Quantifying Interdependencies in Geyser Eruptions at the Upper Geyser Basin, Yellowstone National Park
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Upper Geyser Basin at Yellowstone National Park (Wyoming, USA) harbors the greatest concentration of geysers worldwide. Research suggests that individual geysers are not isolated but rather are hydraulically connected in the subsurface with other geysers and thermal springs. To quantify such connections, we combined techniques from machine learning, causal inference, and dynamical systems to characterize the collective eruptive behavior of a set of 10 geysers over 18 months (April 2007 – September 2008) focusing on geyser‐geyser interactions. Model predictions were up to 15 times more accurate when we sought to predict a geyser's eruption time series based on outflow channel temperatures from the network than based on its own time series alone, suggesting the existence of a complex interconnected subsurface groundwater system. On average, cone‐type geysers had larger impacts on other geysers than did fountain‐type geysers. Similarly, cone‐type geysers were on average more insulated from other geysers. However, substantial unexplained variation remained after considering the cone versus fountain dichotomy. Distance between geysers also affected interactions: nearby geysers had stronger effects on focal geysers than did geysers located farther away. Collectively, results support the hypothesis of geyser interdependence at timescales of 5 min–10 days. Our analyses highlight the existence of quantifiable geyser‐to‐geyser interactions that can be resolved through pairwise and system‐level analyses. These findings emphasize the subsurface interconnectedness of thermal features, provide information relevant to visitor experiences in Yellowstone National Park, and suggest strategies for exploring patterns of interdependence that may exist among other episodic geological phenomena.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".