MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3082873047 · doi:10.1785/0120190265

Ground-Motion Evaluation of Moderate and Large Interface Earthquakes along the Chilean Subduction Zone

2020· article· en· W3082873047 on OpenAlexaff
Carlos Herrera, J. F. Cassidy, Stan E. Dosso, Nicolás Bastías, Tuna Onur

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of the Seismological Society of America · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaNatural Resources CanadaUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeismologySubductionGeologyAftershockSlip (aerodynamics)Induced seismicityGround motionTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Strong-motion observations of recent interface earthquakes along the Chilean subduction zone are evaluated with two ground-motion models (GMM). One GMM was developed with Chilean data and the other with global data. The GMM developed with local Chilean data is found to have an overall better prediction performance than the GMM developed using a global data set. Using residual analysis with the Chilean GMM as reference model due to its better performance, clear indications of an increase of short-period radiation for deeper earthquakes in north and central Chile were found, which may be related to frictional features on the interface such as interseismic coupling, as found previously for other regions, such as Japan. Also, the Iquique earthquake, which featured a clear precursory slow-slip event, exhibits mostly negative between-event residuals at short periods for earthquakes before and after the mainshock, indicating predominantly weaker short-period radiation. However, this trend is not observed in the aftershock sequence of the Illapel earthquake, which did not feature a significant slow-slip event nor precursory seismicity in its rupture area. Finally, a poor predictive performance was found for the Chilean GMM in southern Chile, overpredicting most of the observations. Based on these results, it is proposed that future local GMMs should include corrections for depth, regional effects and include earthquakes from southern Chile, as new data are becoming available in this region.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of the Seismological Society of AmericaSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207