Earthquake prediction

Civil Engineering in English, Technical University Gh. Asachi, Iasi

Summary
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Definition The problem of earthquake prediction Precursory seismicity patterns Electromagnetic Precursors Foreshocks Earth tides as triggers Early warning Evaluation of prediction claims and methods History of prediction attempts

Keywords: magnitude, plate tectonics, radon, wave propagation, amplitude, epicenter

Earthquake prediction An earthquake prediction is a prediction that an earthquake of a specific magnitude will occur in a particular place at a particular time (or ranges thereof). Despite considerable research efforts by seismologists, scientifically reproducible predictions cannot yet be made to a specific day or month. However, for well-understood faults the probability that a segment may rupture during the next few decades can be estimated. Scientists still do not know many of the details of the physical processes involved in earthquakes and how to predict them. The theory of plate tectonics was born in the mid 1960s and confirmed in the early 1970s. Many phenomena are considered to be possible precursors of earthquakes, and among those under investigation are seismicity, changes in the ionosphere, various types of electromagnetic indicators including infrared and radio waves, radon emissions, and even unusual animal behavior. According to the Seismological Society of America, for a statement to be accepted as a valid earthquake prediction, it has to contain the expected magnitude with error limits, the well defined area of the epicenter, the range of dates, and the probability of this to come true. The data from which the prediction was derived must be verifiable and the analysis of these data must be reproducible. Long term predictions (years to decades) are more likely to be achieved than medium term predictions (months to years), and short term predictions (hours to days) are in general unlikely to be possible, at present. If a plausible mechanism linking the observations with the predicted earthquake is not offered, the credibility of the prediction is diminished, but it may not necessarily be rejected. Evaluations of apparent successes must include a statistical estimate of the probability that the prediction came true by chance, which is often the case with predictions by amateurs. Whether a prediction is scientific or amateurish is not based on who makes the prediction, but based on how the prediction is made and tested. Predictions can be formulated either by defining the limits of the parameters probabilistically or by firm values. The problem of earthquake prediction In efforts to predict earthquakes, seismologists have investigated the association of an impending earthquake with such varied phenomena as seismicity patterns crustal movements,ground water level in wells, radon or hydrogen gas emissions from the Earth changes of seismic wave velocities, electromagnetic fields (seismo-electromagnetics), large-scale changes in soil temperature,and changes in ion concentration in the ionosphere. "Earthquake prediction: An overview" is a 2003 review by Hiroo Kanamori and the August 2010 issue of Pure and Applied Geophysics contains a collection of articles on the subject. The mystery of earthquake occurrence frequently sparks people without scientific training into claiming that they have found the solution to the earthquake prediction problem. Discredited, fantastic theories of predicting earthquakes include weather conditions and unusual clouds, and the phases of the moon. These pseudoscientific theories and predictions ignore the requirement of rigorously formulating the hypothesis and to test it statistically. Self-appointed prediction experts often resort to the technique of making vague statements, which they claim were correct predictions, after an earthquake has happened somewhere. Rudolf Falb's "lunisolar flood theory" is a typical example from the late 19th century.

Precursory seismicity patterns In 1969 Japanese seismologist Kiyoo Mogi proposed that there exists a precursory seismicity pattern before large earthquakes that has become known as the 'Mogi doughnut hypothesis'. He showed maps that suggested that major earthquakes tend to occur in seismically unusually calm areas surrounded by a ring of unusually high seismic activity. However, he did not back up his claim by statistical analyses that would have shown whether or not these patterns constituted a significant departure from normal. Subsequently, several groups have separately tested with statistical methods the inside and the outside patterns. The idea that there sometimes exists a 'calm before the storm' is called the quiescence hypothesis, the idea of precursory increased activity in the ring outside is called the accelerated seismic moment release hypothesis. The research regarding the use of these patterns for earthquake prediction is discussed in the following in separate sections because it is extensive and complex. Radon Emission of radon as a quake precursor was studied in the 1970s and 80s with no reliable results and continued to be dismissed by most seismologists until recently. Electromagnetic precursors VAN is a controversial method of earthquake prediction proposed by Professors Varotsos, Alexopoulos and Nomicos in the 1980s; it was named after the researchers' initials. The method is based on the detection of "seismic electric signals" (SES) via a telemetric network of conductive metal rods inserted in the ground; it stems from theoretical predictions by P. Varotsos, a solid-state physicist at the National and Capodistrian University of Athens. First, VAN have claimed to be able to predict earthquakes of magnitude larger than 2.8 within all of Greece with a precursor time of 7 hours. Later the claim changed to being able to predict earthquake larger than magnitude 5, within 100 km of epicentral location, within 0.7 units of magnitude, and in a 2-hour to 11-day time window, but this is disputed. Errors have been discovered in the list of earthquakes correlated according to Van with SES signals. VAN has claimed to have observed at a recording station in Athens a perfect record of a one-to-one correlation between SESs and all earthquakes of magnitude 2.9 which occurred 7 hours later in Greece. However, it was later shown that the list of earthquake used for the correlation was false. Although VAN stated in their article that the list of earthquakes was that of the Bulletin of the National Observatory of Athens it was found that 37% of the earthquakes actually listed in the bulletin, including the largest one, were not in the list used by VAN for issuing their claim. In addition, 40% of the earthquakes which VAN claimed had occurred were not in the NOA bulletin. Objections have been raised that the physics of the claimed process is not possible. None of the earthquakes which Van claimed were preceded by SESs generated an SES themselves, which would have to be expected because the main shock disturbance in the Earth is much larger than any precursory disturbance. An analysis of the wave propagation properties of SESs in the Earths crust showed that it is impossible that signals with the amplitude reported by VAN could

