weston Observatory stations the sensors were CMG-40T feedback geophones with a flat response to ground velocity between roughly 30 Hz and 30 sec. Initially, seven of the stations had Nanometrics, Inc. 16-bit digitizers with gain-ranging, digitized at a rate of 100 samples per second per channel, while five of the stations had Reftek, Inc. 130-01 broadband 24-bit digitizers sampled at 40 samples/second. Telemetry from five of the Nanometrics stations was by internet communications via Earthworm, while from the other two Nanometrics stations the telemetry was via dial-up telephone connection. Telemetry from the Reftek stations was by internet communications via Earthworm. In 2005 the digitizers at the five internet Nanometrics stations were replaced with Reftek 130-10 digitizers using internet communications into the Earthworm system. Event detection at all stations is carried out using a wavelet-transform (WT) based automated event detector and identifier. This system was developed for the Earthworm datastream and was operational throughout the course of this reporting period. It has been tuned so that it successfully detects and identifies many quarry blasts, most teleseisms, and many local earthquakes.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.710
Threshold uncertainty score0.414

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.7100.498

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.204 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSeismology and Earthquake StudiesFrench-language works237,207