Low basal friction‐controlled geometry and kinematics of accretionary wedges from analogue experiments
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cohesion and friction coefficients are fundamental parameters of granular materials used in analogue experiments. Our six models, comprising two sets of quartz sand with a 0–3 mm thickness of basal glass beads, illustrate that accretionary wedges with high basal friction have relatively larger slope angles and heights, shorter wedge lengths, and larger numbers of faults with smaller spacings and displacements than wedges with low basal friction. It should be noted that the differences in the geometry and evolution of the two sets of homogeneous quartz sands are not distinct; however, the differences are substantial when the models have low basal friction of the glass beads. In particular, there are two different tendencies of growth in wedge height with progressive shortening, that is, progressive growth of wedge height with high basal friction and steady‐state growth of wedge height with basal glass beads. We thus infer that the wedge geometries in our experiments are preferentially controlled by the low basal friction achieved with glass beads. In particular, the basal décollement (even when thin) has a significant influence on the location and development of accretionary wedges, in contrast to the physical properties of brittle materials (e.g., friction coefficient and cohesion).
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it