Episodic Magma Hammers for the 15 January 2022 Cataclysmic Eruption of Hunga Tonga‐Hunga Ha'apai
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Understanding the forces and magma system dynamics on timescales of seconds to minutes remains challenging. In the January 2022 phreatoplinian Hunga Tonga‐Hunga Ha'apai eruption, four remarkably similar seismic subevents within a 5‐min interval occurred during the intensifying early eruptive phase. The subevents are similar in waveforms and durations (∼25 s each). Each subevent begins with an unusual negative P‐wave polarity which is inferred, using full‐wave seismic modeling, to be caused by an upward single‐force mechanism at the volcano created by a magma hammer likely in response to magma flow blockage/constriction during the early part of the eruption as discharge rapidly increased over orders of magnitude with concomitant conduit geometry evolution and instability. Our proposed episodic magma hammer model is consistent with thermodynamic and phase properties of the magmatic mixture, and yields an estimate of conduit mass flow in agreement with vent discharge rates derived from satellite imagery of plume heights.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".