Heterogeneity versus Anisotropy and the State of Stress in Stable Cratons: Observations from a Deep Borehole of Opportunity in Northeastern Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Geophysical logs collected from a deep borehole drilled to the Canadian Shield in Northeastern Alberta shed valuable lights on the state of stress in stable cratons. Observed breakout azimuths rotate between three depth intervals, from N100°E at 1650-2000 m to N173°E at 2000-2210 m, and finally to N145°E at the bottom. No obvious fractures that might disturb stresses were found; and these rotating breakouts can be interpreted either as being due to a heterogenous stress field or formation elastic and strength anisotropy. The latter interpretation is favored because the breakout azimuths are strongly controlled by rock metamorphic textures as validated by their close correlations with both dip directions of foliation planes and polarization directions from dipole sonic logs. Monte Carlo realizations further demonstrate that anisotropic metamorphic rocks subjected to a uniform horizontal stress direction could result in the observed azimuth-rotating breakouts. The stress magnitudes inferred from this analysis, which incorporates both the rock anisotropy and weak foliation failure planes, suggest a normal faulting regime and a maximum horizontal compression direction consistent with that in the overlying Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin (NE-SW) and the motion of the North American plate. The inferred stress magnitudes are low and Mohr-Coulomb analyses demonstrate that the formation is not near the critical loading for slip on weak planes. However, more detailed investigations should be conducted since Monte Carlo calculations indicate that analyses from breakout widths, particularly when a conventional Kirsch-based formula is employed, are highly nonunique, allowing for large variations in potential stress states.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".