2021
DOI: 10.1029/2021jb022195
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Attention Network Forecasts Time‐to‐Failure in Laboratory Shear Experiments

Abstract: Earthquake forecasting is an active topic in geoscience research and recent progress in this area has been rapid, thanks in part to developments in machine learning and the availability of laboratory seismic data containing large numbers of labquakes. Quite recently, many researchers have used a variety of machine learning methods in an attempt to forecast labquakes and have had moderate success (e.g.,

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 75 publications
0
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The application of machine learning using continuous seismic records continues to show success in describing physical processes of complex natural systems. While the glacier motion model predictions are not as robust as those for laboratory stick-slip studies (Corbi et al, 2019;Jasperson et al, 2021;Rouet-LeDuc, Hulbert, Bolton, et al, 2018;Shokouhi et al, 2021;Wang et al, 2021), slow slip in Earth (Hulbert et al, 2020), future prediction (Laurenti et al, 2022;Wang et al, 2022), or stick-slip processes in Earth , they are nonetheless predictive for the long-term sliding behavior and especially performant for short-term variations. Ice deformation is considered mostly aseismic through viscous creep (Gimbert et al, 2021), which is inherent to the material properties.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…The application of machine learning using continuous seismic records continues to show success in describing physical processes of complex natural systems. While the glacier motion model predictions are not as robust as those for laboratory stick-slip studies (Corbi et al, 2019;Jasperson et al, 2021;Rouet-LeDuc, Hulbert, Bolton, et al, 2018;Shokouhi et al, 2021;Wang et al, 2021), slow slip in Earth (Hulbert et al, 2020), future prediction (Laurenti et al, 2022;Wang et al, 2022), or stick-slip processes in Earth , they are nonetheless predictive for the long-term sliding behavior and especially performant for short-term variations. Ice deformation is considered mostly aseismic through viscous creep (Gimbert et al, 2021), which is inherent to the material properties.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…The application of machine learning using continuous seismic records continues to show success in describing physical processes of complex natural systems. While the glacier motion model predictions are not as robust as those for laboratory stick-slip studies [37,63,64,65,42], slow slip in Earth [66], future prediction [67,68], or stick-slip processes in Earth [38], they are nonetheless predictive, especially when describing the long period behavior.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…By focusing the attention of the neural networks on specific features, fracture loading mode (Z. and fracture saturation are successfully inferred from the laboratory earthquakes. Similarly, although the deterministic prediction of time-to-failure in natural environments remains elusive, a couple of studies (Jasperson et al, 2021;Shreedharan et al, 2021) show that ML has the ability to predict time-to-failure and the stress state from the laboratory earthquake data. J.-T. Lin et al (2021) demonstrates that deep neural networks trained by simulated ground deformation data have the potential to provide accurate early warnings for large earthquakes, particularly when the regional tectonic setting is well understood and data are abundant.…”
Section: Earthquake Data Applicationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Song et al., 2022) and fracture saturation (Nolte & Pyrak‐Nolte, 2022) are successfully inferred from the laboratory earthquakes. Similarly, although the deterministic prediction of time‐to‐failure in natural environments remains elusive, a couple of studies (Jasperson et al., 2021; Shreedharan et al., 2021) show that ML has the ability to predict time‐to‐failure and the stress state from the laboratory earthquake data. J.‐T.…”
Section: Highlightsmentioning
confidence: 99%