A scaling relationship for the width of secondary deformation around strike-slip faults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Simple mechanical arguments suggest that slip along interlocked, rough faults, damages surrounding rocks. The same arguments require that the scale of secondary damage is proportional to the size of geometric irregularities along the main fault. This relationship could apply at all scales, but has, so far, been difficult to observe at the 10s to 100 s of km scales of large, natural faults, often because large-scale deformation is distributed across wide, complex plate-boundary fault systems, like the San Andreas Fault. The geometry and geology of another large-scale plate-boundary strike slip fault—the Queen Charlotte Fault (QCF)—is, in contrast, especially simple. Here, we show that observations of secondary deformation are well-aligned with predictions of stress variations caused by geometric irregularities along the QCF, suggesting a geometric relationship between primary fault geometry and secondary deformation. The analytic stress solution reveals that the highest stresses and highest likelihood of failure are confined to a zone of influence (ZOI) with a width quantified by ZOI=λ/2π, where λ is the wavelength of geometric variations along the main fault. This simple model is consistent with ~100-km-scale observations along the QCF and can theoretically be used to predict the width of secondary deformation at all scales.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".