The Significance of Tomographic Edge Zones for Large Earthquakes in Taiwan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Seismogenesis of large earthquakes in Taiwan are often controlled by regional tectonics. Despite decades of efforts, the detailed relationship between seismogenesis of disastrous earthquakes and the geophysical properties of the earth materials remains unclear. In this study, we conduct high‐resolution tomography inversion of seismic velocities ( V p and V s ) and the Poisson's ratio (σ), and the results are used to infer the three‐dimensional (3‐D) distributions of crack density (ε) and saturation rate (ζ). We find that more than 70% of large (moment or local magnitudes ≥6, M6+) earthquakes occurred along tomographic edge zones (TEZ) within the crust where the spatial gradient exceeds 0.1, including all three disastrous events in the past two decades: the 1999 M7.6 Chi‐Chi, 2016 M6.5 Meinung, and the 2018 M6.4 Hualien earthquakes. We attribute the preference of large crustal earthquakes along TEZ as the consequence of fluid migration from the more saturated side to the opposite, leading to the build‐up of high pore pressure along TEZ. Locations of historical M6+ earthquakes are consistent with the inference of excessive fluids from either the extensive dehydration of hydrous minerals within the subducting Philippine Sea plate or the sedimentary compaction of alluvium and clastic deposits in the foreland basin west of the orogenic belt. Positive correlation between M6+ earthquakes and TEZ is not unique to Taiwan. Several famous earthquakes in regions with different tectonic settings appear to be associated with local TEZ. Our study could provide insights to long‐term mitigation of regional seismic hazards in Taiwan and probably elsewhere.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".