have been generated by small earthquakes and transmitted over the several hundred kilometers distances from the epicenter to the receiving station. Several authors have pointed out that VANs publications are characterized by a lack of addressing the problem of eliminating the many and strong sources of change in the magnetoelectric field measured by them, such as currents generated near their recording station in suburban Athens, and especially by a lack of statistical testing of the validity of their hypothesis. In particular, it was discovered that of the 22 claims of successful prediction by VAN 74% were false, 9% correlated at random and for 14% the correlation was uncertain. Foreshocks Foreshocks are medium-sized earthquakes that precede major quakes. An increase in foreshock activity (combined with purported indications like ground water levels and strange animal behavior) enabled the successful evacuation of a million people one day before the February 4, 1975 M7.3 Haicheng earthquake by the China State Seismological Bureau. The Xiuyan M5.3 earthquake (29 November 1999) is another example where a successful prediction was issued, based on a correct interpretation of an earthquake swarm as foreshocks. While 50% of major earthquakes are preceded by foreshocks, only about 5-10% of small earthquakes turn out to be foreshocks, leading to false warnings. Earth tides as triggers There are two flavors of tidal stressing that have been claimed to generate enhanced rates of earthquakesdiurnal and biweekly Earth tides. The diurnal correlations would cause more earthquakes only during the hours when the tidal stress is pushing in an encouraging direction. In contrast, biweekly effects would be earthquakes occurring during the days when the sinusoidal stressing oscillations are largest. The former, as most easily observed in the twicedaily rise and fall of the ocean tides, have occasionally been shown to influence earthquakes (e.g., Cochran, Vidale and Tanaka (2004) shows there may be some weak tidal triggering of shallow, oceanic thrust-faulting earthquakes). The latter, which arises from the periodic alignment of the Sun and Moon, has often been claimed in the popular press to incubate earthquakes (sometimes termed the "syzygy" effect) and occasionally for small datasets in the scientific literature (e.g., Glaser (2003)), but generally such effects do not appear in careful studies of large datasets. A paper written by researchers from Beijing Normal University and the Chinese Academy of Sciences found a significant relationship between tidal forces and earthquakes in China and Taiwan. The paper considered the relationship between 21 major earthquakes (Ms 7.0) in land and the offshore area of Taiwan island in the 20th century and the variance ratio of the lunar solar tidal force. The result indicated that the time of these earthquakes is closely related to the variance ratio of the lunarsolar tidal force, and therefore that the tidal force possibly plays an important role in triggering earthquakes. The conclusion is this method may be used to help forecast earthquakes by studying the lunar perigee. Syzygy, which is not given much credence in the scientific community, is motivated by the observation that, historically, there have been some great earthquakes whose timing coincides

with tidal forces near their maximum. For maximum tidal force, three factors must coincide: first, when the moon (in its elliptical orbit) is closest to the earth; second, when it is within a day or two of a new moon (so that the tidal forces of the moon and sun are acting in concert); and third, when the earth (in its elliptical orbit) is at or near its closest distance to the sun. Shallow earthquakes near mid-ocean ridges, volcanic earthquakes, and episodic tremor and slip have also been observed to sometimes correlate with the diurnal tides, with enhanced activity correlating with times that faults are unclamped. Early warning An earthquake warning system is a system of accelerometers, communication, computers, and alarms that is devised for regional notification of a substantial earthquake while it is in progress. Japan, Taiwan and Mexico all have earthquake early-warning systems. In a paper in the journal Nature, Richard Allen of the University of California claims that the distinction between small and large earthquakes can be made from the very first seconds of seismic energy recorded by seismometers, though other scientists are not convinced. If correct this may make earthquake early warning (as distinct from prediction) more powerful. Earthquake early warning provides an alarm that strong shaking is due soon to arrive, and the more quickly that the magnitude of an earthquake can be estimated, the more useful is the early warning. However, earthquake early warning can still be effective without the ability to infer the magnitude of an earthquake in its initial second or two. Evaluation of prediction claims and methods
National prediction evaluation councils

