MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969531188 · doi:10.1785/0120190035

Stress Drops and Directivity of Induced Earthquakes in the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin

2019· article· en· W2969531188 on OpenAlexaffabout
Joanna M. Holmgren, Gail M. Atkinson, Hadi Ghofrani

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of the Seismological Society of America · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeismologyGeologySeismic momentDirectivityInduced seismicitySeismic hazardMoment magnitude scaleAttenuationDrop (telecommunication)MathematicsGeometryPhysicsScalingEngineeringOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Western Canada sedimentary basin (WCSB) has experienced an increase in seismicity during the last decade due primarily to hydraulic fracturing. Understanding the ground motions of these induced earthquakes is critical to characterize the increase in hazard. Stress drop is considered an important parameter in this context because it is a measure of the high‐frequency content of the shaking. We use the empirical Green’s function (EGF) method to determine S‐wave corner frequencies and stress drops of 87 earthquakes of moment magnitude (M) 2.3–4.4 in the WCSB. The EGF method is an effective technique to isolate earthquake source effects by dividing out the path and site components in the frequency domain, using a smaller collocated earthquake as an EGF. The corner frequency of the target event is determined for an assumed spectral ratio shape, from which the stress drop is computed. Assuming a fixed velocity, we find that the average stress drop for induced earthquakes in the WCSB for small‐to‐moderate events is 7.5±0.5 MPa, with a total range from 0.2 to 370 MPa. However, because of the dependence of stress drop on model conventions and constants, we consider the absolute stress‐drop value meaningful only for comparison with other results using the same underlying models. By contrast, corner frequency is a less‐ambiguous variable with which to characterize the source spectrum. The range of corner frequencies obtained in this study for events of M 4.0±0.5 is 1.1–5.8 Hz. Significant rupture directivity is observed for more than one‐third of the earthquakes, with station corner frequencies varying by about a factor of 4 with azimuth. This emphasizes the importance of having suitable station coverage to determine source parameters. We model directivity where evident using a Haskell source model and find that the rupture azimuths are primarily oriented approximately north–south throughout the region.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.693

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.181 · 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.

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

Citations42
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of the Seismological Society of AmericaSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207