MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982629646 · doi:10.3390/rs11212521

Co-Seismic Deformation and Fault Slip Model of the 2017 Mw 7.3 Darbandikhan, Iran–Iraq Earthquake Inferred from D-InSAR Measurements

2019· article· en· W2982629646 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Zicheng Huang, Guohong Zhang, Xinjian Shan, Wenyu Gong, Yingfeng Zhang, Yanchuan Li

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Geology, China Earthquake AdministrationCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchU.S. Geological SurveyConsortium of International Agricultural Research CentersChina Earthquake AdministrationNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaEuropean Space AgencyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGeologySeismologyAftershockInterferometric synthetic aperture radarThrust faultFault (geology)AnticlineSlip (aerodynamics)TectonicsSynthetic aperture radar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 12 November 2017 Darbandikhan earthquake (Mw 7.3) occurred along the converence zone. Despite the extensive research on this earthquake, none of this work explained whether this earthquake rupture was limited to the thick sedimentary cover or it extends to the underlying crystalline basement rock (or both). Besides, whether this region will generate devastating earthquakes again and whether there is a one-to-one correlation between these anticlines and blind-reverse faults need further investigation. In this study, we derived the co-seismic interferograms from the Sentinel-1A/B data and successfully described the surface deformation of the main seismic zone. The fringe patterns of both the ascending and descending interferograms show that the co-seismic deformation is dominated by horizontal movements. Then, using the along- and across-track deformation fields of different orbits, we retrieved the three-dimensional deformation field, which suggests that the Darbandikhan earthquake may be a blind thrust fault close to the north–south direction. Finally, we inverted the geometrical parameters of the seismogenic fault and the slip distribution of the fault plane. The results show that the source fault has an average strike of 355.5° and a northeast dip angle of −17.5°. In addition, the Darbandikhan earthquake has an average rake of 135.5°, with the maximum slip of 4.5 m at 14.5 km depth. On the basis of the derived depth and the aftershock information provided by the Iranian Seismological Center, we inferred that this event primarily ruptured within the crystalline basement and the seismogenic fault is the Zagros Mountain Front Fault (MFF). The seismogenic region has both relatively low historical seismicity and convergent strain rate, which suggests that the vicinity of the epicenter may have absorbed the majority of the energy released by the convergence between the Arabian and the Eurasian plates and may generate Mw > 7 earthquakes again. Moreover, the Zagros front fold between the Lurestan Arc and the Kirkuk Embayment may be generated by the long-distance slippage of the uppermost sedimentary cover in response to the sudden shortening of the MFF basement. We thus conclude that the master blind thrust may control the generation of the Zagros front folding.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.649
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations26
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207