MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943587111 · doi:10.1029/2018gl081766

Spatiotemporal Variations in Crustal Seismic Anisotropy Surrounding Induced Earthquakes Near Fox Creek, Alberta

2019· article· en· W2943587111 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Tianyang Li, Yu Jeffrey Gu, Zizhen Wang, Ruijia Wang, Yunfeng Chen, Teh‐Ru Alex Song, Ruihe Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UKUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsGeologySeismologyInduced seismicityAnisotropyShear wave splittingFocal mechanismShear (geology)Seismic anisotropyHydraulic fracturingSedimentary rockFault (geology)Slip (aerodynamics)GeophysicsPetrologyGeotechnical engineeringGeochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study analyzes earthquake recordings from four near‐source (<10 km) stations near Fox Creek, Alberta, a region known for hydraulic fracturing‐induced seismicity. We examine the spatiotemporal variations of focal mechanisms and seismic anisotropy in the sedimentary strata. The focal mechanisms of surrounding earthquake swarms are generally consistent with the strike‐slip mechanism of the ML4.6 earthquake, favoring a flower type of fault structure. The NE‐SW‐orientated fast splitting direction, determined from the shear wave splitting measurements, reflects the combined effects of (1) N‐S faults and (2) NE‐SW time‐dependent hydraulically stimulated fractures. The latter effect dominates the apparent anisotropy during the days leading to the mainshock, while its contributions are reduced by 60–70% after the mainshock. Loss of fluid into the fault damage zone, which causes the closure of fractures, is responsible for the observed spatiotemporal variation of seismic anisotropy near the hydraulic fracturing well.

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)0.001
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 score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations31
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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