mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Forecasting the 2016-2017 Central Apennines Earthquake Sequence with a Neural Point Process

arXiv 2301.09948 ↗First posted 24 Jan 2023physics.geo-ph stat.AP stat.MLcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Point processes have been dominant in modeling the evolution of seismicity for decades, with the Epidemic Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model being most popular. Recent advances in machine learning have constructed highly flexible point process models using neural networks to improve upon existing parametric models. We investigate whether these flexible point process models can be applied to short-term seismicity forecasting by extending an existing temporal neural model to the magnitude domain and we show how this model can forecast earthquakes above a target magnitude threshold. We first demonstrate that the neural model can fit synthetic ETAS data, however, requiring less computational time because it is not dependent on the full history of the sequence. By artificially emulating short-term aftershock incompleteness in the synthetic dataset, we find that the neural model outperforms ETAS. Using a new enhanced catalog from the 2016-2017 Central Apennines earthquake sequence, we investigate the predictive skill of ETAS and the neural model with respect to the lowest input magnitude. Constructing multiple forecasting experiments using the Visso, Norcia and Campotosto earthquakes to partition training and testing data, we target M3+ events. We find both models perform similarly at previously explored thresholds (e.g., above M3), but lowering the threshold to M1.2 reduces the performance of ETAS unlike the neural model. We argue that some of these gains are due to the neural model's ability to handle incomplete data. The robustness to missing data and speed to train the neural model present it as an encouraging competitor in earthquake forecasting.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 89 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Jan 2023.

Builds on

13 of 89 references.

References · 13

  1. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 37,240
  2. 2016TensorFlow: Large-Scale Machine Learning on Heterogeneous Distributed Systemscited by 664
  3. 2019Intensity-Free Learning of Temporal Point Processescited by 140
  4. 2019Fully Neural Network based Model for General Temporal Point Processescited by 122
  5. 2021Neural Temporal Point Processes: A Reviewcited by 114
  6. 2021Neural Flows: Efficient Alternative to Neural ODEscited by 101
  7. 2017Modeling The Intensity Function Of Point Process Via Recurrent Neural Networkscited by 93
  8. 2020Neural Spatio-Temporal Point Processescited by 93
  9. 2018Lecture Notes: Temporal Point Processes and the Conditional Intensity Functioncited by 40
  10. 2018Learning Temporal Point Processes via Reinforcement Learningcited by 40
  11. 2018Deep Reinforcement Learning of Marked Temporal Point Processescited by 33
  12. 2018Neural Likelihoods via Cumulative Distribution Functionscited by 25
1 more
  1. 2018Automatic differentiation in ML: Where we are and where we should be goingcited by 20

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1.

1 paper.