Intellectual Merit
|
The diversity and scale of earthquake catalogs has exploded in the past years due to dense seismic networks and increasingly automated data processing techniques (Mousavi et al., 2020; Mousavi & Beroza, 2023; Obara, 2003; Z. E. Ross et al., 2019; Shelly, 2017; Tan et al., 2021; White et al., 2019). A motivation for this community effort is that more detailed observations should translate into better earthquake forecasts. However, clear improvement in forecasting skill has yet to materialize (Beroza et al., 2021). One factor here may be the nature of the models used for forecasting. Current operational earthquake forecasts build on seminal work designed for sparse earthquake records based on the canonical statistical laws of seismology (Llenos & Michael, 2017; van der Elst et al., 2022). While the past decades have seen advances in the regionalization of these models (Field et al., 2017; Mai et al., 2016; Ogata, 2017), catalog bias correction (Mizrahi et al., 2021; G. J. Ross, 2021) and spatial forecasts (Ogata, 1998), these advancements have failed to fully capitalize on the wealth of available geophysical data. However, the advances do not leverage the wealth of available geophysical data (Mancini et al., 2022; Mousavi & Beroza, 2023). This is largely due to the limitations inherent to current parametric models, which frequently constrain the analysis to only a small portion of the available catalogs.
In this study, we turn to recent advances in machine learning using neural temporal point processes to complement existing forecasting capabilities. Like most current work, we confine our attention to statistical, rather than to deterministic forecasts. In principle, such approaches provide the promise of general-purpose flexible and scalable forecasting (Shchur et al., 2021). Here we use the term flexible in the sense that models do not presume functional form and thus can both incorporate additional earthquake information and learn complex dependencies in the data (Gareth et al., 2021). We use the term scalable both in the sense that models can efficiently train on large datasets (Grover & Leskovec, 2016) and continue to improve with additional data (Kaplan et al., 2020). Despite these desirable characteristics, it is unclear whether deep learning is well suited for earthquake data (Mignan & Broccardo, 2020). The earthquake record is highly stochastic and is strongly influenced by extreme events. Our goal here is to define and implement the basic requirements for a neural temporal point process model applied to earthquake forecasting and assess whether it is well suited for the task.
|