The influence of competing regional stress regimes on the generation of hydraulic fracturing-induced microseismicity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On 30 November 2018, a felt (ML 4.5) seismic event occurred ~16 km from Fort St. John, British Columbia, that has been attributed to ongoing hydraulic fracturing operations in the area. The mainshock was followed by two felt aftershocks (>ML 3.4) in the following hour. All of the events were tightly clustered, both spatially and in depth, and appear to be related to a southern boundary fault of the Fort St. John Graben complex. Stress inversion of a number of focal mechanisms suggests that the maximum principal stress is well constrained and almost horizontal, however the intermediate- and minimum-principal stresses are poorly constrained between the vertical and minimum horizontal stress. This results in a variety of focal mechanisms from the detected seismicity, and indicates a high complexity in the local stress regime. Hypocenters appear to locate at the confluence between a large-scale reverse faulting style regime (to the north-west, probably due to the influence of the Rocky Mountain fold and thrust belt) and an oblique strike slip faulting regime (to the south-east, probably due to influence of the Fort St. John Graben complex). Presentation Date: Monday, October 12, 2020 Session Start Time: 1:50 PM Presentation Time: 1:50 PM Location: 360A Presentation Type: Oral
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".