METADATA IN ENGLISH

About the journal

NAUKA I TEKHNOLOGICHESKIE RAZRABOTKI (SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS), ISSN: 2079-5165, eISSN: 2410-7948, DOI: 10.21455/std; https://elibrary.ru/title_about.asp?id=32295; http://std.ifz.ru/. The journal was founded in 1992.

PROBLEMS OF SHORT-TERM EARTHQUAKE PREDICTION:
A FORMAL ASPECT

E.B. Chirkov

Schmidt Institute of Physics of the Earth, the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

E-mail: ye_chirkov@list.ru

Highlights

– Arguments of seismologists about the impossibility and uselessness of a short-term earthquake prediction are refuted

– Invalidity of using mathematical theories without physical basis is shown

– Conclusion is made about the impossibility of a short-term prediction based only on seismological methods

– Success can be achieved only through a multidisciplinary approach using a set of geophysical methods

Abstract. The formal arguments given by seismologists to justify the impossibility of developing a method of short-term earthquake prediction based on geophysical methods are considered in detail. Concrete examples show the danger of the practical use of mathematical theories and approaches that do not have a physical basis. The paper shows the inconsistency of all formal arguments of seismologists about the impossibility and uselessness of a short-term earthquake prediction. It is concluded that it is necessary to remove all responsibility from seismologists for the development of a short-term earthquake prediction method due to the impossibility of solving this problem by using only seismological methods. Only a multidisciplinary approach to solving the problem of earthquake prediction with the widespread use of various geophysical methods can give successful results.

Keywords: short-term earthquake prediction, geophysical methods, error of the first kind, false alarm, self-organized criticality

Cite this article as: Chirkov E.B. Problems of short-term earthquake prediction: a formal aspect, Nauka i Tekhnologicheskie razrabotki (Science and Technological Developments), 2020, vol. 99, no. 3, pp. 46–64. [in Russian]. https://doi.org/10.21455/std2020.3-4

Funding

This work was carried out within the framework of the State Task of Schmidt Institute of Physics of the Earth of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Ethics declarations

The author declares that there is no conflict of interest.

References

Aceves, R.L., Park, S.K., Strauss, D.J., Statistical evaluation of the VAN method using the historic earthquake catalog in Greece, Geophys. Res. Lett., 1996, vol. 23, no. 11, pp. 1425–1428.

Bak, P. How Nature Works, New York, Springer-Verlag, 1996, 212 p.

Bak, P., Tang, C., Wiesenfeld, K., Self-Organized Criticality: An Explanation of 1/f Noise, Phys. Rev. Lett., 1987, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 381–384.

Bakun, W.H., Aagaard, B., Dost, B., Ellsworth, W.L., Hardebeck, J.L., Harris, R.A., Ji, C., Johnston, M.J.S., Langbein, J., Lienkaemper, J.J., Michael, A.J., Murray, J.R., Nadeau, R.M., Reasenberg, P.A., Reichle, M.S., Roeloffs, E.A., Shakal, A., Simpson, R.W., Waldhauser, F., Implications for prediction and hazard assessment from the 2004 Parkfield earthquake, Nature, 2005, vol. 437, no. 13, pp. 969–974.

Col, J.M., Chu, J.J., Early Warning Success for the 1976 Tangshan Earthquake: A Best Practice Integrating Public Administration and Science, in: Early Warning Systems for Natural Disaster Reduction, eds. J. Zschau, A. Kuppers, Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer, 2003, pp. 479–481.

Eftaxias, K., Potirakis, S.M., Contoyiannis, Y., Four-Stage Model of Earthquake Generation in Terms of FractureInduced Electromagnetic Emissions: A Review, in: Complexity of Seismic Time Series Measurement and Application, ed. by T. Chelidze, F. Vallianatos, L. Telesca, Elsevier, 2018, pp. 438–503.

Geller, R.J., Jakson, D.D., Kagan, Y.Y., Mulargia, F., Earthquakes Cannot Be Predicted, Science, 1997, vol. 275, pp. 1616–1617.

Hergarten, S., Self-Organized Criticality in Earth Systems, Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer-Verlag, 2002, 272 p.

Ioannidis, J.P.A., Why Most Published Research Findings Are False, PLoS Medicine, 2005, vol. 2, iss. 8, pp. 0696–0701.

Kagan, Y.Y., VAN earthquake predictions – an attempt at statistical evaluation, Geophys. Res. Lett., 1996, vol. 23, no 11, pp. 1315–1318.

Kagan, Y.Y., Worldwide earthquake forecasts, Stoch. Environ. Res. Risk Assess., 2017, vol. 31, pp. 1273–1290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-016-1268-9

Langbein, J., Borcherdt, R., Dreger, D., Fletcher, J., Hardebeck, J., Hellweg, M., Ji, C., Johnston, M., Murray, J., Nadeau, R., Rymer, M., Treiman, J.A., Preliminary report on the 28 September 2004 M 6.0 Parkfield, California earthquake, Seismol. Res. Lett., 2005, vol. 76, no. 1, pp. 10–26. https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.76.1.10

Mandelbrot, B., Fraktal'naya geometriya prirody (Nature Fractal Geometry), Moscow, Computer Research Institute, 2002, 656 p. [in Russian].

Mandelbrot, B., TED talk of B. Mandelbrot, TED, 2010. https://youtu.be/nVDrdGkLP9c

Miachkin, V.I., Processy podgotovki zemletryasenij (Processes of preparation of earthquakes), Moscow, Nauka, 1978, 232 p. [in Russian].

