MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6899333759 · doi:10.5880/gfz.4.2.2020.004

Source parameters of Acoustic Emissions from triaxial experiments on Westerly granite, Aue Granite and Flechtigen Sandstone

2021· dataset· en· W6899333759 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGFZ Data Services · 2021
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsMoment tensorAcoustic emissionRakeFracture (geology)Event (particle physics)AftershockMoment (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dataset is supplementary material to "What controls the presence and characteristics of aftershocks in rock fracture in the lab?" by Joern Davidsen, Thomas H. W. Goebel, Grzegorz Kwiatek, Sergei Stanchits, Jordi Baro and Georg Dresen (Davidsen et al., 2021). The dataset contains source parameters of acoustic emission events recorded during triaxial fracture and friction (stick-slip) experiments performed on two Westerly Granite samples, Aue Granite and Flechtigen Sandstone. Basic seismic catalog associated with each experiment contains origin time, hypocentral location in local Cartesian coordinate system of the sample, acoustic-emission derived magnitude and polarity coefficient (a simplified measure of mechanism type: shear, pore opening or collapse). Extended catalog information is available for selected experiments including information whether event is background seismicity, trigger of following events or triggered by preceding events. In addition, we provide information on focal mechanisms calculated in each experiment using full moment tensor inversion. Focal mechanism catalogs include information on strike, dip and rake of two nodal planes, and percentage of isotropic, clvd and double-couple components of the full moment tensor. The detailed description of catalog is provided in the data description file which is also included in the zip folder of the 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGFZ Data ServicesFrench-language works237,207