↓ Skip to main content

Rapid Acceleration Leads to Rapid Weakening in Earthquake-Like Laboratory Experiments

Overview of attention for article published in Science, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Rapid Acceleration Leads to Rapid Weakening in Earthquake-Like Laboratory Experiments
Published in
Science, October 2012
DOI 10.1126/science.1221195
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. C. Chang, D. A. Lockner, Z. Reches

Abstract

After nucleation, a large earthquake propagates as an expanding rupture front along a fault. This front activates countless fault patches that slip by consuming energy stored in Earth's crust. We simulated the slip of a fault patch by rapidly loading an experimental fault with energy stored in a spinning flywheel. The spontaneous evolution of strength, acceleration, and velocity indicates that our experiments are proxies of fault-patch behavior during earthquakes of moment magnitude (M(w)) = 4 to 8. We show that seismically determined earthquake parameters (e.g., displacement, velocity, magnitude, or fracture energy) can be used to estimate the intensity of the energy release during an earthquake. Our experiments further indicate that high acceleration imposed by the earthquake's rupture front quickens dynamic weakening by intense wear of the fault zone.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Japan 1 2%
Unknown 61 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 22%
Student > Master 8 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 8 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 37 59%
Physics and Astronomy 4 6%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Engineering 2 3%
Neuroscience 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 16 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 October 2012.
All research outputs
#999,421
of 19,250,773 outputs
Outputs from Science
#19,145
of 74,022 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,328
of 148,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#215
of 782 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,250,773 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 74,022 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 57.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 148,033 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 782 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.