Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,461

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Scaling of fracture systems in geological media

Open access
Bonnet, E., Bour, O., Odling, N. E., Davy, P., Main, I., Cowie, P., Berkowitz, B.·2001·Reviews of Geophysics

Abstract

Scaling in fracture systems has become an active field of research in the last 25 years motivated by practical applications in hazardous waste disposal, hydrocarbon reservoir management, and earthquake hazard assessment. Relevant publications are therefore spread widely through the literature. Although it is recognized that some fracture systems are best described by scale‐limited laws (lognormal, exponential), it is now recognized that power laws and fractal geometry provide widely applicable descriptive tools for fracture system characterization. A key argument for power law and fractal scaling is the absence of characteristic length scales in the fracture growth process. All power law and fractal characteristics in nature must have upper and lower bounds. This topic has been largely neglected, but recent studies emphasize the importance of layering on all scales in limiting the scaling characteristics of natural fracture systems. The determination of power law exponents and fractal dimensions from observations, although outwardly simple, is problematic, and uncritical use of analysis techniques has resulted in inaccurate and even meaningless exponents. We review these techniques and suggest guidelines for the accurate and objective estimation of exponents and fractal dimensions. Syntheses of length, displacement, aperture power law exponents, and fractal dimensions are found, after critical appraisal of published studies, to show a wide variation, frequently spanning the theoretically possible range. Extrapolations from one dimension to two and from two dimensions to three are found to be nontrivial, and simple laws must be used with caution. Directions for future research include improved techniques for gathering data sets over great scale ranges and more rigorous application of existing analysis methods. More data are needed on joints and veins to illuminate the differences between different fracture modes. The physical causes of power law scaling and variation in exponents and fractal dimensions are still poorly understood.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/1999rg000074

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 1,461

Metadata

Authors
Bonnet, E., Bour, O., Odling, N. E., Davy, P., Main, I., Cowie, P., & Berkowitz, B.
Venue
Reviews of Geophysics
Published
2001-08
Volume
39
Issue
3
Pages
347-383
ISSN
  • 0096-1043 (ISSN-L)
  • 8755-1209
  • 1944-9208
OpenAlex
W2051875053
Cited by
1,461
References
1
FWCI
30.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Scaling of fracture systems in geological media. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/1999rg000074
The paper
Bonnet, E., Bour, O., Odling, N. E., Davy, P., Main, I., Cowie, P., & Berkowitz, B. (2001). Scaling of fracture systems in geological media. Reviews of Geophysics. https://doi.org/10.1029/1999rg000074

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.