Earthquake rupture through a step-over fault system: An exploratory numerical study of the Leech River Fault, southern Vancouver Island
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Leech River fault (LRF) zone located on southern Vancouver Island is a major regional seismic source. We investigate potential interactions between earthquake ruptures on the LRF and the neighboring Southern Whidbey Island fault (SWIF), which can be interpreted as a step-over fault system. Using a linear slip-weakening frictional law, we perform 3D finite element simulations to study rupture jumping scenarios from the LRF (source fault) to the SWIF (receiver fault), focusing on the influences of the offset distance, fault initial stress level, and fault burial depth. We find a smaller offset distance, a higher initial stress level on either fault or a shallower fault burial depth will promote rupture jumping. Jumping scenarios can be interpreted as the response of the receiver fault to stress perturbations radiated from the source fault rupture. We demonstrate that the final rupture jumping scenario depends on various parameters, which can be collectively quantified by two keystone variables, the time-averaged Over Stressed Zone (where shear stress exceeds static frictional strength on the receiver fault) size $\overline{R_e}$ and the receiver fault initial stress level. Specifically, a smaller offset distance, a higher initial shear stress level, or a shallower burial depth will lead to a larger $\overline{R_e}$. The seismic moment on the receiver fault increases with increasing $\overline{R_e}$. When $\overline{R_e}$ reaches the threshold dependent on the receiver fault initial stress level, the rupture becomes break-away.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".