The 1 May 2017 British Columbia‐Alaska Earthquake Doublet and Implication for Complexity Near Southern End of Denali Fault System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract On 1 May 2017, two MW6.2 earthquakes occurred near the border of northwestern British Columbia and Alaska separated by about 2 hr in time. Despite their close distance (~10 km), the two events have different focal mechanisms, with the first featuring a reverse focal mechanism and the second strike slip. Both focal plane solutions are inconsistent with the nearby southeastern Denali fault system. To resolve their ruptured fault planes, we invert for the earthquake point source parameters and analyze rupture directivity via regional and teleseismic waveforms. We also model the near‐field GPS data and relocate the aftershocks to determine the fault planes. The results indicate that the first event ruptured updip along a steep SW‐dipping fault and the second event ruptured to the ESE along a left‐lateral fault. We infer that the earthquake doublet was related to the regional stress field and slip on the active Duke River fault. The involved faults are associated with transpression caused by the oblique collision of the Yakutat block.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".