DiTingMotion: A deep-learning first-motion-polarity classifier and its application to focal mechanism inversion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate P-wave first-motion-polarity (FMP) information can contribute to solving earthquake focal mechanisms, especially for small earthquakes, to which waveform-based methods are generally inapplicable due to the computationally expensive high-frequency waveform simulations and inaccurate velocity models. In this paper, we propose a deep-learning-based method for the automatic determination of the FMPs, named “DiTingMotion”. DiTingMotion was trained with the P-wave FMP labels from the “DiTing” and SCSN-FMP datasets, and it achieved ∼97.8% accuracy on both datasets. The model maintains ∼83% accuracy on data labeled as “Emergent”, of which the FMP labels are challenging to identify for seismic analysts. Integrated with HASH, we developed a workflow for automated focal mechanism inversion using the FMPs identified by DiTingMotion and applied it to the 2019 M 6.4 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence for performance evaluation. In this case, DiTingMotion yields comparable focal mechanism results to that using manually determined FMPs by SCSN on the same data. The results proved that the DiTingMotion has a good generalization ability and broad application prospect in rapid earthquake focal mechanism inversion .
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".