Rapid Characterization of the July 2019 Ridgecrest, California, Earthquake Sequence From Raw Seismic Data Using Machine‐Learning Phase Picker
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The two principle earthquakes of the July 2019 Ridgecrest, California, earthquake sequence, M W 6.4 and 7.1, and their immediate foreshocks and thousands of aftershocks present a challenging environment for rapid analysis and characterization of this sequence as it unfolded. In this study, we analyze the first 6 days of the sequence using continuous data from available seismic networks to detect and locate earthquakes associated with the earthquake sequence. We build a high‐precision earthquake catalog using a deep‐neural‐network‐based picker—PhaseNet and a sequential earthquake association and location workflow. Without prior information, we automatically detect and locate more than twice as many earthquakes as the routine catalog. Our high‐precision earthquake catalog reveals detailed spatiotemporal evolution of the earthquake sequence and clearly defines multiple faults activated during the sequence. Our study demonstrates that it is possible to characterize earthquake sequences from raw seismic data using a well‐trained machine‐learning picker and our workflow.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it