Showing 1–2 of 2 results for author: Werner, M J

SB-ETAS: using simulation based inference for scalable, likelihood-free inference for the ETAS model of earthquake occurrences

Authors: Samuel Stockman, Daniel J. Lawson, Maximilian J. Werner

Abstract: Performing Bayesian inference for the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model of earthquakes typically requires MCMC sampling using the likelihood function or estimating the latent branching structure. These tasks have computational complexity $O(n^2)$ with the number of earthquakes and therefore do not scale well with new enhanced catalogs, which can now contain an order of $10^6$ events.… ▽ More Performing Bayesian inference for the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model of earthquakes typically requires MCMC sampling using the likelihood function or estimating the latent branching structure. These tasks have computational complexity $O(n^2)$ with the number of earthquakes and therefore do not scale well with new enhanced catalogs, which can now contain an order of $10^6$ events. On the other hand, simulation from the ETAS model can be done more quickly $O(n \log n )$. We present SB-ETAS: simulation-based inference for the ETAS model. This is an approximate Bayesian method which uses Sequential Neural Posterior Estimation (SNPE), a machine learning based algorithm for learning posterior distributions from simulations. SB-ETAS can successfully approximate ETAS posterior distributions on shorter catalogues where it is computationally feasible to compare with MCMC sampling. Furthermore, the scaling of SB-ETAS makes it feasible to fit to very large earthquake catalogs, such as one for Southern California dating back to 1932. SB-ETAS can find Bayesian estimates of ETAS parameters for this catalog in less than 10 hours on a standard laptop, which would have taken over 2 weeks using MCMC. Looking beyond the standard ETAS model, this simulation based framework would allow earthquake modellers to define and infer parameters for much more complex models that have intractable likelihood functions. △ Less

Submitted 28 May, 2024; v1 submitted 25 April, 2024; originally announced April 2024.

Forecasting the 2016-2017 Central Apennines Earthquake Sequence with a Neural Point Process

Authors: Samuel Stockman, Daniel J. Lawson, Maximilian J. Werner

Abstract: Point processes have been dominant in modeling the evolution of seismicity for decades, with the Epidemic Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model being most popular. Recent advances in machine learning have constructed highly flexible point process models using neural networks to improve upon existing parametric models. We investigate whether these flexible point process models can be applied to sho… ▽ More Point processes have been dominant in modeling the evolution of seismicity for decades, with the Epidemic Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model being most popular. Recent advances in machine learning have constructed highly flexible point process models using neural networks to improve upon existing parametric models. We investigate whether these flexible point process models can be applied to short-term seismicity forecasting by extending an existing temporal neural model to the magnitude domain and we show how this model can forecast earthquakes above a target magnitude threshold. We first demonstrate that the neural model can fit synthetic ETAS data, however, requiring less computational time because it is not dependent on the full history of the sequence. By artificially emulating short-term aftershock incompleteness in the synthetic dataset, we find that the neural model outperforms ETAS. Using a new enhanced catalog from the 2016-2017 Central Apennines earthquake sequence, we investigate the predictive skill of ETAS and the neural model with respect to the lowest input magnitude. Constructing multiple forecasting experiments using the Visso, Norcia and Campotosto earthquakes to partition training and testing data, we target M3+ events. We find both models perform similarly at previously explored thresholds (e.g., above M3), but lowering the threshold to M1.2 reduces the performance of ETAS unlike the neural model. We argue that some of these gains are due to the neural model's ability to handle incomplete data. The robustness to missing data and speed to train the neural model present it as an encouraging competitor in earthquake forecasting. △ Less

Submitted 2 October, 2023; v1 submitted 24 January, 2023; originally announced January 2023.