Site Amplification Measurements for Ontario Seismic Stations Based on Ground Motion Relations and Horizontal to Vertical Ratios
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many of Ontario POLARIS (Portable Observatories for Lithospheric Analysis and Research Investigating Seismicity) stations are situated on soft soils, which increase the amplitude of seismic ground motions. These stations, along with CNSN (Canadian National Seismic Network) sites have provided recordings of fifty-four small to moderate earthquakes from which an initial measurement of site effects can be made based on two methods: a) comparison to the regional ground model, and b) horizontal-to-vertical ratios. The time-series data from southern Ontario and western Quebec rock sites have been processed to produce Fourier acceleration amplitudes for a broad frequency range (0.2 – 20Hz), which were then fit to an existing ground motion model for eastern North America (Atkinson, 2004). The observed amplitudes show higher than predicted values at high frequencies. In addition, the eastern North America relation tends to over-predict amplitudes at small hypocentral distances and under-predict values at larger distances in south-central and southwestern Ontario, possibly due in part to a crustal waveguide effect. Spectral plots of estimated site amplification were produced for each soil station
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".