MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793870849 · doi:10.1093/gji/ggy114

The 2017 July 20 Mw 6.6 Bodrum–Kos earthquake illuminates active faulting in the Gulf of Gökova, SW Turkey

2018· article· en· W2793870849 on OpenAlexaff
Ezgi Karasözen, Edwin Nissen, Pınar Büyükakpınar, Musavver Didem Cambaz, Metin Kahraman, Esra Kalkan Ertan, Bizhan Abgarmi, Eric Bergman, Abdolreza Ghods, A. Arda Özacar

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Journal International · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologySeismologyAftershockGrabenInduced seismicityRidgeFault (geology)BathymetryFault traceActive faultFault planeEpicenterEchelon formationTectonicsPaleontologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2017 July 20 Bodrum–Kos earthquake (Mw 6.6) is the largest instrumentally recorded earthquake in the Gökova graben, one of the primary physiographic features of SW Turkey. Using seismology and satellite geodesy, we investigate its source characteristics, aftershock distribution, relationship with earlier instrumental seismicity, and association with known surface faulting. We show that the earthquake ruptured a planar (non-listric) normal fault that dips gently (∼37°) northwards beneath the northern Gulf of Gökova coastline, initiating at a depth of ∼11 km and rupturing upwards and bilaterally. Aftershocks concentrate around (but not necessarily on) the western, eastern and downdip edges of the ∼25 km-long rupture plane, and have maximum focal depths of ∼15 km. The main shock surface trace bounds a bathymetric ridge east of Kos island, and may be one of the several faults imaged previously in this area using seismic profiling and multibeam sonar. The fault thus lies within the hangingwall of the lower-angle (∼20° N-dipping) South Datça fault, which it presumably cross-cuts at depth. Through calibrated relocations, we confirm that sequences of moderate (Mw 5–5.5) earthquakes in 1989, 2004 and 2005 occurred in the eastern and central Gulf of Gökova, many of them likely within the hangingwall of the S-dipping Gökova fault. Overall, our results indicate a switch from dominant S-dipping normal faulting in the eastern graben to dominant N-dipping faulting in the west, but we find no support for a proposed NE–SW-trending left-lateral fault in the central Gulf; most colocated focal mechanisms involve ∼E–W normal faulting. Finally, the Bodrum–Kos main shock adds to growing set of examples from across the Aegean region of large normal faulting earthquakes that cut the seismogenic layer as simple planar structures.

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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations43
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Journal InternationalSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207