Compiled onshore and offshore paleoseismic data along the Cascadia Subduction zone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The USGS Powell Center Cascadia earthquake hazards working group compiled published onshore and offshore paleoseismic data along the Cascadia subduction zone, spanning sites from Vancouver Island to the Mendocino triple junction. Evidence for megathrust rupture includes coastal land-level change, tsunami inundation, onshore shaking proxies such as landslides or liquefaction, and offshore shaking proxies such as marine turbidites. The quality of paleoseismic data for megathrust rupture along the Cascadia subduction zone collected over the past three decades varies because analytical capabilities and data collection methodologies have evolved. Thus, as part of the compilation, we also present a ranking scheme to assess the quality of age estimates and evidence for great megathrust rupture. With the age ranking scheme, we ask: "How well is a proposed paleoseismic event dated?" based on the materials and methods used. With the evidence ranking scheme, we ask: "How confident are we that a proposed event is, in fact, the result of a Cascadia megathrust rupture?" based on the sedimentological characteristics, correlation, and mapping. The evidence ranking scheme also helps to evaluate possible alternative mechanisms for creating paleoseismic evidence such as crustal fault, intraslab, or distant tsunamigenic earthquake.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".