MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2738231860 · doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2017.06.048

Highly variable coastal deformation in the 2016 MW7.8 Kaikōura earthquake reflects rupture complexity along a transpressional plate boundary

2017· article· en· W2738231860 on OpenAlexaff
Kate Clark, Edwin Nissen, Jamie Howarth, Ian Hamling, Joshu J. Mountjoy, W. Ries, Katie Jones, Sharyn J. Goldstien, Ursula Cochran, Pilar Villamor, Sigrún Hreinsdóttir, Nicola Litchfield, Christof Mueller, Kelvin Berryman, Delia Strong

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth and Planetary Science Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersMinistry of Business, Innovation and EmploymentNatural Hazards Research PlatformGenome Institute of SingaporeSerono Symposia International FoundationEarthquake CommissionNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGeologySeismologySubmarine pipelineSlip (aerodynamics)Earthquake ruptureDeformation (meteorology)GeodesyLidarFault (geology)Remote sensingOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coseismic coastal deformation is often used to understand slip on offshore faults in large earthquakes but in the 2016 M W 7.8 Kaikōura earthquake multiple faults ruptured across and sub-parallel to the coastline. Along ∼110 km of coastline, a rich dataset of coastal deformation comprising airborne lidar differencing, field surveying and satellite geodesy reveals highly variable vertical displacements, ranging from −2.5 to 6.5 m. These inform a refined slip model for the Kaikōura earthquake which incorporates changes to the slip on offshore faults and inclusion of an offshore reverse crustal fault that accounts for broad, low-amplitude uplift centered on Kaikōura Peninsula. The exceptional detail afforded by differential lidar and the high variability in coastal deformation combine to form the highest-resolution and most complex record of coseismic coastal deformation yet documented. This should prompt reassessment of coastal paleoseismic records that may not have considered multi-fault ruptures and high complexity deformation fields.

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)0.000
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.227
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.

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

Citations194
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth and Planetary Science LettersSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207