MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Topological properties of aftershock clusters in a viscoelastic model of quasi-brittle failure

2020· article· en· W3168212216 on OpenAlexaff
Jordi Baró, J. Davidsen, √Ålvaro Corral

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAftershockViscoelasticityThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Material failure at different scales and processes can be modeled as an emergent feature in terms of avalanche dynamics in micromechanical systems. Event-event triggering -or aftershocks- is common in seismological catalogs and acoustic emission experiments [1] among other phenomena. Stochastic branching and linear Hawkes processes are used to model the statistical properties of catalogs. In the micromechanical approach, viscoelastic stress transfer and after-slip are among the proposed mechanism of aftershocks. Here we ask this simple question: 'Do aftershock sequences in micromechanical models agree with such epidemic branching paradigm?' We introduce two fibrous models as prototypes of viscoelastic fracture [2] which (i) provides an analytical explanation to the acceleration of activity in absence of critical failure observed in acoustic emission experiments [3]; (ii) reproduce the typical spatio-temporal properties of triggering found in field catalogs, acoustic emission experiments; but (iii) display discrepancies with the branching topological properties predicted by stochastic models [4], probably due to physical constrains. [1] J. Baró et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (8), 088702 (2013). [2] J. Baró, J. Davidsen, Phys. Rev. E 97 (3), 033002 (2018). [3] J. Baró, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (24), 245501 (2018). [4] S. Saichev, et al., Pure and App. Geoph. 162 (6), 1113-1134 (2005).

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLandslides and related hazards→French-language works237,207→