MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7057945507

Locations of the 1982 Miramichi (Canada) Aftershocks : Implication of Two Rupture Regions Activated

2020· other· en· W7057945507 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library) · 2020
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAftershockIntraplate earthquakeEpicenterForeshockSequence (biology)Event (particle physics)Magnitude (astronomy)Arrival time
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On 9 January 1982, in the Miramichi region of New Brunswick, Canada, an earthquake with mb 5.7 occurred. It was followed by extensive aftershocks and felt throughout eastern Canada and north-eastern USA. Since this earthquake occurred in an uninhabited region, the damage was minor. Due to an mb 5.7 event is rare in north-eastern America, investigating it and its aftershocks is important for understanding intraplate seismicity. Digital seismic stations were not yet common by 1982. Fortunately, four seismic phases at three stations could be used to locate larger aftershocks. A simplified master-event location method combined with regional depth-phase modeling was used to locate aftershocks. For each aftershock its focal depth was first determined using a depth phase; then, with the depth fixed, the epicenter was determined using the four arrival time readings measured at the same three stations. The located aftershocks were divided into three groups. In each group the earthquake numbers are similar, but the majority of the energy was released in one group. The epicenters formed two trends in the NE–SW direction, implying that the Miramichi earthquake sequence activated two rupture regions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.218
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.011
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1860.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library)Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207