Slab Transport of Fluids to Deep Focus Earthquake Depths—Thermal Modeling Constraints and Evidence From Diamonds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The nature and cause of deep earthquakes remain enduring unknowns in the field of seismology. We present new models of thermal structures of subducted slabs traced to mantle transition zone depths that permit a detailed comparison between slab pressure/temperature (P/T) paths and hydrated/carbonated mineral phase relations. We find a remarkable correlation between slabs capable of transporting water to transition zone depths in dense hydrous magnesium silicates with slabs that produce seismicity below ∼300‐km depth, primarily between 500 and 700 km. This depth range also coincides with the P/T conditions at which oceanic crustal lithologies in cold slabs are predicted to intersect the carbonate‐bearing basalt solidus to produce carbonatitic melts. Both forms of fluid evolution are well represented by sublithospheric diamonds whose inclusions record the existence of melts, fluids, or supercritical liquids derived from hydrated or carbonate‐bearing slabs at depths (∼300–700 km) generally coincident with deep‐focus earthquakes. We propose that the hydrous and carbonated fluids released from subducted slabs at these depths lead to fluid‐triggered seismicity, fluid migration, diamond precipitation, and inclusion crystallization. Deep focus earthquake hypocenters could track the general region of deep fluid release, migration, and diamond formation in the mantle. The thermal modeling of slabs in the mantle and the correlation between sublithospheric diamonds, deep focus earthquakes, and slabs at depth demonstrate a deep subduction pathway to the mantle transition zone for carbon and volatiles that bypasses shallower decarbonation and dehydration processes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".