MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3154640686 · doi:10.1029/2021ea001825

Reactivation Potential of Intraplate Faults in the Western Quebec Seismic Zone, Eastern Canada

2021· article· en· W3154640686 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jeremy Rimando, Alexander L. Peace

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth and Space Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntraplate earthquakeGeologySeismologyInduced seismicitySeismic hazardSlip (aerodynamics)Fault (geology)NeotectonicsSeismic riskSeismic gapTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The intraplate western Quebec seismic zone (WQSZ) in eastern Canada experiences moderate seismicity that mainly results from reactivation of inherited structures under the present‐day, NE‐SW‐striking regional maximum horizontal stress ( S H ) and, possibly to a minor extent, through stress perturbations in response to glacio‐isostatic adjustment. This work comprises the first numerical stress simulation‐based study that predicts the preferred spatial distribution, trends, and sense of slip of contemporary fault reactivation, which may have implications for possible fault segmentation patterns in the WQSZ. We show that mostly NNW‐SSE to NW‐SE‐striking faults exhibit the highest slip tendency values. Spatial patterns of slip tendency and kinematics of reactivation are consistent with the observed seismicity. In an area where Quaternary‐active faults have yet to be systematically identified, we have narrowed down areas to focus on for more detailed, future neotectonic investigations that could provide sound foundation for seismic hazard assessments. This study demonstrates the applicability of slip tendency analysis to identifying potentially active faults in stable continental regions worldwide.

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)0.001
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations26
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth and Space ScienceSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207