No evidence for an active margin-spanning megasplay fault at the Cascadia Subduction Zone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been previously proposed that a megasplay fault within the Cascadia accretionary wedge, spanning from offshore Vancouver Island to Oregon, has the potential to slip during a future Cascadia subduction zone earthquake. This hypothetical fault has major implications for tsunami size and arrival times and is included in disaster-planning scenarios currently in use in the region. This hypothesis is evaluated in this study using CASIE21 deep-penetrating and U.S. Geological Survey high-resolution seismic reflection profiles. We map changes in wedge structural style and seismic character to identify the inner-outer wedge transition zone where a megasplay fault has been previously hypothesized to exist and evaluate evidence for active faulting within this zone. Our results indicate that there is not an active, through-going megasplay fault in Cascadia, but instead, the structure and activity of faulting at the inner-outer wedge transition zone is highly variable and segmented along strike, consistent with the segmentation of other physical and mechanical properties in Cascadia. Wedge sedimentation, plate dip, and subducting topography are proposed to play a major role in controlling megasplay fault development and evolution. Incorporating updated megasplay fault location, geometry, and activity into modeling of Cascadia earthquakes and tsunamis could help better constrain associated hazards.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".