Scientific Exploration of Induced SeisMicity and Stress (SEISMS)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Several major fault-drilling projects have captured the interseismic and postseismic periods of earthquakes. However, near-field observations of faults immediately before and during an earthquake remain elusive due to the unpredictable nature of seismicity. The Scientific Exploration of Induced SeisMicity and Stress (SEISMS) workshop met in March 2017 to discuss the value of a drilling experiment where a fault is instrumented in advance of an earthquake induced through controlled fluid injection. The workshop participants articulated three key issues that could most effectively be addressed by such an experiment: (1) predictive understanding of the propensity for seismicity in reaction to human forcing, (2) identification of earthquake nucleation processes, and (3) constraints on the factors controlling earthquake size. A systematic review of previous injection experiments exposed important observational gaps in all of these areas. The participants discussed the instrumentation and technological needs as well as faults and tectonic areas that are feasible from both a societal and scientific standpoint.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it