MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214893986 · doi:10.1093/gji/ggac096

A reappraisal of active tectonics along the Fethiye<i>–</i>Burdur trend, southwestern Turkey

2022· article· en· W4214893986 on OpenAlexafffund
Edwin Nissen, Musavver Didem Cambaz, Élyse Gaudreau, Andrew Howell, Ezgi Karasözen, Elena Savidge

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Journal International · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for InnovationBritish Columbia Knowledge Development FundUniversity of Victoria
KeywordsGeologySeismologySubductionTectonicsInduced seismicityFocal mechanismPlate tectonicsFault (geology)Strike-slip tectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY We investigate active tectonics in southwestern Turkey along the trend between Fethiye, near the eastern end of the Hellenic subduction zone, and Burdur, on the Anatolian plateau. Previously, regional GNSS velocities have been used to propose either (1) a NE-trending zone of strike-slip faulting coined the Fethiye–Burdur Fault Zone, or (2) a mix of uniaxial and radial extension accommodated by normal faults with diverse orientations. We test these models against the available earthquake data, updated in light of recent earthquakes at Arıcılar (24 November 2017, Mw 5.3), Acıpayam (20 March 2019, Mw 5.6) and Bozkurt (8 August 2019, Mw 5.9), the largest in this region in the last two decades. Using Sentinel-1 InSAR and seismic waveforms and arrival times, we show that the Arıcılar, Acıpayam and Bozkurt earthquakes were partially or fully buried ruptures on pure normal faults with subtle or indistinct topographic expressions. By exploiting ray paths shared with these well-recorded modern events, we relocate earlier instrumental seismicity throughout southwestern Turkey and incorporate these improved hypocentres in an updated focal mechanism compilation. The southwestern Fethiye–Burdur trend is dominated by ESE–WNW trending normal faulting, even though most faults evident in the topography strike NE–SW. This hints at a recent change in regional strain, perhaps related to eastward propagation of the Gökova graben into the area or to rapid subsidence of the Rhodes basin. The northeastern Fethiye–Burdur trend is characterized by orthogonal normal faulting, consistent with radial extension and likely responsible for the distinct physiography of Turkey’s Lake District. We find that the 1971 Mw 6.0 Burdur earthquake likely ruptured a NW-dipping normal fault in an area of indistinct geomorphology near Salda Lake, contradicting earlier studies that place it on well-expressed faults bounding the Burdur basin, and further highlighting how damaging earthquakes are possible on faults that would prove difficult to identify beforehand. Overall, our results support GNSS-derived kinematic models that depict a mix of uniaxial and radial extension throughout southwestern Turkey, with no evidence from focal mechanisms for major, active strike-slip faults anywhere along the Fethiye–Burdur trend. Normal faulting orientations are consistent with a stress field driven primarily by contrasts in gravitational potential energy between the elevated Anatolian plateau and the low-lying Rhodes and Antalya basins.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.580
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.228 · 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.

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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Journal InternationalSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207