Supervised machine learning on a network scale: application to seismic event classification and detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new method using a machine learning technique is applied to event classification and detection at seismic networks. This method is applicable to a variety of network sizes and settings. The algorithm makes use of a small catalogue of known observations across the entire network. Two attributes, the polarization and frequency content, are used as input to regression. These attributes are extracted at predicted arrival times for P and S waves using only an approximate velocity model, as attributes are calculated over large time spans. This method of waveform characterization is shown to be able to distinguish between blasts and earthquakes with 99 per cent accuracy using a network of 13 stations located in Southern California. The combination of machine learning with generalized waveform features is further applied to event detection in Oklahoma, United States. The event detection algorithm makes use of a pair of unique seismic phases to locate events, with a precision directly related to the sampling rate of the generalized waveform features. Over a week of data from 30 stations in Oklahoma, United States are used to automatically detect 25 times more events than the catalogue of the local geological survey, with a false detection rate of less than 2 per cent. This method provides a highly confident way of detecting and locating events. Furthermore, a large number of seismic events can be automatically detected with low false alarm, allowing for a larger automatic event catalogue with a high degree of trust.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".