Surficial sediment failures due to the 1929 Grand Banks Earthquake, St Pierre Slope
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A M w 7.2 earthquake centred beneath the upper Laurentian Fan of the SW Newfoundland continental slope triggered a damaging turbidity current and tsunami on 18 November 1929. The turbidity current broke telecommunication cables, and the tsunami killed 28 people and caused major infrastructure damage along the south coast of Newfoundland. Both events are believed to have been derived from sediment mass failure as a result of the earthquake. This study aims to identify the volume and kinematics of the 1929 slope failure in order to understand the geohazard potential of this style of sediment failure. Ultra-high-resolution seismic reflection and multibeam swath bathymetry data are used to determine: (1) the dimension of the failure area; (2) the thickness and volume of failed sediment; (3) fault patterns and displacements; and (4) styles of sediment failure. The total failure area at St Pierre Slope is estimated to be 5200 km 2 , recognized by escarpments, debris fields and eroded zones on the seafloor. Escarpments are typically 20–100 m high, suggesting failed sediment consisted of this uppermost portion of the sediment column. Landslide deposits consist mostly of debris flows with evidence of translational, retrogressive sliding in deeper water (>1700 m) and evidence of instantaneous sediment failure along fault scarps in shallower water (730–1300 m). Two failure mechanisms therefore seem to be involved in the 1929 submarine landslide: faulting and translation. The main surficial sediment failure concentrated along the deep-water escarpments consisted of widely distributed, translational, retrogressive failure that liquefied to become a debris flow and rapidly evolved into a massive channelized turbidity current. Although most of the surficial failures occurred at these deeper head scarps, their deep-water location and retrogressive nature make them an unlikely main contributor to the tsunami generation. The localized fault scarps in shallower water are a more likely candidate for the generation of the tsunami, but further research is needed in order to address the characteristics of these fault scarps.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".