Seismicity Pattern Recognition in the Sumatra Megathrust Zone Through Mathematical Modeling of the Maximum Earthquake Magnitude Using Gaussian Mixture Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The research area of the present study is the Sumatra megathrust zone, which can be partitioned into five segments based on the large earthquake sources, including the Aceh Andaman, Nias Simeulue, Mentawai Siberut, Mentawai Pagai, and Enggano segments.This work presents the recognition of seismicity patterns in the research area from January 1970 to December 2022 using segmental and zonal mathematical modeling of the annual maximum earthquake magnitude.To achieve this, we use two kinds of Gaussian mixture models: G-group Gaussian independent mixture models (G-group GMMs) and N-state Gaussian hidden Markov models (N-state GHMMs) to determine the appropriate probability density function of the seismicity data (ePDF).The fit model is selected based on the smallest Bayes information criterion.For the segment analysis, the results show that the ePDF of the Mentawai-Pagai segment fits the 2-state GHMM, whereas, for the four remaining segments, it tends to fit the 2-group GMM.Subsequently, for the zone analysis, the ePDF of the data fits the 2-state GHMM.Thus, from a segmental and zoning point of view, seismicity patterns fluctuate at two levels.From a seismic risk management aspect, these findings can be used to evaluate the risk vulnerability of an area to destructive earthquakes.That is, the patterns of seismicity sequences in all segments of the Sumatra megathrust zone all fluctuate within the range of moderate to strong earthquakes.Furthermore, the seismicity pattern in the Mentawai-Pagai segment and the Sumatra megathrust zone has Markov properties.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".