MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897215218 · doi:10.1029/2018gl079519

A Lack of Dynamic Triggering of Slow Slip and Tremor Indicates That the Shallow Cascadia Megathrust Offshore Vancouver Island Is Likely Locked

2018· article· en· W2897215218 on OpenAlexaffabout
J. J. McGuire, J. A. Collins, Earl E. Davis, Keir Becker, M. Heesemann

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsOcean Networks Canada SocietyUniversity of VictoriaGeological Survey of Canada
FundersW. M. Keck FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGeologySubductionSeismologyEpisodic tremor and slipTrenchSubmarine pipelineSeafloor spreadingSlip (aerodynamics)BoreholeTectonicsGeotechnical engineeringGeophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Great subduction zone earthquakes vary considerably in the updip extent of megathrust rupture. It is unclear if this diversity reflects variations in interseismic strain accumulation owing to the limited number of subduction zones with seafloor monitoring. We use a borehole seismic‐geodetic observatory installed at the updip end of the Cascadia fault offshore Vancouver Island to show that the megathrust there does not appear to slip in triggered tremor or slow‐slip events when subjected to moderate dynamic stress transients. Borehole tilt and seismic data from recent teleseismic M7.6–8.1 earthquakes demonstrate a lack of triggered slow slip above the Mw 4.0 level and an absence of triggered tremor despite shear‐stress transients of 1–10 kPa that were sufficient to trigger tremor on the downdip end of the interface. Our observations are most consistent with a model in which the Cascadia fault offshore Vancouver Island is locked all the way to the trench.

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 score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.219

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations30
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207