MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311029801 · doi:10.1093/gji/ggac473

The 2015–2017 Pamir earthquake sequence: foreshocks, main shocks and aftershocks, seismotectonics, fault interaction and fluid processes

2022· article· en· W4311029801 on OpenAlexaff
Wasja Bloch, Sabrina Metzger, Bernd Schurr, Xiaohui Yuan, Lothar Ratschbacher, Sanaa Reuter, Qiang Xu, Junmeng Zhao, S. Murodkulov, Ilhomjon Oimuhammadzoda

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Journal International · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAftershockGeologySeismologyForeshockInduced seismicitySeismotectonicsTectonicsSlip (aerodynamics)Shock (circulatory)Seismic gapFault (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY A sequence of three strong (MW7.2, 6.4, 6.6) earthquakes struck the Pamir of Central Asia in 2015–2017. With a local seismic network, we recorded the succession of the foreshock, main shock and aftershock sequences at local distances with good azimuthal coverage. We located 11 784 seismic events and determined 33 earthquake moment tensors. The seismicity delineates the tectonic structures of the Pamir in unprecedented detail, that is the thrusts that absorb shortening along the Pamir’s thrust front, and the strike-slip and normal faults that dissect the Pamir Plateau into a westward extruding block and a northward advancing block. Ruptures on the kinematically dissimilar faults were activated subsequently from the initial MW 7.2 Sarez event at times and distances that follow a diffusion equation. All main shock areas but the initial one exhibited foreshock activity, which was not modulated by the occurrence of the earlier earthquakes. Modelling of the static Coulomb stress changes indicates that aftershock triggering occurred over distances of ≤90 km on favourably oriented faults. The third event in the sequence, the MW 6.6 Muji earthquake, ruptured despite its repeated stabilization through stress transfer in the order of –10 kPa. To explain the accumulation of MW > 6 earthquakes, we reason that the initial main shock may have increased nearby fault permeability, and facilitated fluid migration into the mature fault zones, eventually triggering the later large earthquakes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.752
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Journal InternationalSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207