MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2794187366 · doi:10.4095/306590

Seismic attenuation in the interior of British Columbia and westernmost continental craton

2018· report· en· W2794187366 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amir Mansour Farahbod, J. F. Cassidy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCratonGeologySeismologyContinental marginPaleontologyTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study we investigated coda-wave attenuation (QC) in the interior of British Columbia, with a focus on stations in the eastern Cordillera and westernmost continental craton using records from 13 stations (short period and broadband) of the Canadian National Seismic Network (CNSN). Our dataset is comprised of 1832 earthquakes recorded between 1992 and 2017 with magnitudes ranging from 1.5 to 4.9, depths from 0 to 54 km (with the vast majority being <15 km) and epicentral distances of 15 to 100 km. This gives a total of 1214 high signal-to-noise (S/N) traces (S/N?5.0) useful for QC calculation (with a range of ellipse parameter, a2, of 20 to 100) across the region. Coda windows were selected to start at tc = 2tS (two times the travel time of the direct S wave), and were filtered at center frequencies of 2, 4, 8, 12 and 16 Hz. Our study reveals a consistent pattern. We find that in the interior of BC, the lowest Q0 values (e.g., Q0 of 45) are at station BCBC at the western end of the Anahim Volcanic Belt. This is consistent with previous studies showing a low average Q0 of 53 (a2 of 30-50 km) for stations within that volcanic belt. The highest Q0 values that we find (e.g., Q0 of 165) are at station BLBC, located on the western edge of the continental craton. Other stations in the interior of BC show intermediate values of Q0. One surprising result is that FNBB and BMBC stations in northeast BC - also located on the western edge of the continental craton - show consistently low Q0 values (46-76 over the range of a2 from 20 to 70). Those stations were deployed in a region of hydraulic fracturing activity, and the low Q0 values may be partially attributed to fluids or fracturing in the uppermost crust.

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)0.002
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological formations and processes→French-language works237,207→