USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70256598

Rapid estimation of single-station earthquake magnitudes with machine learning on a global scale

Abstract

The foundation of earthquake monitoring is the ability to rapidly detect, locate, and estimate the size of seismic sources. Earthquake magnitudes are particularly difficult to rapidly characterize because magnitude types are only applicable to specific magnitude ranges, and location errors propagate to substantial magnitude errors. We developed a method for rapid estimation of single‐station earthquake magnitudes using raw three‐component P waveforms observed at local to teleseismic distances, independent of prior size or location information. We used the MagNet regression model architecture ( Mousavi and Beroza, 2020b ), which combines convolutional and recurrent neural networks. We trained our model using ∼2.4 million P ‐phase arrivals labeled by the authoritative magnitude assigned by the U.S. Geological Survey. We tested input data parameters (e.g., window length) that could affect the performance of our model in near‐real‐time monitoring applications. At the longest waveform window length of 114 s, our model (Artificial Intelligence Magnitude [AIMag]) is accurate (median estimated magnitude within ±0.5 magnitude units from catalog magnitude) between M 2.3 and 7.6. However, magnitudes above M ∼7 are more underestimated as true magnitude increases. As the windows are shortened down to 1 s, the point at which higher magnitudes begin to be underestimated moves toward lower magnitudes, and the degree of underestimation increases. The over and underestimation of magnitudes for the smallest and largest earthquakes, respectively, are potentially related to the limited number of events in these ranges within the training data, as well as magnitude saturation effects related to not capturing the full source time function of large earthquakes. Importantly, AIMag can determine earthquake magnitudes with individual stations’ waveforms without instrument response correction or knowledge of an earthquake’s source‐station distance. This work may enable monitoring agencies to more rapidly recognize large, potentially tsunamigenic global earthquakes from few stations, allowing for faster event processing and reporting. This is critical for timely warnings for seismic‐related hazards.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Sydney Dybing, William L. Yeck, Hank M. Cole, Diego Melgar. 2024-01-02. Rapid estimation of single-station earthquake magnitudes with machine learning on a global scale. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120230171

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