MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285490885 · doi:10.1038/s41467-022-31901-4

Responding to eruptive transitions during the 2020–2021 eruption of La Soufrière volcano, St. Vincent

2022· article· en· W4285490885 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Erouscilla P. Joseph, Michal Camejo‐Harry, T. Christopher, Rodrigo Contreras‐Arratia, Stacey Edwards, Omari Graham, M. Johnson, A. Juman, Joan L. Latchman, Lloyd Lynch, V. Miller, Ilias Papadopoulos, Karen Pascal, Richard Robertson, G. Ryan, A. Stinton, Raphaël Grandin, Ian Hamling, M-J. Jo, Jenni Barclay, Paul Cole, B.V. Davies, R. S. J. Sparks

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitut de Physique du Globe de ParisU.S. Geological SurveyEuropean CommissionSight Research UKGovernment of CanadaJapan Aerospace Exploration AgencyNatural Environment Research CouncilUnited States Agency for International DevelopmentNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsVolcanoUnrestMagmaKey (lock)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicineComputer scienceSeismologyGeologyComputer securityPolitical sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A critical challenge during volcanic emergencies is responding to rapid changes in eruptive behaviour. Actionable advice, essential in times of rising uncertainty, demands the rapid synthesis and communication of multiple datasets with prognoses. The 2020-2021 eruption of La Soufrière volcano exemplifies these challenges: a series of explosions from 9-22 April 2021 was preceded by three months of effusive activity, which commenced with a remarkably low level of detected unrest. Here we show how the development of an evolving conceptual model, and the expression of uncertainties via both elicitation and scenarios associated with this model, were key to anticipating this transition. This not only required input from multiple monitoring datasets but contextualisation via state-of-the-art hazard assessments, and evidence-based knowledge of critical decision-making timescales and community needs. In addition, we share strategies employed as a consequence of constraints on recognising and responding to eruptive transitions in a resource-constrained setting, which may guide similarly challenged volcano observatories worldwide.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.799
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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations58
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207