Twin Horsetailing Structures in the Extensional Regime based on Physical Experiment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Horsetailing is an important feature to identify the strike‐slip structure and indicates the movement mode of the fault. However, the formation mechanism of horsetailing in the extensional regime remains unclear. In this study, the formation process of horsetailing is reproduced through physical experiment, simulating the Linnan sag in the extensional regime. The results of the physical experiment demonstrates that the formation of the horsetailing in the extensional regime requires two phases of non‐coaxial stretching plus the segment of the principal fault. The stretching distance in the early phase is slightly smaller than that in the middle–late phase. The segment point of the principal fault is only the intersection of the horsetailing structure and the principal fault. The horsetailing formed in the extensional regime is different from that in the strike‐slip regime. For the formation of structure, the principal fault is dip‐slip in the early phase and then becomes an oblique‐slip in the middle–late phase, and the horsetailing is composed of the middle–late new tensile faults. The fault properties of the horsetailing in the extensional regime has important guiding significance for the longitudinal fluid migration along the fault in petroliferous basins.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".