MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321996059 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu23-10395

OBSPicker: A generalized transfer-learned OBS phase picker

2023· preprint· en· W4321996059 on OpenAlexaff
Alireza Niksejel, Miao Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSeismology and Earthquake Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeismometerSeismologyPhase (matter)Submarine pipelineTransfer (computing)GeologyTransfer of learningSequence (biology)Computer scienceSet (abstract data type)False positive paradoxTectonicsData setAlgorithmArtificial intelligencePhysicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Offshore earthquakes recorded by Ocean Bottom Seismometers (OBS) are crucial to studying tectonic activities in the subduction zones and mid-ocean ridges. In recent years, the ever-advancing Machine Learning (ML)-based phase pickers have shown promise in land earthquake monitoring, but there are few available ML models to handle OBS data due mainly to the lack of labelled training sets and low signal-to-noise ratios. Though land ML-based phase pickers may roughly work for OBS data, they introduce a large number of false negatives and false positives, leading to numerous events being missing and fake.In this study, we create a tectonically inclusive OBS training data set and develop a generalized deep-learning OBS phase picker - OBSPicker using the EQTransformer (EQT; Mousavi et al., 2019) and the transfer learning approach. To create an inclusive OBS training data set, we collect earthquake waveforms from routine catalogues recorded at 11 OBS networks worldwide with different tectonic settings and geographic locations. Earthquakes are recorded in local and regional distances with diverse magnitudes (ML 0.0-5.8), source depths (0-250 km), and epicentral distances (0-3 deg). To label their phase picks, we adopt a sequence of processing steps including 1) initial phase arrival detection and picking by EQT, 2) identifying and discarding samples with multiple (unwanted) events using STA/LTA method, and 3) refining phase picks using the Generalized Phase Detection method (GPD, Ross et al., 2018), resulting in ~38,000 well-labelled earthquake samples. In addition, we also collect ~150,000 OBS noise samples from the same OBS networks for training augmentation instead of using the commonly adopted Gaussian noises. Those OBS noise samples are used to simulate low-magnitude earthquakes under different marine environments. Initial results show that our transfer-learned OBS phase picker outperforms the EQTransformer base model in both accuracy and precision, especially in presence of higher levels of noise.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.720
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.112
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSeismology and Earthquake StudiesFrench-language works237,207