Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “phase pickers”

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 OSTI2026

Phase Picking Beyond Local Distances: Where Waveform Filtering Still Matters for Deep Learning Models

Waveform filtering is a standard step in traditional seismic phase picking but often receives little attention in deep learning workflows, where models are typically trained on raw or minimally processed waveforms. Although this strategy performs well for local events, we show that performance can degrade substantially at regional distances. To address this limitation, we introduce two ways to incorporate multiband-filtered waveforms into deep learning phase pickers. The stacking approach concatenates filtered inputs along the channel dimension, while the branching approach processes each frequency band through a dedicated network branch before feature fusion. Both approaches can substantially improve performance across epicentral distances of 0° to 20°, but their effectiveness depends strongly on the selected frequency bands. Tests with multiple filter banks show that filter-bank design should be treated as part of model optimization rather than as a fixed preprocessing choice. Grad-CAM analysis of the branching model indicates that band importance varies among waveform samples and across training realizations, with only a weak overall preference for the 0.25 to 0.5 Hz band. These results show that no single filter band is consistently optimal and demonstrate that explicit feature engineering remains valuable for robust deep learning-based seismic phase picking.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Evaluating multistation phase picking algorithm phase neural operator (PhaseNO) on local seismic networks

Reliable automatic phase picking is important for many seismic applications. With the development of machine learning approaches, many algorithms are proposed, evaluated and applied to different areas. Many of these algorithms are single station based, while recent proposed methods start to combine surrounding stations into consideration in the problem of phase picking. Among these algorithms, the phase neural operator (PhaseNO) shows promising results on regional data sets comparing to existing algorithms. But there are many use cases for the local seismic networks in our community, therefore in this paper we evaluate the performance of PhaseNO on four different local data sets and compare the results to PhaseNet and EQTransformer. We used both individual phase picking metrics as well as association metrics to illustrate the performance of PhaseNO. By manually reviewing the newly detected events, we find that the PhaseNO model outperforms the single station-based approaches in the local-scale use cases due to its consideration of coherent signals from multiple stations. We also explored PhaseNO’s behaviours when only using one station, as well as gradually increasing the number of stations in the seismic network to better understand its behaviour. Overall, using the off-the-shelf machine learning based phase pickers, PhaseNO demonstrated its good performance on local-scale seismic networks.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Denoising Seismograms in the Time Domain Using a Deep Learning Model

Deep learning has emerged as a transformative tool for enhancing the extraction of reliable information from seismograms, addressing the increasing demand for precise and efficient seismic data analysis. We introduce an innovative encoder–decoder deep learning model, named WaveDenoiser, designed for noise reduction in the time domain, thereby eliminating the need for spectrogram computations that have been used for existing deep learning tools and significantly improving processing speed. Utilizing the benchmark dataset that is Stanford Earthquake Dataset, we developed three models of varying sizes: base, medium, and large. Notably, the large (referred to as WaveDenoiser) model demonstrated superior performance, achieving a median signal‐to‐noise ratio improvement of 8.8 dB on in‐distribution unseen data (in the same geographic region) and 7.7 dB on out‐distribution unseen data (in a new geographic region), outpacing both the base and medium models. Further evaluation of the WaveDenoiser model revealed a reduction in median arrival‐time errors by 0.02 s for P waves and 0.01 s for S waves when processing waveforms prior to phase picking using PhaseNet on in‐distribution unseen data. When tested on out‐distribution unseen data, the model also effectively reduced the P‐wave median arrival‐time error by 0.02 and 0.01 s in median arrival‐time error for S waves. Importantly, the application of WaveDenoiser resulted in a significant reduction of phase picking outliers by 1.1% to 3.6% for both P and S waves. In addition, we achieved over five times acceleration in processing speed compared with the seisBench implementation of DeepDenoiser. Our findings underscore the potential of WaveDenoiser as a powerful tool for improving seismic data analysis and processing efficiency.

P-waves↗
DOE OSTI2026

Variability in Performance of a Machine Learning Seismicity Catalog: Central Italy, 2016–2017

Machine learning (ML) catalogs contain many more earthquakes than routine catalogs, but their performance in phase picking and earthquake detection has not been fully evaluated. We develop station‐level detection probabilities using logistic regression and combine them across a seismic network to compute spatial magnitude‐of‐completeness fields. We apply this approach to two catalogs from the 2016–2017 Central Italy sequence that were constructed from the same seismic network, one routine and one ML‐based. At the station level, the ML picker increases detection sensitivity by identifying smaller magnitude events and detecting earthquakes at greater distances. Spatially, the magnitude of completeness decreases substantially, with median values shifting from 1.6 to 0.5 for P waves and from 1.7 to 0.5 for S waves. However, the ML catalog also shows greater variability in station‐level performance than the routine catalog. These results demonstrate that ML‐based improvements in detectability are widespread but spatially nonuniform, highlighting their benefits, their limitations, and the potential for further improvements.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Exploring the tempering behaviour of additively manufactured high-alloy tool steel using synchrotron X-ray and neutron techniques

Post-processing heat treatment provides a critical pathway toward the commercialisation of additively manufactured (AM) S390 high-speed steel, which is a representative high-alloy tool steel employed in precision manufacturing, offering up to 1.5 times longer tool life and over 20% higher cutting speeds compared to conventional grades. In this study, the phase evolution of AM S390 steel during heat treatment, with particular emphasis on carbide precipitation behaviour, was systematically investigated using a combination of synchrotron X-ray and neutron techniques. The metastable M2C carbides were found to dissolve during austenitisation, while the stable primary carbides MC and M6C experienced coarsening with an average size increase of about 60 nm after just 2 min of tempering. Moreover, the austenite lattice parameters reduced from 3.618 to 3.608 Å within the first 10 min of tempering, suggesting carbon depletion in the steel matrix was likely associated with the formation of secondary carbides. This interpretation was substantiated by small-angle scattering results, which revealed the presence of nanoscale precipitates with a volume fraction of 3.1% after 60 min of tempering. These microstructural evolutions collectively accounted for the observed peak hardness of 921 HV. Furthermore, a comparative analysis of synchrotron and neutron small-angle scattering data highlighted the complementary strengths of each technique, offering critical insight into their suitability for characterising nanoscale features in AM high-alloy steels.

Synchrotron X-ray diffraction↗