In‐situ Mass Balance Estimates Offshore Costa Rica
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Costa Rican convergent margin has been considered a type erosive margin, with erosional models suggesting average losses up to −153 km3/km/m.y. However, three‐dimensional (3D) seismic reflection and Integrated Ocean Drilling Program data collected offshore the Osa Peninsula images accretionary structures and vertical motions that conflict with the forearc basal erosion model. Here we integrate such data to do an in‐situ accounting of material transfer at the plate boundary across the outermost 10 km of the forearc, characterized by active and inactive megathrusts. Our in‐situ budget finds an approximate balance between sediment recycling via accretion and underplating, 0.7–2.3 km3/km/m.y., and basal erosion, 0.7 km3/km/m.y., while subducting sediment volumes, 7.8 km3/km/m.y., greatly outpace either material transfer volumes. These budget results differ significantly from published estimates based on simple proxies of trench axis deflection and slope subsidence. These budget results are the summation of thin incoming hemipelagic sediments that variably accrete along the deformation front, underplating of hemipelagic sediments on the upthrown‐side and basal erosion on the downthrown‐side of active plate bending faulting landward of the trench axis, and sediment subduction primarily composed of pelagic sediments.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".