Jeanne L. Hardebeck, Nicolas D. DeSalvio, Wenyuan Fan, Andrew J. Barbour
{"title":"动力地震触发识别中的误报","authors":"Jeanne L. Hardebeck, Nicolas D. DeSalvio, Wenyuan Fan, Andrew J. Barbour","doi":"10.1029/2025JB031566","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Dynamic earthquake triggering is commonly identified through the temporal correlation between increased seismicity rates and global earthquakes that are possible triggering events. However, correlation does not imply causation. False positives may occur when unrelated seismicity rate changes coincidently occur at around the time of candidate triggers. We investigate the expected false positive rate in Southern California with global <i>M</i> ≥ 6 earthquakes as candidate triggers. We compute the false positive rate by applying the statistical tests used by DeSalvio and Fan (2023), https://doi.org/10.1029/2023jb026487 to synthetic earthquake catalogs with no real dynamic triggering. We find a false positive rate of ∼3.5%–8.5% when realistic earthquake clustering is present, consistent with the 95% confidence typically used in seismology. However, when this false positive rate is applied to the tens of thousands of spatial-temporal windows in Southern California tested in DeSalvio and Fan (2023), https://doi.org/10.1029/2023jb026487, thousands of false positives are expected. The expected false positive occurrence is large enough to explain the observed apparent triggering following 70% of large global earthquakes (DeSalvio & Fan, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023jb026487), without requiring any true dynamic triggering. Aside from the known triggering from the nearby El Mayor-Cucapah, Mexico, earthquake, the spatial and temporal characteristics of the reported triggering are indistinguishable from random false positives. This implies that best practice for dynamic triggering studies that depend on temporal correlation is to estimate the false positive rate and investigate whether the observed apparent triggering is distinguishable from the correlations that may occur by chance.</p>","PeriodicalId":15864,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth","volume":"130 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"False Positives in the Identification of Dynamic Earthquake Triggering\",\"authors\":\"Jeanne L. Hardebeck, Nicolas D. DeSalvio, Wenyuan Fan, Andrew J. Barbour\",\"doi\":\"10.1029/2025JB031566\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Dynamic earthquake triggering is commonly identified through the temporal correlation between increased seismicity rates and global earthquakes that are possible triggering events. However, correlation does not imply causation. False positives may occur when unrelated seismicity rate changes coincidently occur at around the time of candidate triggers. We investigate the expected false positive rate in Southern California with global <i>M</i> ≥ 6 earthquakes as candidate triggers. We compute the false positive rate by applying the statistical tests used by DeSalvio and Fan (2023), https://doi.org/10.1029/2023jb026487 to synthetic earthquake catalogs with no real dynamic triggering. We find a false positive rate of ∼3.5%–8.5% when realistic earthquake clustering is present, consistent with the 95% confidence typically used in seismology. However, when this false positive rate is applied to the tens of thousands of spatial-temporal windows in Southern California tested in DeSalvio and Fan (2023), https://doi.org/10.1029/2023jb026487, thousands of false positives are expected. The expected false positive occurrence is large enough to explain the observed apparent triggering following 70% of large global earthquakes (DeSalvio & Fan, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023jb026487), without requiring any true dynamic triggering. Aside from the known triggering from the nearby El Mayor-Cucapah, Mexico, earthquake, the spatial and temporal characteristics of the reported triggering are indistinguishable from random false positives. This implies that best practice for dynamic triggering studies that depend on temporal correlation is to estimate the false positive rate and investigate whether the observed apparent triggering is distinguishable from the correlations that may occur by chance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15864,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth\",\"volume\":\"130 7\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2025JB031566\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2025JB031566","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
False Positives in the Identification of Dynamic Earthquake Triggering
Dynamic earthquake triggering is commonly identified through the temporal correlation between increased seismicity rates and global earthquakes that are possible triggering events. However, correlation does not imply causation. False positives may occur when unrelated seismicity rate changes coincidently occur at around the time of candidate triggers. We investigate the expected false positive rate in Southern California with global M ≥ 6 earthquakes as candidate triggers. We compute the false positive rate by applying the statistical tests used by DeSalvio and Fan (2023), https://doi.org/10.1029/2023jb026487 to synthetic earthquake catalogs with no real dynamic triggering. We find a false positive rate of ∼3.5%–8.5% when realistic earthquake clustering is present, consistent with the 95% confidence typically used in seismology. However, when this false positive rate is applied to the tens of thousands of spatial-temporal windows in Southern California tested in DeSalvio and Fan (2023), https://doi.org/10.1029/2023jb026487, thousands of false positives are expected. The expected false positive occurrence is large enough to explain the observed apparent triggering following 70% of large global earthquakes (DeSalvio & Fan, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023jb026487), without requiring any true dynamic triggering. Aside from the known triggering from the nearby El Mayor-Cucapah, Mexico, earthquake, the spatial and temporal characteristics of the reported triggering are indistinguishable from random false positives. This implies that best practice for dynamic triggering studies that depend on temporal correlation is to estimate the false positive rate and investigate whether the observed apparent triggering is distinguishable from the correlations that may occur by chance.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth serves as the premier publication for the breadth of solid Earth geophysics including (in alphabetical order): electromagnetic methods; exploration geophysics; geodesy and gravity; geodynamics, rheology, and plate kinematics; geomagnetism and paleomagnetism; hydrogeophysics; Instruments, techniques, and models; solid Earth interactions with the cryosphere, atmosphere, oceans, and climate; marine geology and geophysics; natural and anthropogenic hazards; near surface geophysics; petrology, geochemistry, and mineralogy; planet Earth physics and chemistry; rock mechanics and deformation; seismology; tectonophysics; and volcanology.
JGR: Solid Earth has long distinguished itself as the venue for publication of Research Articles backed solidly by data and as well as presenting theoretical and numerical developments with broad applications. Research Articles published in JGR: Solid Earth have had long-term impacts in their fields.
JGR: Solid Earth provides a venue for special issues and special themes based on conferences, workshops, and community initiatives. JGR: Solid Earth also publishes Commentaries on research and emerging trends in the field; these are commissioned by the editors, and suggestion are welcome.