Probabilistic approach to earthquake prediction.
Main Article Content
Abstract
The evaluation of any earthquake forecast hypothesis requires the application of rigorous statistical methods. It implies a univocal definition of the model characterising the concerned anomaly or precursor, so as it can be objectively recognised in any circumstance and by any observer.A valid forecast hypothesis is expected to maximise
successes and minimise false alarms. The probability gain associated to a precursor is also a popular way to estimate the quality of the predictions based on such precursor. Some scientists make use of a statistical approach based on the computation of the likelihood of an observed realisation of seismic events, and on the comparison of
the likelihood obtained under different hypotheses. This method can be extended to algorithms that allow the computation of the density distribution of the conditional probability of earthquake occurrence in space, time and magnitude. Whatever method is chosen for building up a new hypothesis, the final assessment of its validity should be carried out by a test on a new and independent set of observations. The implementation of this test could, however, be problematic for seismicity characterised by long-term recurrence intervals. Even using the historical record, that may span time windows extremely variable between a few centuries to a few millennia, we have a low probability to catch more than one or two events on the same fault. Extending the record of earthquakes of the past back in time up to several millennia, paleoseismology represents a great opportunity to study how earthquakes recur through time and thus provide innovative contributions to time-dependent seismic hazard assessment. Sets of paleoseimologically dated earthquakes have been established for some faults in the Mediterranean area: the Irpinia fault in Southern Italy, the Fucino fault in Central Italy, the El Asnam fault in Algeria and the Skinos fault in Central Greece. By using the age of the paleoearthquakes with their associated uncertainty we have computed, through a Montecarlo procedure, the probability that the observed inter-event times come from a uniform random distribution (null hypothesis). This probability is estimated approximately equal to 8.4% for the Irpinia fault, 0.5% for the Fucino fault, 49% for the El Asnam fault and 42% for the Skinos fault. So, the null Poisson hypothesis can be rejected with a confidence level of 99.5% for the Fucino fault, but it can be rejected only with a confidence level between 90% and 95% for the Irpinia fault, while it cannot be rejected for the other two cases. As discussed in the last section of this paper, whatever the scientific value of any prediction hypothesis, it should be considered effective only after evaluation of the balance between the costs and benefits introduced by its practical implementation.
successes and minimise false alarms. The probability gain associated to a precursor is also a popular way to estimate the quality of the predictions based on such precursor. Some scientists make use of a statistical approach based on the computation of the likelihood of an observed realisation of seismic events, and on the comparison of
the likelihood obtained under different hypotheses. This method can be extended to algorithms that allow the computation of the density distribution of the conditional probability of earthquake occurrence in space, time and magnitude. Whatever method is chosen for building up a new hypothesis, the final assessment of its validity should be carried out by a test on a new and independent set of observations. The implementation of this test could, however, be problematic for seismicity characterised by long-term recurrence intervals. Even using the historical record, that may span time windows extremely variable between a few centuries to a few millennia, we have a low probability to catch more than one or two events on the same fault. Extending the record of earthquakes of the past back in time up to several millennia, paleoseismology represents a great opportunity to study how earthquakes recur through time and thus provide innovative contributions to time-dependent seismic hazard assessment. Sets of paleoseimologically dated earthquakes have been established for some faults in the Mediterranean area: the Irpinia fault in Southern Italy, the Fucino fault in Central Italy, the El Asnam fault in Algeria and the Skinos fault in Central Greece. By using the age of the paleoearthquakes with their associated uncertainty we have computed, through a Montecarlo procedure, the probability that the observed inter-event times come from a uniform random distribution (null hypothesis). This probability is estimated approximately equal to 8.4% for the Irpinia fault, 0.5% for the Fucino fault, 49% for the El Asnam fault and 42% for the Skinos fault. So, the null Poisson hypothesis can be rejected with a confidence level of 99.5% for the Fucino fault, but it can be rejected only with a confidence level between 90% and 95% for the Irpinia fault, while it cannot be rejected for the other two cases. As discussed in the last section of this paper, whatever the scientific value of any prediction hypothesis, it should be considered effective only after evaluation of the balance between the costs and benefits introduced by its practical implementation.
Article Details
How to Cite
1.
Console R, Pantosti D, D’Addezio G. Probabilistic approach to earthquake prediction. Ann. Geophys. [Internet]. 2002Dec.25 [cited 2023Dec.2];45(6). Available from: https://www.annalsofgeophysics.eu/index.php/annals/article/view/3546
Issue
Section
OLD
Open-Access License
No Permission Required
Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia applies the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) to all works we publish.
Under the CCAL, authors retain ownership of the copyright for their article, but authors allow anyone to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute, so long as the original authors and source are cited. No permission is required from the authors or the publishers.
In most cases, appropriate attribution can be provided by simply citing the original article.
If the item you plan to reuse is not part of a published article (e.g., a featured issue image), then please indicate the originator of the work, and the volume, issue, and date of the journal in which the item appeared. For any reuse or redistribution of a work, you must also make clear the license terms under which the work was published.
This broad license was developed to facilitate open access to, and free use of, original works of all types. Applying this standard license to your own work will ensure your right to make your work freely and openly available. For queries about the license, please contact ann.geophys@ingv.it.