Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “SEISMOGRAPH”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

5 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Small-Magnitude Seismic Swarms in Central Utah (US): Interactions of Regional Tectonics, Local Structures and Hydrothermal Systems

Swarms in Central Utah are situated in the complex transition between the Basin and Range (BR) province and the Colorado Plateau. Transecting transverse structures, volcanic deposits, and hydrothermal systems complicate the extensional BR horst and graben structures and provide a multitude of plausible triggering mechanisms. Revisiting the catalog of the University of Utah Seismograph Stations (1981–2022), we analyze spatio-temporal patterns and characteristic features of seismic sequences. Swarms with alternating seismicity rates, bursts, and longer swarms with persistent moment release exhibit a remarkable diversity in temporal evolution. Swarm durations do not scale with cumulative seismic moment: swarms lasting less than 1 day can have similar cumulative seismic moments as month-long swarms. Here, we observe stationary swarms re-occurring for years (e.g., Mineral Mountains), as well as singular swarms in low-seismicity areas (e.g., activating a local structure). The swarms show a pronounced heterogeneity in triggering and driving mechanisms, observed in the detailed analysis of exemplary sequences (detections, relocations, moment tensors, waveform-based clustering, and repeater analysis). The 2022 Sevier Valley sequence activated a BR-related normal fault, the first resolved fault plane in the valley since 1983. The 2011 Circleville sequence is interpreted as a swarm triggered by mainshock-aftershock activity characterized by increasing magnitudes, changing rupture mechanisms, and a concentration of highly similar events in the second part of the sequence. By jointly discussing exemplary sequences and catalog statistics, we draw a comprehensive picture of swarm activity and its relation to geothermal and tectonic activity.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Denoising Seismic Waveforms Using a Wavelet-Transform-Based Machine-Learning Method

Seismic waveform data recorded at stations can be thought of as a superposition of the signal from a source of interest and noise from other sources. Frequency‐based filtering methods for waveform denoising do not result in desired outcomes when the targeted signal and noise occupy similar frequency bands. Recently, denoising techniques based on deep‐learning convolutional neural networks (CNNs), in which a recorded waveform is decomposed into signal and noise components, have led to improved results. These CNN methods, which use short‐time Fourier transform representations of the time series, provide signal and noise masks for the input waveform. These masks are used to create denoised signal and designaled noise waveforms, respectively. However, advancements in the field of image denoising have shown the benefits of incorporating discrete wavelet transforms (DWTs) into CNN architectures to create multilevel wavelet CNN (MWCNN) models. The MWCNN model preserves the details of the input due to the good time–frequency localization of the DWT. In this report we use a data set of over 382,000 constructed seismograms recorded by the University of Utah Seismograph Stations network to compare the performance of CNN and MWCNN‐based denoising models. Evaluation of both models on constructed test data shows that the MWCNN model outperforms the CNN model in the ability to recover the ground‐truth signal component in terms of both waveform similarity and preservation of amplitude information. Model evaluation of real‐world data shows that both the CNN and MWCNN models outperform standard band‐pass filtering (BPF; average improvement in signal‐to‐noise ratio of 9.6 and 19.7 dB, respectively, with respect to BPF). Evaluation of continuous data suggests the MWCNN denoiser can improve both signal detection capabilities and phase arrival time estimates.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Compilation of a Comprehensive Earthquake Catalog and Relocations in the Caucasus Region

Instrumental seismic monitoring has a long history in the Caucasus and started in 1899 when the first seismograph was installed in Tbilisi, Georgia. Much of the analog paper records from this time period are preserved in the Tbilisi archives because Georgia served as the regional data center. In the 1990s, due to the collapse of the Soviet Union and the political turmoil in the region, the analog networks and the communication between the newly formed national networks deteriorated. In Georgia, for the next 13 yr, the seismic network coverage was poor until the 2002 Tbilisi earthquake. Following this earthquake, the first permanent digital seismic station in Georgia was established in Tbilisi in 2003. The digital era progressively improved the ability to collect and archive data and today more than a hundred broadband seismic stations (including temporary arrays) are operating in the southern Caucasus. Until recently, the region lacked a coordinated effort to catalog all analog and digital era data collected by different countries into a single repository. As a result of collaboration between Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, the Ilia State University, and the Republican Seismic Survey Center of Azerbaijan, a comprehensive earthquake catalog was compiled for the Caucasus and neighboring areas as part of a broader probabilistic seismic hazard assessment project. Here this project digitized Soviet-era paper bulletins, compiled a unified earthquake catalog from regional bulletins, developed 1D reference velocity model, and used it to relocate the events. The final catalog contains 16,963 events with magnitudes 3.7 and above, bringing together all the available data sets in the Caucasus region from 1900 to 2015, significantly improving locations, and generating the most complete earthquake catalog in the region, temporally and geographically.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Anomaly Detection in Seismic Data with Deep Learning: Application for Instrument Failure Detection and Forecasting

Seismic data quality assessment (QA) is the first and one of the most important steps before conducting any further data analysis. Traditional methods involve checking various metrics, such as spike detection and power spectral density, by setting strict thresholds or comparing data against synthetic benchmarks. However, these approaches often rely on pre-existing knowledge and assumptions about data anomalies, leading to potential misclassification of unusual cases. Here, in this study, we propose a deep autoencoder model, an unsupervised learning approach that evaluates data quality without making assumptions about normal and anomalous data, which can be used to identify deviations in recorded data that may indicate nascent instrument failure. We test the model with the U.S. International Monitoring System (IMS) seismic stations and demonstrate the capability of detecting anomalies on a monthly scale. This could prompt station operators to examine potential problems early, allowing sufficient time for instrument maintenance to prevent data outages. In addition, we use a new manually selected testing dataset to compare our model performance against two supervised machine learning (ML) approaches and a standard QA package, as baseline models. When applied to the dataset containing known data anomalies, performance of the supervised and unsupervised ML approaches is similar, with an accuracy of 88.1% for our model compared to ∼90% for the supervised ML approach and 78.2% for the standard QA package. Our model outperforms the baseline models when applied to new stations, where new types of data anomalies can be station-specific and not included in the training dataset. Finally, we show model transferability by training the model with data from the Global Seismograph Network only and applying it to the IMS network data. The results suggest that our model is generalizable and can be applied to new stations with good accuracy.

Lin, Jiun-Ting [Lawrence Livermore National Labora↗
DOE OSTI2025

Differential Seismic Phase Detection Probability as a Potential Discriminant of Explosions and Earthquakes

Deep learning models trained to estimate the probability of seismic P and S phases are rapidly expanding the scale of local event detections. Here, we evaluate the potential for deep learning model output phase detection probabilities to contribute to event‐type classification, particularly discrimination of single‐fired borehole explosions and earthquakes at local distances (<300 km). Motivated by the empirical success of P/S amplitude ratios, we consider the difference between P and S pick probability output from previously developed phase detection models, P prob −S prob ⁠, as a discriminant. Test data include M L ∼1–4 earthquakes and explosions observed by common seismographs in ten geologically diverse localities. Depending on the picking model and training data, binary classification using P prob −S prob with at least three stations can achieve approximately equivalent classification accuracy as P/S amplitude ratios without requiring any customization. Joint classification with P/S and P prob −S prob improves accuracy for most quality control scenarios. Pick probabilities are an efficient attribute to consider in explosion discrimination because they can be automated byproducts of event detection. They avoid the binary choice of picking or not picking weakly visible S waves common to explosions.

Duan, Chenglong [Rice Univ., Houston, TX (United S↗