MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312835551 · doi:10.3133/ofr20221085

Systematic mapping of the ocean-continent transform plate boundary of the Queen Charlotte fault system, southeastern Alaska and western British Columbia—A preliminary bathymetric terrain model

2022· article· en· W4312835551 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brian D. Andrews, Daniel S. Brothers, Peter Dartnell, J V Barrie, Peter J. Haeussler, Kristen M. Green, H. Gary Greene, N. C. E. Miller, Jared W. Kluesner, Uri S. ten Brink

Bibliographic record

VenueAntarctica A Keystone in a Changing World · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyBathymetrySubmarine pipelineSeismologyArchipelagoFault (geology)Geological surveyLandslideQueen (butterfly)TerrainPlate tectonicsTransform faultOceanographyArchaeologyGeographyTectonicsCartographyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2015, U.S. Geological Survey scientists in collaboration with scientists from other institutions began a study of the Queen Charlotte fault-the first systematic study of the fault in more than three decades.The primary goal of the study was to gain a better understanding of the earthquake, tsunami, and underwater-landslide hazards throughout southeastern Alaska, as well as gather data to develop geologic models that can be applied to similar plate boundaries around the globe, such as the San Andreas fault system in southern California, the Alpine fault in New Zealand, and the North Anatolian fault in Turkey.A bathymetric terrain model was compiled from six different multibeam surveys of the previously unmapped Queen Charlotte fault offshore of southeastern Alaska and Haida Gwaii archipelago.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAntarctica A Keystone in a Changing WorldSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207