Hydraulic fracturing operations within an extremely complex stress regime: The case of Fort St. John, British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On 30 November 2018, three felt earthquakes occurred in quick succession close to the city of Fort St. John, British Columbia, likely as a direct response to a hydraulic fracturing operation in the area. Events appear tightly clustered spatially within the upper 10 km of the crust. Hypocenters locate at the confluence between a large scale reverse faulting regime (in the north-west, probably due to the influence of the Rocky Mountain fold and thrust belt) and an oblique strike slip faulting regime (in the south-east, probably due to the influence of the Fort St. John Graben), resulting in a variety of focal mechanisms and a very complex local stress regime. Further analysis of the principal stresses suggests that σ1 is well constrained and close to horizontal, whereas σ2 and σ3 are poorly constrained, and can alternate between the horizontal and the vertical plane. Here, we present an overview of the temporal and spatial evolution of this seismic sequence and its relationship to hydraulic fracturing operations in the area, and examine the influence of large-scale regional tectonic structures on the generation of seismicity on this occasion.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".