MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401552301 · doi:10.5194/se-15-989-2024

(D)rifting in the 21st century: key processes, natural hazards, and geo-resources

2024· article· en· W4401552301 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSolid Earth · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersHelmholtz-Zentrum Potsdam - Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum GFZDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftCardiff UniversityEuropean Commission
KeywordsRiftEarth scienceGeologyNatural resourceNatural (archaeology)East African RiftNatural hazardTerminologyTectonicsEnvironmental resource managementPaleontologyPolitical scienceEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Rifting and continental break-up are major research topics within geosciences, and a thorough understanding of the processes involved as well as of the associated natural hazards and natural resources is of great importance to both science and society. As a result, a large body of knowledge is available in the literature, with most of this previous research being focused on tectonic and geodynamic processes and their links to the evolution of rift systems. We believe that the key task for researchers is to make our knowledge of rift systems available and applicable to face current and future societal challenges. In particular, we should embrace a system analysis approach and aim to apply our knowledge to better understand the links between rift processes, natural hazards, and the geo-resources that are of critical importance to realise the energy transition and a sustainable future. The aim of this paper is therefore to provide a first-order framework for such an approach by providing an up-to-date summary of rifting processes, hazards, and geo-resources, followed by an assessment of future challenges and opportunities for research. We address the varied terminology used to characterise rifting in the scientific literature, followed by a description of rifting processes with a focus on the impact of (1) rheology and stain rates, (2) inheritance in three dimensions, (3) magmatism, and (4) surface processes. Subsequently, we describe the considerable natural hazards that occur in rift settings, which are linked to (1) seismicity, (2) magmatism, and (3) mass wasting, and provide some insights into how the impacts of these hazards can be mitigated. Moreover, we classify and describe the geo-resources occurring in rift environments as (1) non-energy resources, (2) geo-energy resources, (3) water and soils, and (4) opportunities for geological storage. Finally, we discuss the main challenges for the future linked to the aforementioned themes and identify numerous opportunities for follow-up research and knowledge application. In particular, we see great potential in systematic knowledge transfer and collaboration between researchers, industry partners, and government bodies, which may be the key to future successes and advancements.

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.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.796
Threshold uncertainty score0.472

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.209 · 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