Circum‐Antarctic Glacially Induced Fault Reactivation Since the Last Glacial Maximum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) has the potential to reactivate faults in the crust due to the generation of stresses caused by changes in the ice load. Research on the release of stress along pre‐existing faults, known as glacially induced faults, in Antarctica is limited due to the lack of detailed information about the region's ice sheet history, Earth's rheology, and fault parameters. Here, we analyse the reactivation potential of 62 faults since the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) by calculating Coulomb failure stress changes (CFS) for a thrust faulting and a strike‐slip faulting stress regime in combination with various GIA models and stress parameters. In general, a higher fault instability was observed in a strike‐slip faulting stress regime compared to a thrust faulting stress regime. Furthermore, the ice sheet history models had a higher effect on fault instability than the Earth models. Faults located in the Ross Sea area show the highest potential of fault reactivation, while those in the Antarctic Peninsula show the lowest. Our results suggest that the potential for glacially triggered faulting has increased since the LGM in many inherited rift systems, and some faults remain unstable until today.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".