MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394908904 · doi:10.1134/s0016852124700067

Transpressive Tectonics Evidence in the Epicentral Area of the Modern Earthquake in Constantine Area of Algerian Eastern Tell Atlas: New Insights from Rhumel Valley

2024· article· en· W4394908904 on OpenAlexaff
Sahra Aourari, Djamel Machane, Mehdi Amine Guemache, Hamid Haddoum, Azzeddine Benhamouche, Hakim Moulouel, S. Sadrati, N. Sidi Said, Dalila Ait Benamar

Bibliographic record

VenueGeotectonics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geophysical Studies Worldwide
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Natural Resources and Forestry
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural geologyGeologyTectonicsAtlas (anatomy)SeismologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The neotectonic processes are crucial for identification of active faults in a seismic unstable area. The Aїn Smara active fault runs along the Middle Rhumel Valley located in Constantine area of Algerian Eastern Tell Atlas mountain chain and it emerges in the south‒western part of the epicentral zone of the earthquake occurred on October 27, 1985 (Mw = 5.8) within a corridor displaying morphological features and deformed Pliocene‒Quaternary layers, which are the consequence of transpressive tectonic regime. In our study the morpho-tectonic and structural research supported by the fieldwork, was performed. The thick fault gouge indicating simple shear deformation, fault breccias and minor faults affecting the Pliocene limestone and Quaternary alluvial terraces, were found. The active fault splits into northern and southern segments. The northern segment corresponds to the El Aria Fault that ruptured during the earthquake in 1985 and the southern segment with the studied Aĭn Smara Fault. Our research showed the significant extent of the active fault and including its parameters for improved seismic hazard assessment of the Constantine area.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.180 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeotectonicsSame topicGeological and Geophysical Studies WorldwideFrench-language works237,207