Literature DB >> 33495346

Laboratory earthquake forecasting: A machine learning competition.

Paul A Johnson1, Bertrand Rouet-Leduc2, Laura J Pyrak-Nolte3,4,5, Gregory C Beroza6, Chris J Marone7,8, Claudia Hulbert9, Addison Howard10, Philipp Singer11, Dmitry Gordeev11, Dimosthenis Karaflos12, Corey J Levinson13, Pascal Pfeiffer14, Kin Ming Puk15, Walter Reade10.   

Abstract

Earthquake prediction, the long-sought holy grail of earthquake science, continues to confound Earth scientists. Could we make advances by crowdsourcing, drawing from the vast knowledge and creativity of the machine learning (ML) community? We used Google's ML competition platform, Kaggle, to engage the worldwide ML community with a competition to develop and improve data analysis approaches on a forecasting problem that uses laboratory earthquake data. The competitors were tasked with predicting the time remaining before the next earthquake of successive laboratory quake events, based on only a small portion of the laboratory seismic data. The more than 4,500 participating teams created and shared more than 400 computer programs in openly accessible notebooks. Complementing the now well-known features of seismic data that map to fault criticality in the laboratory, the winning teams employed unexpected strategies based on rescaling failure times as a fraction of the seismic cycle and comparing input distribution of training and testing data. In addition to yielding scientific insights into fault processes in the laboratory and their relation with the evolution of the statistical properties of the associated seismic data, the competition serves as a pedagogical tool for teaching ML in geophysics. The approach may provide a model for other competitions in geosciences or other domains of study to help engage the ML community on problems of significance.
Copyright © 2021 the Author(s). Published by PNAS.

Entities:  

Keywords:  earthquake prediction; laboratory earthquakes; machine learning competition; physics of faulting

Year:  2021        PMID: 33495346      PMCID: PMC7865129          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2011362118

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  19 in total

1.  Seismic evidence for an earthquake nucleation phase.

Authors:  W L Ellsworth; G C Beroza
Journal:  Science       Date:  1995-05-12       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Slow earthquakes, preseismic velocity changes, and the origin of slow frictional stick-slip.

Authors:  Bryan M Kaproth; C Marone
Journal:  Science       Date:  2013-08-15       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 3.  Machine learning for data-driven discovery in solid Earth geoscience.

Authors:  Karianne J Bergen; Paul A Johnson; Maarten V de Hoop; Gregory C Beroza
Journal:  Science       Date:  2019-03-22       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 4.  Connecting slow earthquakes to huge earthquakes.

Authors:  Kazushige Obara; Aitaro Kato
Journal:  Science       Date:  2016-07-15       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  Nonvolcanic deep tremor associated with subduction in southwest Japan.

Authors:  Kazushige Obara
Journal:  Science       Date:  2002-05-31       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Episodic tremor and slip on the Cascadia subduction zone: the chatter of silent slip.

Authors:  Garry Rogers; Herb Dragert
Journal:  Science       Date:  2003-05-08       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Modeling flow and transport in fracture networks using graphs.

Authors:  S Karra; D O'Malley; J D Hyman; H S Viswanathan; G Srinivasan
Journal:  Phys Rev E       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 2.529

8.  Machine Learning Reveals the Seismic Signature of Eruptive Behavior at Piton de la Fournaise Volcano.

Authors:  C X Ren; A Peltier; V Ferrazzini; B Rouet-Leduc; P A Johnson; F Brenguier
Journal:  Geophys Res Lett       Date:  2020-02-07       Impact factor: 4.720

9.  Earthquake detection through computationally efficient similarity search.

Authors:  Clara E Yoon; Ossian O'Reilly; Karianne J Bergen; Gregory C Beroza
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2015-12-04       Impact factor: 14.136

View more
  3 in total

1.  Physics-informed attention-based neural network for hyperbolic partial differential equations: application to the Buckley-Leverett problem.

Authors:  Ruben Rodriguez-Torrado; Pablo Ruiz; Luis Cueto-Felgueroso; Michael Cerny Green; Tyler Friesen; Sebastien Matringe; Julian Togelius
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-05-09       Impact factor: 4.996

2.  Masks and distancing during COVID-19: a causal framework for imputing value to public-health interventions.

Authors:  Andres Babino; Marcelo O Magnasco
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-03-04       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Predicting fault slip via transfer learning.

Authors:  Kun Wang; Christopher W Johnson; Kane C Bennett; Paul A Johnson
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2021-12-16       Impact factor: 14.919

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.