2019
DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/1152/1/012033
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On effective ULF frequency ranges for geomagnetic earthquake precursor

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This step was to minimize human-made noise during the day. Frequency ranges, ∆f in prior studies were arbitrarily chosen [33], hence nine ranges were tested to determine the most effective one for each earthquake: ∆f = 0.01-0.02, 0.02-0.03, . .…”
Section: Precusor Detectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This step was to minimize human-made noise during the day. Frequency ranges, ∆f in prior studies were arbitrarily chosen [33], hence nine ranges were tested to determine the most effective one for each earthquake: ∆f = 0.01-0.02, 0.02-0.03, . .…”
Section: Precusor Detectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If anything else, this short analysis demonstrates that the choice of the frequency of interest is not a trivial one. Yusof et al (2019) find no apparent correlation between effective ULF frequency ranges with magnitudes, depths or epicentral distances, without any better solution, we advise that future studies do not restrict themselves to a narrow frequency band but instead explore the frequency space in a systematic way. We also think that a better physical understanding of the alleged pre-earthquake ULF anomalies is needed to narrow the frequency band of interest.…”
Section: Sensitivity To Frequencymentioning
confidence: 88%
“…The central frequency of 0.02 Hz is of special interest, as it was identifed by Yusof et al (2019) as being “optimal for earthquake prediction purpose.” Yusof et al (2019) perform a bibliographical analysis in which they plot the percentage of success achieved in previous studies against the effective ULF frequency range in use, using 0.01‐Hz increments, exploring frequencies ranging from 0.01 to 1.5 Hz. They conclude that both the 0.02–0.03 Hz (or 0.04 Hz as mentioned in their introduction) and the 0.06‐Hz bands are especially pertinent.…”
Section: Sensitivity Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Several studies have been conducted to monitor the activity of the earth's crust linked to electromagnetic anomalies within the limit of ULF (f<10 Hz) in terms of earthquake precursors. Previous studies have successfully shown that the ULF range within 0.01-0.1 Hz gave the best results for detecting electromagnetic anomalies in terms of earthquake precursors [5,6,7]. However, the ULF emission that can be assigned as electromagnetic anomalies has sometimes been problematic because not only is the intensity very weak (around 1nT) but it is usually difficult to understand as well due to the intense natural background of the geomagnetic field [8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%