A Massive Slump on the St. Pierre Slope, A New Perspective on the 1929 Grand Banks Submarine Landslide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The 1929 Grand Banks submarine landslide on the southwestern Grand Banks of Newfoundland was triggered by a M w 7.2 strike‐slip earthquake. It is the first studied example of a submarine mass movement known to have caused a turbidity current and tsunami. The event resulted in 28 casualties and caused severe economic damage. The St. Pierre Slope is the main source area for the sediment failure. It contains translational and probable retrogressive surficial failures (<25 m); the majority of which lie in >1,700‐m water depth. These observations contradict what might be expected for a tsunamigenic event; thus, the objective of this study is to look for other potential causal mechanisms. A comprehensive analysis of 2‐D seismic reflection data of various resolutions and multibeam bathymetry allowed mapping of new stratigraphic and structural features. Numerous, low‐angle (~17°) faults are present throughout the Quaternary section of the St. Pierre Slope that are associated with seafloor escarpments (750‐ to 2,000‐m water depth). These faults have up to 100‐m high displacement and are interpreted as part of a massive (~560 km 3 ), complex slump. There are multiple décollements (250‐ and 400‐ to 550‐m below seafloor) within this slump and there is indication for slumping in at least two directions. Evidence suggests slumping as a result of the 1929 earthquake occurred along these faults, with ~100‐m seafloor displacement in places. The 1929 submarine landslide therefore involved two failure mechanisms: massive slumping (~500‐m thick) and consequent widespread, surficial (<25 m) sediment failure. Both failure mechanisms likely contributed to tsunami generation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".