Geophysical Surveys at Machu Picchu, Peru: Results for Landslide Hazard Investigations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Geophysical methods are being used more frequently to assess slopes for landslide hazard potential, especially in areas where traditional methods such as trenching and drilling are either difficult to employ or not allowed. This paper presents the results of joint DC resistivity and EM surveys to map fractures and zones of weakness in crystalline bedrock at Machu Picchu, Peru. DC resistivity surveys were carried out along the upper 8 switchbacks leading to the sanctuary as well as across the sanctuary. EM-34 surveys were carried out along the upper 3 switchbacks and across the sanctuary. Inversion of the resistivity data located several lower resistivity zones along the switchbacks. These zones were associated with water seeping out of the rock in ditches. The water is confined to the upper switchbacks which is consistent with the disappearance of lower resistivity zones in the lower switchbacks. EM-34 results along the switchbacks, although more subtle to recognize, located several coincident zones of lower resistivity. The DC resistivity data across the sanctuary located a lower resistivity zone on the east side of the main plaza. There is presently no information on whether any of these fractures have been active in the recent past. Consequently the results from this study are still under investigation.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".