Controls of Slab Subduction and Tearing on the Magmatism of Wrangell Volcanoes in South‐Central Alaska
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study integrates data from all broadband seismic stations in Alaska and northwestern Canada in 1999–2022 to construct a shear‐wave velocity model for south‐central Alaska and northwesternmost Canada, using ambient noise wave propagation simulation and inversion. Our model reveals three key features, including (a) the presence of the subducting Yakutat slab with apparent velocity reductions near the trench and within its flat segment, (b) two slab segments beneath the Wrangell volcanic field, differing in steepness, depth, and seismic velocity, and aligning spatially with the northwestern and southeastern volcano clusters, and (c) the existence of slab windows between the Yakutat and Wrangell slabs and between the northwestern and southeastern portions of the Wrangell slab. Our findings reinforce that the Wrangell volcanoes are predominantly influenced by subduction‐related magmatism. Furthermore, the two slab windows could have induced asthenospheric upwelling, contributing to the volcanism in the Wrangell clustered volcanoes.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".