Solid‐State Sintering Can Cause Explosivity and Seismogenic Unstable Sliding During Dome‐Building Eruptions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The hydraulic and rheological properties of shear zones that develop in dome‐building eruptions govern the potential for explosive and seismic behavior at those volcanoes. Previous isostatic hot‐pressing experiments demonstrated that crystalline fault gouge undergoes solid‐state sintering at high temperature and pressure, and sintering causes lithification and permeability loss within volcanic shear zones over years. We present results of torsion experiments in which we document, for the first time, gouge rheological behavior at the temperature‐normal stress‐strain rate conditions expected in volcanic shear zones, and determine the effect of shear on solid‐state sintering rate. Gouge sheared at 500°C, 50 or 100 MPa normal stress and 10 −4 to 10 −3 s −1 does not sinter, exhibits strain‐independent behavior, and deforms by distributed granular flow. In contrast, gouge sheared at 900°C, 50 or 100 MPa normal stress and 10 −5 to 10 −3 s −1 sinters, strain‐weakens, and exhibits microstructural evidence of strain localization and significant lithification. Samples sheared at 900°C for <1 hr have final porosities and permeabilities comparable to gouge samples hot‐pressed for 60 hr, indicating sintering is enhanced by a shear stress acting on grain boundaries in addition to a normal stress. These results are used to develop a model for time‐dependent densification by solid‐state sintering that is applicable when gouge is static or shearing. Finally, we propose that sintering‐driven lithification can cause deforming shear zones to transition from aseismic stable sliding to seismogenic sliding, potentially resulting in the drumbeat seismicity frequently observed at dome‐building 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 | 0.000 | 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".