MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010488991 · doi:10.1029/2019jb019101

Coupled Evolution of Deformation, Pore Fluid Pressure, and Fluid Flow in Shallow Subduction Forearcs

2020· article· en· W3010488991 on OpenAlexaff
Tianhaozhe Sun, Susan Ellis, D. M. Saffer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Solid Earth · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaNatural Resources Canada
FundersUnited States Science Support ProgramMarsden FundCenter for Hierarchical Manufacturing, National Science Foundation
KeywordsGeologySubductionPore water pressureForearcFluid dynamicsGeotechnical engineeringPermeability (electromagnetism)PetrologyTectonicsSeismologyMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Deformation and fluid flow in subduction zone forearcs are dynamically coupled, but our quantitative understanding of their coupling is incomplete. In this work, we investigate the hydrological and mechanical coupling in shallow forearcs, using a Lagrangian‐Eulerian finite element model that incorporates constitutive and transport properties of sediments and faults constrained by laboratory and field measurements. Wide‐ranging observations show that sediment thickness and composition, plate convergence rate, basement strength and roughness, and subducting slab dip angle vary between subduction zones. We therefore systematically study their effects on forearc stress and pore fluid pressure states, consolidation and dewatering patterns, and margin morphology. Our models, with the incorporation of a simple description of permeability enhancement along fault damage zones, yield a range of fault permeability (10 −13 –10 −17 m 2 ) consistent with previous estimates and describe the important role of upper plate splay faults in causing heterogeneous dewatering and consolidation patterns and in modulating effective normal stress on the plate interface. Spatial variations in tectonic loading and sediment consolidation can also be caused by subducting basement roughness such as a horst‐and‐graben structure. For typically observed relief and spacing, our models predict locally enhanced porosity reduction by up to 50% at the downdip edge of the horsts and anomalously high sediment porosity above the geometrical highs. At the margin scale, our results demonstrate that sediment permeability and thickness are dominant controls on fluid overpressure, sediment compaction, and megathrust strength. Rough and frictionally strong megathrusts produce similar effects in driving high wedge tapers.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations30
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Solid EarthSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207