MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2744654333 · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-08192-7

Source and dynamics of a volcanic caldera unrest: Campi Flegrei, 1983–84

2017· article· en· W2744654333 on OpenAlexaff
Luca De Siena, Giovanni Chiodini, G. Vilardo, Edoardo Del Pezzo, M. Castellano, Simona Colombelli, Nicola Tisato, Guido Ventura

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of AberdeenRoyal Society of EdinburghRoyal Society
KeywordsCalderaGeologyUnrestSeismologyTiltmeterVolcanoEarthquake swarmInduced seismicity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite their importance for eruption forecasting the causes of seismic rupture processes during caldera unrest are still poorly reconstructed from seismic images. Seismic source locations and waveform attenuation analyses of earthquakes in the Campi Flegrei area (Southern Italy) during the 1983-1984 unrest have revealed a 4-4.5 km deep NW-SE striking aseismic zone of high attenuation offshore Pozzuoli. The lateral features and the principal axis of the attenuation anomaly correspond to the main source of ground uplift during the unrest. Seismic swarms correlate in space and time with fluid injections from a deep hot source, inferred to represent geochemical and temperature variations at Solfatara. These swarms struck a high-attenuation 3-4 km deep reservoir of supercritical fluids under Pozzuoli and migrated towards a shallower aseismic deformation source under Solfatara. The reservoir became aseismic for two months just after the main seismic swarm (April 1, 1984) due to a SE-to-NW directed input from the high-attenuation domain, possibly a dyke emplacement. The unrest ended after fluids migrated from Pozzuoli to the location of the last caldera eruption (Mt. Nuovo, 1538 AD). The results show that the high attenuation domain controls the largest monitored seismic, deformation, and geochemical unrest at the caldera.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations75
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207