The Earthquake Swarms of Eastern Maine and Nearby New Brunswick Since 2006
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Several earthquake swarms in Maine and nearby New Brunswick are analyzed to look for common features among the swarms. The swarms took place at Bar Harbor, Maine, in 2006–2007, at Searsport, Maine, in 2011, at McAdam, New Brunswick, in 2012 and 2015–2016, at Jonesboro, Maine, in 2022, at Dedham, Maine, in 2022–2023, and at Millinocket, Maine, in 2022–2023. The six earthquake swarms all had focal depths of 4 km or less, appear to have taken place within or at the edges of Devonian granitic plutons, and with one exception show spatial distributions that are parallel to trends in the local geology. The swarms all had spatial extents of 3 km or less. The time histories of most of the swarms in Maine and New Brunswick are generally consistent with the main part of the swarm being controlled by aseismic creep rather than by fluid diffusion. Modeling of a rock inclusion that is stiffer than the surrounding rock mass in a regional stress field shows that stress will concentrate within the rock inclusion as well as along some of its edges. This modeling suggests that granitic rock bodies in eastern North American could have stress concentrations that fail in earthquakes, although the size of the largest earthquake in any single granitic rock body cannot be assessed by the results of this study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".