利用深度学习和基于网络的算法在本地 OBS 网络中自动编制地震目录的实用方法

Matthias Pilot, Vera Schlindwein
{"title":"利用深度学习和基于网络的算法在本地 OBS 网络中自动编制地震目录的实用方法","authors":"Matthias Pilot, Vera Schlindwein","doi":"10.1785/0220230182","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In land-based seismology, modern automatic earthquake detection and phase picking algorithms have already proven to outperform classic approaches, resulting in more complete catalogs when only taking a fraction of the time needed for classic methods. For marine-based seismology, similar advances have not been made yet. For ocean-bottom seismometer (OBS) data, additional challenges arise, such as a lower signal-to-noise ratio and fewer labeled data sets available for training deep-learning models. However, the performance of available deep-learning models has not yet been extensively tested on marine-based data sets. Here, we apply three different modern event detection and phase picking approaches to an ∼12 month local OBS data set and compare the resulting earthquake catalogs and location results. In addition, we evaluate their performance by comparing different subcatalogs of manually detected events and visually revised picks to their automatic counterparts. The results show that seismicity patterns from automatically compiled catalogs are comparable to a manually revised catalog after applying strict location quality control criteria. However, the number of such well-constrained events varies between the approaches and catalog completeness cannot be reliably determined. We find that PhaseNet is more suitable for local OBS networks compared with EQTransformer and propose a pick-independent event detection approach, such as Lassie, as the preferred choice for an initial event catalog compilation. Depending on the aim of the study, different schemes of manual repicking should be applied because the automatic picks are not yet reliable enough for developing a velocity model or interpreting small-scale seismicity patterns.","PeriodicalId":508466,"journal":{"name":"Seismological Research Letters","volume":"35 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Practical Approach to Automatic Earthquake Catalog Compilation in Local OBS Networks Using Deep-Learning and Network-Based Algorithms\",\"authors\":\"Matthias Pilot, Vera Schlindwein\",\"doi\":\"10.1785/0220230182\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n In land-based seismology, modern automatic earthquake detection and phase picking algorithms have already proven to outperform classic approaches, resulting in more complete catalogs when only taking a fraction of the time needed for classic methods. For marine-based seismology, similar advances have not been made yet. For ocean-bottom seismometer (OBS) data, additional challenges arise, such as a lower signal-to-noise ratio and fewer labeled data sets available for training deep-learning models. However, the performance of available deep-learning models has not yet been extensively tested on marine-based data sets. Here, we apply three different modern event detection and phase picking approaches to an ∼12 month local OBS data set and compare the resulting earthquake catalogs and location results. In addition, we evaluate their performance by comparing different subcatalogs of manually detected events and visually revised picks to their automatic counterparts. The results show that seismicity patterns from automatically compiled catalogs are comparable to a manually revised catalog after applying strict location quality control criteria. However, the number of such well-constrained events varies between the approaches and catalog completeness cannot be reliably determined. We find that PhaseNet is more suitable for local OBS networks compared with EQTransformer and propose a pick-independent event detection approach, such as Lassie, as the preferred choice for an initial event catalog compilation. Depending on the aim of the study, different schemes of manual repicking should be applied because the automatic picks are not yet reliable enough for developing a velocity model or interpreting small-scale seismicity patterns.\",\"PeriodicalId\":508466,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Seismological Research Letters\",\"volume\":\"35 12\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Seismological Research Letters\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1785/0220230182\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seismological Research Letters","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1785/0220230182","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在陆基地震学中,现代自动地震探测和相位选取算法已被证明优于传统方法,只需传统方法所需的一小部分时间,就能获得更完整的目录。在海洋地震学方面,尚未取得类似进展。对于洋底地震仪(OBS)数据,还存在其他挑战,如信噪比较低、可用于训练深度学习模型的标注数据集较少等。然而,现有深度学习模型的性能尚未在基于海洋的数据集上得到广泛测试。在此,我们将三种不同的现代事件检测和相位选取方法应用于一个为期 12 个月的本地 OBS 数据集,并比较由此产生的地震目录和定位结果。此外,我们还通过比较人工检测到的事件的不同子目录和目视修正的选相结果与自动选相结果来评估它们的性能。结果表明,在应用严格的定位质量控制标准后,自动编制的目录中的地震活动性模式与人工修订的目录相当。然而,在不同的方法中,此类约束良好的事件数量各不相同,因此无法可靠地确定编目完整性。我们发现,与 EQTransformer 相比,PhaseNet 更适用于本地 OBS 网络,并建议在编制初始事件目录时,首选与选区无关的事件检测方法(如 Lassie)。根据研究目的的不同,应采用不同的人工重新选取方案,因为自动选取对于建立速度模型或解释小尺度地震模式还不够可靠。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Practical Approach to Automatic Earthquake Catalog Compilation in Local OBS Networks Using Deep-Learning and Network-Based Algorithms
In land-based seismology, modern automatic earthquake detection and phase picking algorithms have already proven to outperform classic approaches, resulting in more complete catalogs when only taking a fraction of the time needed for classic methods. For marine-based seismology, similar advances have not been made yet. For ocean-bottom seismometer (OBS) data, additional challenges arise, such as a lower signal-to-noise ratio and fewer labeled data sets available for training deep-learning models. However, the performance of available deep-learning models has not yet been extensively tested on marine-based data sets. Here, we apply three different modern event detection and phase picking approaches to an ∼12 month local OBS data set and compare the resulting earthquake catalogs and location results. In addition, we evaluate their performance by comparing different subcatalogs of manually detected events and visually revised picks to their automatic counterparts. The results show that seismicity patterns from automatically compiled catalogs are comparable to a manually revised catalog after applying strict location quality control criteria. However, the number of such well-constrained events varies between the approaches and catalog completeness cannot be reliably determined. We find that PhaseNet is more suitable for local OBS networks compared with EQTransformer and propose a pick-independent event detection approach, such as Lassie, as the preferred choice for an initial event catalog compilation. Depending on the aim of the study, different schemes of manual repicking should be applied because the automatic picks are not yet reliable enough for developing a velocity model or interpreting small-scale seismicity patterns.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信