MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3137984631 · doi:10.1029/2020jb020950

Amplification and Tuning of Ground Motion at the Outer Cascadia Accretionary Prism

2021· article· en· W3137984631 on OpenAlexaffabout
Earl E. Davis, Joseph J. Farrugia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Solid Earth · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyAccretionary wedgeSeismologyPrismSubductionSeismometerRidgeBedrockAmplitudeMicroseismGeodesyGeomorphologyOpticsTectonicsPaleontologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Ground‐motion amplification in the outer Cascadia subduction zone accretionary prism has been documented previously by comparing earthquake and microseismic vertical ground‐motion and pressure records from an ONC/NEPTUNE Canada cabled observatory site on the outer prism to those from a site on the flank of the Juan de Fuca Ridge. Since then, four additional instruments became operational, and data, now spanning 10 years, include more than 100 large ( Mw > 7) distant earthquakes. Well‐tuned response at the outer prism sites is observed in both vertical and horizontal components, with peaks in the spectral ratio of vertical velocity relative to nearby ocean crustal and continental bedrock sites (V/V ref ) at 9 s, and in the intra‐site horizontal to vertical spectral ratio horizontal‐to‐vertical spectral ratio at 14 s, both with band widths of ±10% to 15% at half amplitude. The vertical response is consistent with ¼ wavelength compressional wave reinforcement, while the horizontal motion tuning most likely reflects the effects of the low velocity prism sediments on surface‐wave propagation. At the periods of maximum relative motion, outer prism surface‐wave vertical and horizontal accelerations are enhanced by factors of up to 15 and 25, respectively. Similar behaviour is seen in microseismic records from these sites, and, to a lesser extent, in earthquake records from temporarily deployed Cascadia Initiative seismometers along the outer Cascadia prism to the south. Such tuning and amplification must be accounted for when assessing the dynamic behavior of the prism and its basal fault at the time of large local earthquakes.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.701
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Solid EarthSame topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207