Subsurface evidence for potentially seismogenic structures in the offshore Grand Banks region of Newfoundland, eastern Canada: present-day reactivation of inherited passive margin structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Earthquakes in the offshore Grand Banks region of Newfoundland pose a risk to lives and property in nearby coastal communities and to crucial commercial infrastructure and operations in offshore areas. The 1929 M7.2 Grand Banks earthquake, which was associated with a tsunamigenic landslide, devastated the coastal communities in southern Newfoundland and ruptured several trans-Atlantic telecommunications cables. Despite this event, we still know little about the structural setting and neotectonics of the area. In this study, we identified potentially active tectonic structures, and associated secondary deformation features, affecting the youngest strata and the seabed in this region through the interpretation of offshore two-dimensional (2D) seismic reflection profiles. Analysis of these profiles also allowed us to interpret the relationship of the younger, potentially seismogenic structures to inherited passive margin structures at depth. Our findings on the locations and geometries of potentially active faults can be utilized as a basis for seismic hazard inputs for the modelling of earthquake scenarios, which are useful for estimating the potential impacts of the rupture of faults/fault segments on certain populations and assets.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".