A preliminary assessment of the occurrence of submarine slope failures in coastal British Columbia by analysis of swath multibeam bathymetric data collected 2001-2011
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An inventory of submarine slope instability features has been compiled for coastal areas of British Columbia based on morphologic analysis of regional multibeam bathymetric data. The slope instability features are classified as submarine slides, debris flows, rock avalanches and associated features including fan deltas, sediment cones and channel complexes. In addition, the study provides an initial assessment of the size and distribution of these geohazards, with a particular focus on identifying large features that are the result of a single failure event because these would have the greatest potential to generate a damaging tsunami. Submarine landslide deposits have been identified in all fjords and inlets examined including Bute, Knight, Toba and Jervis Inlets and Howe Sound. Douglas Channel, Kitimat Arm and Alberni Inlets also have significant landslide derived sediment bodies on the margin and floors of these inlets. In the Strait of Georgia extensive failures have been identified along the Fraser River delta and on slopes where sediment accretion has occurred in the Holocene, including spits and other coastal landforms. The locus of nearly all submarine slope failures in Juan de Fuca Strait has been along the edge of a terrace landform associated with sea level lowstand. Whereas the age of some features can be tentatively inferred by association with modern or postglacial morphology, the exact age of the instability features documented in this study cannot be determined from this morphologic analysis alone. The accompanying ArcGIS document allows each instability feature to be located and queried for information such as morphologic classification, surface area, possible age, and other details.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".