MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158480126 · doi:10.1785/0220210014

Earthquakes in the Eastern Canadian Arctic: Past Occurrences, Present Hazard, and Future Risk

2021· article· en· W3158480126 on OpenAlexaffabout
Maurice Lamontagne, A L Bent

Bibliographic record

VenueSeismological Research Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMercalli intensity scaleArcticPermafrostZoningSeismic hazardGeologySeismologyPhysical geographyMagnitude (astronomy)HazardActive faultGeographyGround motionPeak ground accelerationOceanographyFault (geology)Law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Canadian Arctic encompasses several active seismic areas where a small number of significant earthquakes have been recorded since the early twentieth century. Our study area is defined as the eastern Canadian Arctic, an immense territory that covers 30% of the Canadian land mass. It includes the territory of Nunavut and the region of Nunavik in northern Quebec. Ten earthquakes had a moment magnitude (M) between 5.5 and 7.4, but only five can be considered significant because of their impact. Most were felt in communities at distances of a few hundreds of kilometers, but none exceeded modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) V. This article contains descriptions of the impact of these five earthquakes and of smaller ones that were felt in nearby communities. These macroseismic effects suggest stronger attenuation of MMIs than what is generally assumed for eastern North America. According to the current seismic zoning, very few communities face a significant earthquake hazard. Seismic risk has to consider that most high Arctic buildings are built on piles sitting on permafrost. It is believed that the newer engineered constructions would resist fairly well to seismic shaking, as opposed to buildings with older at grade foundations with little lateral resistance. The fast warming of the Arctic may lead to some thickening of the active layer of the permafrost, which may increase the potential for slope instabilities during earthquake shaking. The change would not be significant enough to alter the potential for local ground-motion amplification.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.192
Threshold uncertainty score0.800

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeismological Research LettersSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207