Mjachkin, V.I., Brace, W.F., Sobolev, G.A., Dieterich, J.H., Two models for earthquake forerunners, Pure Appl. Geophys., 1975, vol. 113, pp. 169–181.

Mulargia, F., Gasperini, P., Evaluating the statistical validity beyond chance of ‘VAN’ earthquake precursors, Ceophys. J. Int., 1992, no. 111, pp. 32–44.

Nagel, S.R., Instabilities in a sandpile, Rev. Mod. Phys., 1992, vol. 64, no, 1, pp. 321–325.

Nanjo, K.Z., Earthquake forecasts for the CSEP Japan experiment based on the RI algorithm, Earth Planets Space, 2011, vol. 63, pp. 261–274.

Nanjo, K.Z., Tsuruoka, H., Yokoi, S., Ogata, Y., Falcone, G., Hirata, N., Ishigaki, Y., Jordan, T.H., Kasahara, K., Obara, K., Schorlemmer, D., Shiomi, K., Zhuang, J., Predictability study on the aftershock sequence following the 2011 Tohoku-Oki, Japan, earthquake: first results, Geophys. J. Int., 2012, vol. 191, iss. 2, pp. 653–658. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2012.05626.x

Papadopoulos, G.A., Comment on “The Prediction of Two Large Earthquakes in Greece”, Eos, 2010, vol. 91, no. 184, pp. 162.

Pruessner, G., Self-Organised Criticality: Theory, Models and Characterisation, Cambridge, University Press, 2012, 494 p.

Reinhart, А., STATISTICS DONE WRONG: the woefully complete guide, San Francisco, No Starch Press, Inc., 2015, 158 p.

Rodkin, M.V., Statistics of apparent stresses in relation to the origin of an earthquake source, Izvestiya, Physics of the Solid Earth, 2001, vol. 37, no. 8, pp. 663–672.

Rodkin, M.V., Seismic activation regime in a generalized vicinity of a severe earthquake, Fizicheskaya mezomekhanika (Physical Mesomechanics), 2008, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 74–79. [in Russian].

Sidorin, A.Ya., Predvestniki zemletryaseniy (Earthquake precursors), Moscow, Nauka, 1992, 192 p. [in Russian].

Sobolev, G.A., Ponomarev, A.V., Fizika zemletryasenij i predvestniki (Physics of earthquakes and precursors), Moscow, Nauka, 2003, 270 p. [in Russian].

Sornette, D., Critical Phenomena in Natural Sciences. Chaos, Fractals, Self-organization and Disorder: Concepts and Tools, Springer, 2000, 434 p.

Trapeznikov, Yu.A., Vol'hin, A.M., Shchelochkov, G.G., Zejgarnik, V.A., Bragin, V.D., Kosh­kin, N.A., Turovskij, P.S., Geller, E.L., Orlenko, N.N., The main results of electromagnetic research on earthquake prediction at IVTAN test sites, Prognoz zemletryasenij (Earthquake Prediction), 1989, vol. 11, pp. 264–274.

Uyeda, S., What Should We Do? Earthquake Prediction of Japan Chuou Kouron (The Central Public Opinion), 2011. URL: http://www.geocities.jp/EMSEV2012/Uyeda.html

Uyeda, S., Kamogawa, M., The Prediction of Two Large Earthquakes in Greece, Eos, 2008, vol. 89, no. 39, p. 363.

Uyeda, S., Kamogawa, M., Reply to Comment on “The Prediction of Two Large Earthquakes in Greece”, Eos, 2010, vol. 91, no. 184, p. 163.

Varotsos, P.A., Sarlis, N.V., Skordas, E.S., Seismic Electric Signals and 1/f “noise” in natural time, arXiv:0711.3766v3, 2008.

Ventcel', E.S. Teoriya veroyatnostej (Probability Theory), Moscow, Nauka, 1964, 576 p. [in Russian].

Viti, M., Cenni, N., Babbucci, D., Mantovani, E., Earthquake Predictions in Italy by Probabalistic Approaches: Main Limitations, GNGTS, 2014, sessione 2.1 001-502, vol. 2, pp. 98–104.

Watkins, N.W., Pruessner, G., Chapman, S.C., Crosby, N.B., Jensen, H.J., 25 Years of Self-organized Criticality: Concepts and Controversies, Space Sci. Rev., 2016, vol. 198, iss. 1–4, pp. 3–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11214-015-0155-x

Winslow, N., Introduction to Self-Organized Criticality & Earthquakes, University of Michigan, 1997. URL: http://www2.econ.iastate.edu/classes/econ308/tesfatsion/SandpileCA.Winslow97.htm

Zechar, J.D., Evaluating earthquake predictions and earthquake forecasts: a guide for students and new researchers, Community Online Resource for Statistical Seismicity Analysis, 2010. https://doi.org/10.5078/corssa-77337879

Zhurkov, S.N., Kuksenko, V.S., Petrov, V.A., Physical foundations of predicting mechanical failure, DAN SSSR (Reports of the USSR Academy of Sciences), 1981, vol. 259, no. 6, pp. 1350–1353. [in Russian].

About the author

CHIRKOV Evgeny Borisovich – Schmidt Institute of Physics of the Earth of RAS. Russia, 123242, Moscow, ul. Bolshaya Gruzinskaya 10, stroenie 1. E-mail: ye_chirkov@list.ru