MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040748029 · doi:10.1029/2020gl087254

Stress Chatter via Fluid Flow and Fault Slip in a Hydraulic Fracturing‐Induced Earthquake Sequence in the Montney Formation, British Columbia

2020· article· en· W3040748029 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Andrés Felipe Peña Castro, Marco Pascal Roth, Alessandro Verdecchia, John Onwuemeka, Yajing Liu, R. M. Harrington, Yong Zhang, Honn Kao

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaMcGill University
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsGeologyAftershockSeismologyHydraulic fracturingSeismometerSlip (aerodynamics)Fluid pressureDifferential stressShear stressFluid dynamicsGeotechnical engineeringDeformation (meteorology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Source processes of injection‐induced earthquakes involve complex fluid‐rock interaction often elusive to regional seismic monitoring. Here we combine observations from a local seismograph array in the Montney Formation, northeast British Columbia, and stress modeling to examine the spatiotemporal evolution of the 30 November 2018 M w 4.2 (M L 4.5) hydraulic fracturing‐induced earthquake sequence. The isolated occurrence of the mainshock at a depth of ∼ 4.5 km in the crystalline basement 2 days following injection onset at ∼ 2.5 km depth suggests direct triggering by rapid fluid pressure increase via a high‐permeability conduit. Most aftershocks are in the top 2 km sedimentary layers, with focal mechanisms indicating discrete slip along subvertical surfaces in an ∼ 1 km wide deformation zone. Aftershock distribution is consistent with static stress triggering from the M w 4.2 coseismic slip. Our analysis suggests that complex hydraulic and stress transfer between fracture networks needs to be considered in induced seismic hazard assessment.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.566
Threshold uncertainty score0.901

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations62
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207