What neural network architectures were used for earthquake prediction/anomalies based on geomagnetic and TEC data?
Best insight from top research papers
Neural network architectures used for earthquake prediction/anomalies based on geomagnetic and TEC data include Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) , Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) neural network , and Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) . ANN was used to predict earthquakes and determine their magnitudes based on ionospheric disturbances and VTEC data . MLP neural network was used to detect seismo-ionospheric anomalous variations induced by earthquakes using TEC time series data . CNN was used to construct an earthquake prediction system based on seismic wave pictures and has good generalization ability .
Answers from top 3 papers
More filters
| Papers (3) | Insight |
|---|---|
8 Citations | The paper does not mention the specific neural network architectures used for earthquake prediction/anomalies based on geomagnetic and TEC data. |
01 Jul 2019 7 Citations | The paper does not mention the specific neural network architectures used for earthquake prediction based on geomagnetic and TEC data. |
01 Dec 2020 1 Citations | The paper does not mention the specific neural network architectures used for earthquake prediction/anomalies based on geomagnetic and TEC data. |
Related Questions
What are the potential applications of deep learning for seismic inversion?4 answersDeep learning has shown potential applications in seismic inversion. It has been used to perform inversion on synthetic data examples, yielding successful results in small areas. Deep learning architectures, such as conditional generative adversarial networks (GANs) and convolutional neural networks (CNNs), have been leveraged for velocity model building (VMB). These architectures have demonstrated state-of-the-art performance in reconstructing velocity models using seismic shots, reducing cost and computational complexity. Deep learning methods, such as the seismic velocity inversion transformer (SVIT), have been proposed to address the challenges of velocity inversion, capturing long-range dependence and providing more informative features for building velocity models. Additionally, deep learning has been applied to directly invert acoustic impedance in depth-domain seismic data, improving the characterization of fine reservoirs. Hybrid inversion schemes that incorporate data-driven estimates as soft-prior have also been proposed, achieving best-in-class accuracy.
What can XAI explainability do to earthquake prediction?4 answersExplainable artificial intelligence (XAI) can provide transparency and interpretability in earthquake prediction models. XAI models, such as the hybrid Inception v3-ensemble extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) model with shapely additive explanations (SHAP), can effectively interpret and recognize the behavior and weighted contribution of factors in spatial probability assessment (SPA) models. XAI techniques, including Smart Predictor and Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanation (LIME), have been used to evaluate and highlight the importance of different factors in earthquake hazard assessment (EHA) models. SHAP has also been implemented to estimate earthquake probability using machine learning approaches like artificial neural networks (ANN) and random forest (RF), providing insight into the importance of input parameters and feature selection. XAI, specifically SHAP, has been used to interpret the outputs of machine learning models for building-damage assessment after earthquakes, helping to identify limitations and improve model reliability. XAI, through SHAP, has also been employed in landslide prediction models, allowing for the understanding of decisions made by ML-based models and providing transparency and explainability in geohazard prediction.
How can artificial neural networks be used for structural health monitoring?4 answersArtificial neural networks (ANNs) can be used for structural health monitoring (SHM) in various ways. One approach is to use ANNs to perform damage detection based on statistical indicators and damage indicators (DIs) derived from vibration measures. Another approach is to use deep neural networks (DNNs) in a multi-fidelity framework to create surrogate models for real-time SHM. ANNs can also be used for feature extraction, such as extracting cepstral coefficients from vibration signals, which can then be used for anomaly detection. Additionally, ANNs, specifically generative adversarial networks (GANs), have been used in the civil SHM field for a wide variety of applications, such as structural damage detection and assessment. Overall, ANNs provide innovative and non-invasive methods for assessing the condition of structures and can contribute to the advancement of SHM techniques.
What are the best machine learning methods to classify seismovolcanic signals?5 answersMachine learning methods for classifying seismovolcanic signals have been extensively investigated. One approach is to use a multitask learning scheme that utilizes the seismic wave equation and three-dimensional P-wave velocity (Vp) model for signal representation learning. This approach has shown superior performance compared to state-of-the-art methods. Another method involves using deep learning neural networks in combination with time-frequency graphs obtained through time-frequency analysis techniques such as short-term Fourier transformation, wavelet transformation, and S transformation. The combination of S transformation and Resnet50 network has achieved high classification accuracy for seismic signals.
What are the different machine learning methods that have been used to classify seismovolcanic signals?5 answersMachine learning methods have been used to classify seismovolcanic signals. One approach is the use of deep neural networks in the PICOSS platform, which provides a modular data-curator platform for volcano-seismic data analysis. Another method involves the application of empirical mode decomposition (EMD) along with machine learning techniques, such as support vector machines, for identifying different types of events at the Ubinas volcano. Additionally, supervised and unsupervised learning methods, including random forest, convolutional neural network, and K-medoids clustering, have been used for signal-noise classification of microseismic data from the Pohang region in South Korea. Furthermore, supervised machine learning classification methods, such as support vector machine, logistic regression, random forest, and Gaussian process classifiers, have been applied to seismic time series data from the Telica and Nevado del Ruiz volcanoes to determine the end of volcanic eruptions.
Which machine learning model is most effective for classifying seismovolcanic signals?5 answersThe most effective machine learning model for classifying seismovolcanic signals is the K-neighbors classifier. Other machine learning models such as Random Forest Regressor, SVM Classifier, Decision Tree Classifier, and Logistics Regression were also tested, but the K-neighbors classifier performed effectively in this situation. Additionally, the Deep Neural Network (DNN) was used as a confident classifier tool for seismic event classification. The proposed method also utilized the support vector machine (SVM) algorithm, which provided the best results for classifying events at the Ubinas volcano. The usage of heterogeneous classifiers, such as K-NN, MLP, Naive Bayes, and Decision Tree, combined in ensemble methods, also showed accurate results for seismic region classification.