MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903262319 · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-35453-w

Causes of volcanic unrest at Mt. Spurr in 2004–2005 inferred from repeated tomography

2018· article· en· W2903262319 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Iván Koulakov, S. Z. Smirnov, Valery Gladkov, Ekaterina Kasatkina, M. E. West, Nassir Al‐Arifi

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Population and Public HealthRussian Science FoundationSiberian Branch, Russian Academy of SciencesKing Saud UniversityRussian Foundation for Basic Research
KeywordsGeologyVolcanoImpact craterInduced seismicityUnrestSeismologyMagmaExplosive materialExplosive eruption

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mt. Spurr is the largest active volcano in Alaska of high explosive potential. The most recent activity, including two recent magmatic eruptions in 1953 and 1992, has occurred via the flanking Crater Peak. From 2004 to 2006, strong seismicity, gas flux, and heating were observed in the summit area, which had remained inactive for more than 5 Ka. To understand the cause of this reactivation, we performed repeated tomography inversions that clearly imaged the magma reservoir beneath Mt. Spurr and showed temporal changes in its shape and intensity. During the two years preceding the unrest, we observed ascension of the upper limit of the reservoir-related anomaly from a depth of 5 to 3 km below the surface, accompanied by strong seismicity. During the following years, the shape of the anomaly remained unchanged, but its intensity weakened. These observations may indicate the release of fluids from the ductile reservoir and fast upward ascent through the brittle cover that caused intensive seismicity and gas flux during the unrest from 2004 to 2006. The origin of this zone will possibly cause a resumption of explosive eruptions in the summit area of Mt. Spurr.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207