Bibliographic record
Abstract
The devastating magnitude 7.0 earthquake that struck Haiti on 12 January 2010 was followed by hundreds of aftershocks. The largest were recorded at regional to teleseismic distances. The smaller aftershocks were not recorded in the days immediately following the mainshock as there was no seismic monitoring capacity within Haiti. With the installation of a real time three-station network in Haiti by the GSC in mid-February the ability to monitor the aftershocks was vastly improved. Using the new Haitian stations as well as existing stations elsewhere in the Caribbean, focal mechanisms and depths of many of the aftershocks can be determined, both of which provide insight into the seismotectonics of the region and implications for future seismic hazard assessments. This paper summarizes the focal mechanisms and depths of the larger (magnitude ? 4.5) aftershocks determined by regional moment tensor inversion and the focal mechanisms of the smaller aftershocks determined by a composite first motion inversion. The results are consistent with the teleseismically determined focal mechanisms of the mainshock and largest aftershock and provide further evidence for a complex faulting regime consisting of strike-slip faulting in the east of the aftershock zone where the mainshock initiated and thrust faulting in the west where the largest number of aftershocks has occurred.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".