MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084202746 · doi:10.1029/2020jb019750

A Double Difference Tomography Study of the Washington Forearc: Does Siletzia Control Crustal Seismicity?

2020· article· en· W3084202746 on OpenAlexafffund
Reid Merrill, M. G. Bostock, Simon M. Peacock, Andrew J. Calvert, Nikolas I. Christensen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Solid Earth · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsForearcGeologySeismologyInduced seismicityCrustSeismic tomographyRidgeSubductionTectonicsGeophysicsPaleontologyMantle (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present new seismic tomography of the Washington forearc using a suite of manually picked regional earthquake phase arrivals. The recovery of similarly sampled P and S velocity permits the robust calculation of Poisson's ratio throughout the region. The seismological signature of Siletzia, an accreted oceanic plateau that crops out in Washington as the Crescent Formation, is evident in our models as a continuous high Poisson's ratio body that coincides with subsurface structures estimated from potential field maps. Relocated earthquakes preferentially locate in low Poisson's ratio regions in the forearc crust and, in particular, in a diffuse layer located at 15–25 km depth in the crust beneath relatively aseismic Siletzia. Our imaging of the Puget Sound is consistent with previous interpretations of the architecture of major faults and blocks, as evident by distinct Poisson's ratio signatures that distinguish sedimentary basins from mafic rocks of the Crescent Formation. We speculate that seismicity below the Puget Sound is promoted by slab‐derived fluids that are localized beneath Siletzia as a result of intrinsic low vertical permeability.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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