MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405357801 · doi:10.1002/9781394195947.ch8

Synthesis of the Seismic Structure of the Greater Alaska Region: Subducting Slab Geometry

2024· other· en· W4405357801 on OpenAlexaff
G. L. Pavlis, M. A. Jadamec, Michael Everett Mann, Xiaotao Yang, A. J. Schaeffer, S. Shawn Wei, K. M. Fischer

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical monograph · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologySlabSeismologyGeometryGeophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We utilized a normalized vote method to define common features in teleseismic, body-wave tomography models produced from the Alaska USArray data. The metric is used with three-dimensional visualizations to define subducting slab geometry. We observe the following features. (1) The eastern end of the slab downstream from the Yakutat microplate has a flap-like structure extending to 300–350 km depth that is bounded on the east by an edge consistent with rigid plate kinematics and on the west by a tear located downstream from the western limit of Yakutat rocks. (2) The geometry matches Slab2.0. (3) Below Slab2.0, the dip steepens to form a vertical structure that extends to the top of the mantle transition zone. Within the transition zone, the geometry changes from north to south dipping to form a lithospheric scale, recumbent fold connected to a lower-mantle structure located ∼1,000 km south of the trench. (4) A previously unknown mantle structure extends eastward from the flat slab to an edge predicted by rigid plate kinematics suggesting it is an older section of the Pacific Plate emplaced before the Yakutat tear initiated. We propose a new kinematic model of subduction history in Alaska since 40 Ma consistent with the new data.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical monographSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207