MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966239072 · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aaw0913

Dynamic earthquake rupture in the lower crust

2019· article· en· W2966239072 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Arianne Petley‐Ragan, Yehuda Ben‐Zion, Håkon Austrheim, Benoı̂t Ildefonse, François Renard, Bjørn Jamtveit

Bibliographic record

VenueScience Advances · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsCrustGeologyFragmentation (computing)SeismologyGeophysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Earthquakes in the continental crust commonly occur in the upper 15 to 20 km. Recent studies demonstrate that earthquakes also occur in the lower crust of collision zones and play a key role in metamorphic processes that modify its physical properties. However, details of the failure process and sequence of events that lead to seismic slip in the lower crust remain uncertain. Here, we present observations of a fault zone from the Bergen Arcs, western Norway, which constrain the deformation processes of lower crustal earthquakes. We show that seismic slip and associated melting are preceded by fracturing, asymmetric fragmentation, and comminution of the wall rock caused by a dynamically propagating rupture. The succession of deformation processes reported here emphasize brittle failure mechanisms in a portion of the crust that until recently was assumed to be characterized by ductile deformation.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations68
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience AdvancesSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207