MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3171344269 · doi:10.1785/0220200462

Short-Period Surface-Wave Tomography in the Continental United States—A Resource for Research

2021· article· en· W3171344269 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
R. B. Herrmann, Charles J. Ammon, H. Benz, Asiye Aziz-Zanjani, Joshua Boschelli

Bibliographic record

VenueSeismological Research Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologySeismologyRayleigh waveLithosphereCrustDispersion (optics)TomographySeismic tomographyRiftSeismic noiseContinental crustGroup velocitySurface waveGeodesyGeophysicsTectonicsMantle (geology)OpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The variation of phase and group velocity dispersion of Love and Rayleigh waves was determined for the continental United States and adjacent Canada. By processing ambient noise from the broadband channels of the Transportable Array (TA) of USArray and several Program for the Array Seismic Studies of the Continental Lithosphere experiments and using some earthquake recordings, the effort was focused on determining dispersion down to periods as short as 2 s. The relatively short distances between TA stations permitted the use of a 25 km×25 km grid for the four independent tomographic inversions (Love and Rayleigh and phase and group velocity). One reason for trying to obtain short-period dispersion was to have a data set capable of constraining upper crust velocity models for use in determining regional moment tensors. The benefit of focusing on short-period dispersion is apparent in the tomography maps—shallow geologic structures such as the Mid-Continent Rift, and the Michigan, Illinois, Anadarko, Arkoma, and Appalachian basins are imaged. In our processing, we noted that the phase velocities were more robustly determined than the group velocities. We also noted that the inability to obtain dispersion at short periods shows distinct regional patterns that may be related to the local upper crust structure.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.345
Threshold uncertainty score0.662

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeismological Research LettersSame topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207