Arnaud Mignan

Arnaud Mignan, Marco Broccardo

In the last few years, deep learning has solved seemingly intractable problems, boosting the hope to find approximate solutions to problems that now are considered unsolvable. Earthquake prediction, the Grail of Seismology, is, in this context of continuous exciting discoveries, an obvious choice for deep learning exploration. We review the entire literature of artificial neural network (ANN) applications for earthquake prediction (77 articles, 1994-2019 period) and find two emerging trends: an increasing interest in this domain, and a complexification of ANN models over time, towards deep learning. Despite apparent positive results observed in this corpus, we demonstrate that simpler models seem to offer similar predictive powers, if not better ones. Due to the structured, tabulated nature of earthquake catalogues, and the limited number of features so far considered, simpler and more transparent machine learning models seem preferable at the present stage of research. Those baseline models follow first physical principles and are consistent with the known empirical laws of Statistical Seismology, which have minimal abilities to predict large earthquakes.

Arnaud Mignan

The complete part of the earthquake frequency-magnitude distribution (FMD), above completeness magnitude mc, is well described by the Gutenberg-Richter law. The parameter mc however varies in space due to the seismic network configuration, yielding a convoluted FMD shape below max(mc). This paper investigates the shape of the generalized FMD (GFMD), which may be described as a mixture of elemental FMDs (eFMDs) defined as asymmetric Laplace distributions of mode mc [Mignan, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JB009347]. An asymmetric Laplace mixture model (GFMD- ALMM) is thus proposed with its parameters (detection parameter kappa, Gutenberg-Richter beta-value, mc distribution, as well as number K and weight w of eFMD components) estimated using a semi-supervised hard expectation maximization approach including BIC penalties for model complexity. The performance of the proposed method is analysed, with encouraging results obtained: kappa, beta, and the mc distribution range are retrieved for different GFMD shapes in simulations, as well as in regional catalogues (southern and northern California, Nevada, Taiwan, France), in a global catalogue, and in an aftershock sequence (Christchurch, New Zealand). We find max(mc) to be conservative compared to other methods, kappa = k/log(10) = 3 in most catalogues (compared to beta = b/log(10) = 1), but also that biases in kappa and beta may occur when rounding errors are present below completeness. The GFMD-ALMM, by modelling different FMD shapes in an autonomous manner, opens the door to new statistical analyses in the realm of incomplete seismicity data, which could in theory improve earthquake forecasting by considering c. ten times more events.

Arnaud Mignan

Text analytics based on supervised machine learning classifiers has shown great promise in a multitude of domains, but has yet to be applied to Seismology. We test various standard models (Naive Bayes, k-Nearest Neighbors, Support Vector Machines, and Random Forests) on a seismological corpus of 100 articles related to the topic of precursory accelerating seismicity, spanning from 1988 to 2010. This corpus was labelled in Mignan (2011) with the precursor whether explained by critical processes (i.e., cascade triggering) or by other processes (such as signature of main fault loading). We investigate rather the classification process can be automatized to help analyze larger corpora in order to better understand trends in earthquake predictability research. We find that the Naive Bayes model performs best, in agreement with the machine learning literature for the case of small datasets, with cross-validation accuracies of 86% for binary classification. For a refined multiclass classification ('non-critical process' < 'agnostic' < 'critical process assumed' < 'critical process demonstrated'), we obtain up to 78% accuracy. Prediction on a dozen of articles published since 2011 shows however a weak generalization with a F1-score of 60%, only slightly better than a random classifier, which can be explained by a change of authorship and use of different terminologies. Yet, the model shows F1-scores greater than 80% for the two multiclass extremes ('non-critical process' versus 'critical process demonstrated') while it falls to random classifier results (around 25%) for papers labelled 'agnostic' or 'critical process assumed'. Those results are encouraging in view of the small size of the corpus and of the high degree of abstraction of the labelling. Domain knowledge engineering remains essential but can be made transparent by an investigation of Naive Bayes keyword posterior probabilities.