MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220972324 · doi:10.1029/2022gl097984

Supershear Rupture During the 2021 <i>M</i><sub>W</sub> 7.4 Maduo, China, Earthquake

2022· article· en· W4220972324 on OpenAlexaff
Xu Zhang, Wanpeng Feng, Hailin Du, Sergey Samsonov, Lei Yi

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeismologyGeologyAftershockEarthquake ruptureSeismometerGeodetic datumFault (geology)Geodesy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Combined with the multi‐array back‐projection and finite‐fault joint inversion methods, we investigate the detailed spatiotemporal rupture complexity of the 2021 M W 7.4 Maduo earthquake using seismic and geodetic data. Our results reveal that this earthquake ruptured bilaterally 170 km long fault segments with a duration of 38 s. The obtained back‐projection results, specific aftershock signature of the supershear earthquake, and observations of far‐field Love Mach waves consistently validate that this earthquake is a supershear event. Furthermore, by analyzing global large strike‐slip earthquakes, we find that the moment‐scaled radiated energies of previously well confirmed supershear earthquakes with relatively simple fault geometries are similar to that of the 2021 M W 7.4 Maduo earthquake, which are significantly smaller than those of subshear strike‐slip events. This new finding provides additional supporting evidence to validate the supershear rupture during the 2021 M W 7.4 Maduo earthquake.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.750
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.223 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations47
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207