Dergiler / Gazi University Journal of Science / 2022 / Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 4

LSTM-Based Deep Learning Methods for Prediction of Earthquakes Using Ionospheric Data

Sayfa
1417–1431
Yayın Tarihi
2022-12-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

The results reveal that the proposed models improve in detecting the earthquakes at an accuracy rate of about 0.82 and can be used as a successful tool for detecting earthquakes based on the previous days.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:The ionosphere may play an essential role in the atmosphere and earth.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The ionospheric variability during moderate and severe earthquake events of varying strengths for 2012-2019 is discussed in this paper.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:The results reveal that the proposed models improve in detecting the earthquakes at an accuracy rate of about 0.82 and can be used as a successful tool for detecting earthquakes based on the previous days.
🔬Tür:Modelleme & Sayısal Simülasyon
📍Kapsam:2012-2019 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Ionosphere · Total electron content · Lstm

Abstract

The ionosphere may play an essential role in the atmosphere and earth. Solar flares due to coronal mass ejection, seismic movements, and geomagnetic activity cause deviations in the ionosphere. The main parameter for investigating the structure of the ionosphere is Total Electron Content (TEC). TEC values obtained from GPS stations are a powerful technique for analyzing the ionospheric response to earthquakes and solar storms. This article analyzes the relations between earthquakes and TEC data to detect earthquakes. Our goal is to propose a prediction model to detect earthquakes in previous days. The ionospheric variability during moderate and severe earthquake events of varying strengths for 2012-2019 is discussed in this paper. The proposed models use LSTM-based (Long Short-Term Memory) deep learning models to classify earthquake days by analyzing TEC values of the last days. The LSTM-Based prediction models are compared against the SVM (Support Vector Machine), LDA (Linear Discriminant Analysis) classifier and Random Forest classifier to evaluate the proposed models based on earthquake prediction. The results reveal that the proposed models improve in detecting the earthquakes at an accuracy rate of about 0.82 and can be used as a successful tool for detecting earthquakes based on the previous days.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

ABRİ, R., ARTUNER, H. (2022). LSTM-Based Deep Learning Methods for Prediction of Earthquakes Using Ionospheric Data. Gazi University Journal of Science, Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 4, 1417–1431. https://ajindex.com/articles/859443

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (13)

  1. Arikan, F., Erol, C., Arikan, O., “Regularized estimation of vertical total electron content from global positioning system data”, Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics, A12, (2003)
  2. Nayir, H., Arikan, F., Arikan, O., Erol, C., “Total electron content estimation with Reg-Est”, Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics, A11, (2007)
  3. Rishbeth, H., Garriott, K., “Introduction to ionospheric physics”, New York Academic Press, 14: 345-379, (1969)
  4. Pulinets, S., Ouzounov, D., Karelin, A., Davi-denko, D., “Lithosphere atmosphere ionosphere magnetosphere coupling a concept for pre-earthquake signals generation”, Pre-Earthquake Processes: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Earthquake Prediction Studies, 3: 79-99, (2018)
  5. Pulinets, S., Contreras, L., Bisiacchi-Giraldi, G., Ciraolo, L., “Total electron content variations in the ionosphere before the Colima, Mexico, earthquake of 21 January 2003”, Geofisica Internacional, 4: 369–377, (2005)
  6. Tao, D., Jinbin, C., Battiston, R., Li, L., Yuduan, M., Wenlong, L., Wang, L., Dunlop, W., “Seismo-ionospheric anomalies in ionospheric TEC and plasma density before the 17 July 2006 M7. 7 south of Java earthquake”, Annales Geophysicae, 35(3): 589-598, (2017)
  7. Arslan, T., Munawar, M., Pajares, H., Iqbal, T., “Pre-earthquake ionospheric anomalies before three major earthquakes by GPS-TEC and GIM-TEC data during 2015–2017”, Advances in Space Research, 7: 2088-2099, (2019)
  8. Biqiang, Z., Weixing, W., Libo, L., Tian, M., “Morphology in the total electron content under geomagnetic disturbed conditions: results from global ionosphere maps”, Annales Geophysicae, 7: 1555-1568, (2007)
  9. Trigunait, A., Parrot, M., Pulinets, S., Feng, L., “Variations of the ionospheric electron density during the Bhuj seismic event”, Annales Geophysicae, 12: 4123-4131, (2004)
  10. Liu, J., Chen, Y., Chuo, J., Chen, C., “A statistical investigation of pre-earthquake ionospheric anomaly”, Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics, A5, (2006)
  11. Lopez-Paz, D., Sra, S., Smola, A., Ghahramani, Z., Scholkopf, B., “Randomized nonlinear component analysis”, International Conference on Machine Learning, 10: 1359-1367, (2014)
  12. Oikonomou, C., Haralambous, H., Muslim, B., “Investigation of ionospheric TEC precursors related to the M7. 8 Nepal and M8. 3 Chile earthquakes in 2015 based on spectral and statistical analysis”, Natural Hazards, 11: 97-116, (2016)
  13. Pundhir, D., Singh, B., Kumar, S., Gupta, S., Pathak