Hydrothermal alteration can result in pore pressurization and volcano instability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The collapse of a volcanic flank can be destructive and deadly. Hydrothermal alteration is common to volcanoes worldwide and is thought to promote volcano instability by decreasing rock strength. However, some laboratory studies have shown that not all alteration reduces rock strength. Our new laboratory data for altered rhyodacites from Chaos Crags (Lassen volcanic center, California, USA) show that pore- and crack-filling mineral precipitation can reduce porosity and permeability and increase strength, Young's modulus, and cohesion. A significant reduction in permeability, by as much as four orders of magnitude, will inhibit fluid circulation and create zones of high pore fluid pressure. We explored the consequences of pore fluid pressurization on volcano stability using large-scale numerical modeling. Upscaled physical and mechanical properties for hydrothermally altered rocks were used as input parameters in our modeling. Results show that a high-pore-pressure zone within a volcano increases volcano deformation and that increasing the size of this zone increases the observed deformation. Hydrothermal alteration associated with mineral precipitation, and increases to rock strength, can therefore promote pore pressurization and volcano deformation, increasing the likelihood of volcano spreading, flank collapses, and phreatic/phreatomagmatic explosions. We conclude that porosity-decreasing alteration, explored here, and porosity-increasing alteration can both promote volcano instability and collapse, but by different mechanisms. Hydrothermal alteration should therefore be monitored at volcanoes worldwide and incorporated into hazard assessments.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".