Earthquakes in the Mantle? Insights From Rock Magnetism of Pseudotachylytes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Ultramafic pseudotachylytes have been regarded as earthquake fossils formed at mantle depths (i.e., >30 km). Here we show that pseudotachylytes hosted by ultramafic rocks from three localities have distinct magnetic properties. Fresh host peridotites contain only small amounts of coarse‐grained magnetite. In contrast, the ultramafic pseudotachylytes contain variable amounts of significantly finer magnetite that formed coseismically through melting. Among each locality, magnetite abundance in the pseudotachylytes ranges over several orders of magnitude (4–2,000 ppm), and magnetic grain size varies considerably (from single domain to multidomain). Because the host peridotites are compositionally similar, the pseudotachylyte magnetic properties are interpreted to primarily reflect the physical and cooling conditions prevailing during seismic slip. Further, the examination of laboratory‐produced ultramafic pseudotachylytes shows that quenching does not produce superfine magnetite. We hypothesize that the magnetic properties of ultramafic pseudotachylytes are controlled by fO2 and in consequence vary systematically with depth of formation. Therefore, these properties can be used to assess if the ruptures producing the earthquakes that these pseudotachylytes represent nucleated at actual mantle depths or at shallow depths during exhumation of mantle rocks.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".