Effects of large aftershocks on spatial aftershock forecasts during the 2017–2019 western Iran sequence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY On 12 November 2017, an earthquake with a moment magnitude of 7.3 struck the west of Iran near the Iraq border. This event was followed about 9 and 12 months later by two large aftershocks of magnitude 5.9 and 6.3, which together triggered intensive seismic activity known as the 2017–2019 Kermanshah sequence. In this study, we analyse this sequence regarding the potential to forecast the spatial aftershock distribution based on information about the main shock and its largest aftershocks. Recent studies showed that classical Coulomb failure stress (CFS) maps are outperformed by alternative scalar stress quantities, as well as a distance-slip probabilistic model (R) and deep neural networks (DNN). In particular, the R-model performed best. However, these test results were based on the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) metric, which is not well suited for imbalanced data sets such as aftershock distributions. Furthermore, the previous analyses also ignored the potential impact of large secondary earthquakes. For the complex Kermanshah sequence, we applied the same forecast models but used the more appropriate MCC-F1 metric for testing. Similar to previous studies, we also observe that the receiver independent stress scalars yield better forecasts than the classical CFS values relying on the specification of receiver mechanisms. However, detailed analysis based on the MCC-F1 metric revealed that the performance depends on the grid size, magnitude cut-off and test period. Increasing the magnitude cut-off and decreasing the grid size and period reduce the performance of all methods. Finally, we found that the performance of the best methods improves when the source information of large aftershocks is additionally considered, with stress-based models outperforming the R model. Our results highlight the importance of accounting for secondary stress changes in improving earthquake forecasts.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".