Investigating 10 Yr of Volcanoacoustic Activity at Tungurahua Volcano, Ecuador, Aided by Machine Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Here, we present the results of applying diverse data processing and machine learning tools to investigate a very large dataset obtained from single station infrasonic recordings from the last 10 yr of the most recent period of explosive activity at Tungurahua volcano, Ecuador. To increase the quality and quantity of information extracted from the large data set and enhance pattern recognition, we combined traditional techniques with more recent ones. We divided the investigation into sequential steps: detection, discrimination, cleaning, and clustering. For the detection step, we tested the classical short-term average/long-term average algorithm and an algorithm specific for explosions detection called “Volcanic INfrasound Explosions Detector Algorithm (VINEDA)” and detected 118,516 events. To clean the detected signals from potential false positives, we used supervised classification that reduced the events to 75,483, and a catalog cleaning procedure using shallow learners including support vector machines, random forests, and a single layer neural network, trained using data from a manual catalog, to a final number of 36,359 events. This led to a sixfold increase in detected explosions compared to the manual catalog. Then, we applied hierarchical clustering to a well-studied time window of activity using two independent difference metrics: dynamic time warping and waveform cross correlation and showed the insights and drawbacks from this approach. We showed that the different techniques were able to reveal repeating and striving events between selected different eruptive phases and associated them to possible changes in eruptive dynamics. Finally, to analyze the whole dataset at once we used a convolutional autoencoder network and obtained similar results to the classical clustering in a fraction of the time. We identified different families of explosions that appeared, sometimes intermittently, and revealed various potentially competing eruptive processes during the whole time period.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".