Using Data From Fracking Country, Scientists Train a Neural Network to Detect Earthquakes

WIth a 95 percent precision rate, the software is still learning.

Getty Images

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

As earthquakes grow more frequent in the central United States—driven at least in part by the fracking boom—researchers have been working on sophisticated new tools, including satellites, underwater seismic sensors, and software to detect temblors and hopefully even predict them.

The latest unveiling is ConvNetQuake, a so-called convolutional neural network that detects and locates earthquakes using a single waveform. In plain language, it’s software that learns from past seismic data and then applies that knowledge to identify even very small quakes. Unlike traditional methods, ConvNetQuake doesn’t rely on triangulation. “What people used to do is they would use a lot of seismic stations,” says Thibaut Perol, a senior deep learning scientist at Gram Labs, an AI startup. “You don’t need three stations anymore. You can do it with one.”

ConvNetQuake is the subject of a peer-reviewed study published last week in the journal Science Advances. For the study, Perol and his collaborators, Massachusetts Institute of Technology graduate student Michaël Gharbi and Harvard assistant professor Marine Denolle, trained their network with real seismic data from 2014 to 2016.

When tested on a large data set—more than 132,000 earthquakes and “seismic noise” windows catalogued by the Oklahoma Geological Survey—the trained software correctly detected all earthquakes and had an overall precision rate of slightly under 95 percent. 

The distinction between actual earthquakes and seismic noise is an important one, Perol says. Noise can be caused by anything from a tractor rolling by to ocean waves. “If you try to record someone talking inside a car, the noise made by the car is quite constant,” Perol explains. “While someone’s speaking, it’s a bunch of spiking, and you want to distinguish that from the noise. This is what we do naturally with our ears, but this is what we want to do naturally with earthquakes.”

Detecting small earthquakes has also been difficult in the central United States, where hydraulic fracturing—fracking—has exploded in recent years. Perol stops short of saying that fracking directly causes new quakes, but he points to research showing a strong correlation between fracking and quakes. (There are myriad other studies, too.) Unfortunately, ConvNetQuake can’t yet help scientists determine how much seismic activity is due to fracking, Perol says.

The next step is creating a probabilistic location map, a task the neural network is still working on—it has trouble with larger clusters of earthquakes. This is “not surprising,” the researchers say, because the software yet hasn’t been adequately trained. As ConvNetQuake works with larger data sets, its accuracy rate should improve further.

“The reason we’re interested in detecting and locating the small ones is we can get an idea of how seismic activity evolves,” Perol says. “The software will detect tons of earthquakes. Basically, all of this will be done in real time, and all of this information could be given to scientists so they could assess the risk faster.”

The ultimate goal? Long-term earthquake prediction. That doesn’t mean you’ll be able to get an alert saying, “an earthquake is coming in 10 seconds,” anytime soon. But Perol and his colleagues have made their code open-source in the hope that other researchers will experiment with it. Perol says he’s already had a few people reach out.

The software could also be deployed in other seismically active areas—say, along the San Andreas fault—“maybe predicting the next big one,” Perol says.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate