Updated Understanding of the Thompson River Valley Landslides Kinematics Using Satellite InSAR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Thompson River valley is one of the most important transportation corridors in western Canada as it hosts two important railways. This valley has experienced several historical landslide events, many of them along a 10 km section south of the town of Ashcroft. Six of these landslides, showing varying states of activity, were selected for analysis in this paper, as these have the potential for the biggest impact on the railways. The subsurface interpretation of these landslides is combined with satellite InSAR data from May 2015 to May 2017 to enhance the current understanding of the landslide kinematics. Two InSAR orientations are combined geometrically with the assumption that the horizontal component of landslide movement is parallel to the slope azimuth, which provides a practicable approach to approximate landslide displacement vectors. The results classify these landslides as very slow-moving. The maximum velocities recorded are 29, 35, 26, 64, 18, and 52 mm/year for the Goddard, North, South, South extension, Barnard, and Redhill landslides, respectively. All landslides except the Redhill landslide show near-horizontal movements near the toe, with increasing vertical components as measurements approach the back scarp. This confirms that kinematics include rotational and compound mechanisms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".