MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Storms, Sea Ice, and Microseismic Noise in Alaska

2025· article· W7117152326 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S. John

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Geological SurveyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMicroseismStormNoise (video)Seismic noiseFocus (optics)Ambient noise level

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using 155 distributed seismic stations spanning Alaska and western Canada, we document how environmental factors like storms and sea ice influence microseismic noise. We examine power spectral densities of continuous seismic data and focus on secondary microseisms (5-10s) and short period secondary microseisms (1-2s). We cross-correlate the height of ocean waves across the region with the power spectral density time series. We find that the Gulf of Alaska is the dominant source of secondary microseisms in Alaska. The eastern Gulf, in particular, produces more energetic secondary microseisms despite, at times, lower overall wave amplitudes. We find that the short period secondary microseismic noise is produced in the coastal waters and attenuates quickly moving inland. We show that this band is heavily modulated by the influence of sea ice in the coastal ocean by comparing it with sea ice concentrations. We also document how these two microseismic bands vary seasonally and spatially as they respond to different environmental phenomena. We find that this seismic energy tracks closely the seasonal arrival and departure of sea ice in the coastal waters. As an example of how microseism energy can be used to track environmental change, we demonstrate an application of the short period microseism using it as a proxy for the annual season of coastal erosion.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.396
Threshold uncertainty score0.788

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207