MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389473141 · doi:10.1002/9781119750925.ch5

Seismic and Acoustic Monitoring of Submarine Landslides

2023· other· en· W4389473141 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Clare, Gwyn Lintern, Ed Pope, Megan L. Baker, Sean Ruffell, Mohammad Zulkifli, S. Simmons, Morelia Urlaub, Mohammad Belal, Peter J. Talling

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical monograph · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaNatural Resources Canada
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilLeverhulme Trust
KeywordsSubmarine landslideGeologyLandslideSeismometerGeophoneSeismologySubmarine pipelineSubmarineHazardOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Submarine landslides pose a hazard to coastal communities and critical seafloor infrastructure, occurring on all of the world's continental margins, from coastal zones to hadal trenches. Offshore monitoring has been limited by the largely unpredictable occurrence of submarine landslides and the need to cover large regions. Recent subsea monitoring has provided new insights into the preconditioning and run-out of submarine landslides using active geophysical techniques. However, these tools measure a small spatial footprint and are power- and memory-intensive, thus limiting long-duration monitoring. Most landslide events remain unrecorded. In this chapter, we first show how passive acoustic and seismologic techniques can record acoustic emissions and ground motions created by terrestrial landslides. This terrestrial-focused research has catalyzed advances in characterizing submarine landslides using onshore and offshore networks of broadband seismometers, hydrophones, and geophones. We discuss new insights into submarine landslide preconditioning, timing, location, velocity, and down-slope evolution arising from these advances. Finally, we outline challenges, emphasizing the need to calibrate seismic and acoustic signals generated by submarine landslides. Passive seismic and acoustic sensing has a strong potential to enable more complete hazard catalogs to be built and open the door to emerging techniques (such as fiber-optic sensing) to fill key knowledge gaps.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.209
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical monographSame topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207