MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220997854 · doi:10.1007/s10950-021-10062-9

A review of the microtremor horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratio (MHVSR) method

2022· review· en· W4220997854 on OpenAlexafffund
Sheri Molnar, Aamna Sirohey, Jamal Assaf, Pierre‐Yves Bard, Silvia Castellaro, Cécile Cornou, Brady R. Cox, Bertrand Guillier, Behzad Hassani, Hiroshi Kawase, Shinichi Matsushima, F. J. Sánchez-Sesma, Alan Yong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Seismology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsBC Hydro (Canada)Western University
FundersDirección General de Asuntos del Personal Académico, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Geological SurveyStrong
KeywordsMicrotremorGeologyStandardizationSeismologyBedrockHydrogeologyInversion (geology)GeophysicsGeotechnical engineeringComputer scienceTectonicsGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The single-station microtremor horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratio (MHVSR) method was initially proposed to retrieve the site amplification function and its resonance frequencies produced by unconsolidated sediments overlying high-velocity bedrock. Presently, MHVSR measurements are predominantly conducted to obtain an estimate of the fundamental site frequency at sites where a strong subsurface impedance contrast exists. Of the earthquake site characterization methods presented in this special issue, the MHVSR method is the furthest behind in terms of consensus towards standardized guidelines and commercial use. The greatest challenges to an international standardization of MHVSR acquisition and analysis are (1) thewhat— the underlying composition of the microtremor wavefield is site-dependent, and thus, the appropriate theoretical (forward) model for inversion is still debated; and (2) thehow— many factors and options are involved in the data acquisition, processing, and interpretation stages. This paper reviews briefly a historical development of the MHVSR technique and the physical basis of an MHVSR (thewhat). We then summarize recommendations for MHVSR acquisition and analysis (thehow). Specific sections address MHVSR interpretation and uncertainty assessment.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations208
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of SeismologySame topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207