Official earthquake prediction evaluation councils have been established in California (the California Earthquake Prediction Evaluation Council) and the federal government in the United States (the National Earthquake Prediction Evaluation Council), but have yet to endorse any method of predicting quakes as reliable. Unless the following parameters are specified, a statement does not qualify as an earthquake prediction: A specific location or area A specific span of time A specific magnitude range A specific probability of occurrence
International evaluation of claims and methods

The sub-commission for earthquake prediction of IASPEI (International Association of Seismology and Physics of the Earths Interior) has reviewed claims of successful predictions and of proposed methods to predict during the 1990s. Their procedure was similar to reviews of proposals for research grants. Authors submitted their detailed research on the prediction problem. Anonymous reviewers commented, and members of the sub-commission discussed the merits of the proposal and of the reviewers comments. A decision to place the claim into one of three categories (preliminary list of significant precursors, no decision, rejected) was then transmitted to the authors, who could write a reply, if

they so wished. The entire exchange was then published, unless the authors did not agree to publication. Most of the nominated successful predictions and methods to predict were rejected At that time, three methods seemed most promising: Seismicity patterns, ground water properties, and crustal deformations. Attribution to a plausible physical mechanism lends credibility, and suggests a means for future improvement. Reproducibility and statistical analysis are used to distinguish predictions which come true due to random chance (of which a certain number are expected) versus those that have more useful predictive capability, and to validate models of long-term probability. Such models are difficult to test or validate because large earthquakes are so rare, and because earthquake activity is naturally clustered in space and time. "Predictions" which are made only after the fact are common but generally discounted.
Animal behavior

Animal behavior reports are often ambiguous and not consistently observed. In folklore, some animals, especially dogs, cats, chickens, horses, toads and other smaller animals, have been identified as being more able to predict earthquakes than others. It has been postulated that the reported animal behavior before an earthquake is simply their response to an increase in low-frequency electromagnetic signals. In Italy, findings from 2009 suggest that toads are able to detect pre-seismic cues. In the 2011 Virginia earthquake, animals at the Smithsonian National Zoological Park were reported to have sensed the Earthquake coming.
Fractoluminescence

One possible method for predicting earthquakes is fractoluminescence. Studies at the Chugoku National Industrial Research Institute by Yoshizo Kawaguchi have shown that upon fracturing, silica releases red and blue light for a period of about 100 milliseconds. Kawaguchi attributed this to the relaxation of the free bonds and unstable oxygen atoms that are left when the silicon oxygen bonds have broken due to the stresses within the rock. It has not been applied yet only because of various limitations of current technology. First, blue light does not travel well through the ground, which makes it necessary to place either transducers that turn a light signal into an electrical signal or fiber optic interfaces allowing a direct pick up of blue light into an optical medium in direct contact with the rock that is about to fracture, and to lay the corresponding optical or electrical transmission lines required for bringing the signal to the surface. Secondly, since the exact position where rocks are going to fracture is known only with a degree of approximation, a very large volume of rock where fracture is reasonably expected to happen needs to be covered with transducers or optical interfaces. Thirdly, considering that most earthquakes are due to fractures taking place at depths of several kilometers, building the whole required infrastructure is still beyond the reach of current drilling technology.

History of prediction attempts

China

The Haicheng evacuation

After a series of foreshocks, some of which damaged buildings, local government leaders evacuated much of the populace before the devastating magnitude 7.3 1975 Haicheng earthquake. Although much discussion about the possibility of future earthquakes in NE China had taken place during the years preceding this earthquake, there was no prediction formulated that would have fit this event. However, the Chinese government failed to predict the July 28, 1976 M7.8 Tangshan earthquake, which put Chinese earthquake prediction research in doubt for several years. In the late 1990s, there were over thirty false alarms unofficially announced in China. The Japanese government established the Imperial Earthquake Investigation Committee in 1892 in response to the Nobi (Mino-Owari) earthquake (1891) which caused significant damage in Japan. In the 1970s and 1980s, the Japanese government embarked on a major earthquake preparedness campaign, which some criticized as emphasizing prediction too much over mitigation. It failed to result in a prediction of the Great Hanshin earthquake which devastated the city of Kobe in 1995. See also 2011 Thoku earthquake and tsunami.
United States of America

Failed Lima prediction An earthquake predicted by a scientist at the U.S. Bureau of Mines to occur on June 28, 1981, in Lima, Peru, failed to materialize. Despite being dismissed by the U.S. National Earthquake Prediction Evaluation Council, the prediction caused popular fear and many left the city. Failed Parkfield earthquake prediction Based on a history of regularly spaced earthquakes in the early 20th century, the USGS in 1985 began an experiment based on the predictions and published papers of Allan Lindh and W.H. Bakun of the USGS and T.V. McEvilly of the University of California at Berkeley. The goal was to predict a 6.0 magnitude earthquake near Parkfield, California. "Bakun and Lindh summarized the state of the art in the Parkfield Prediction Experiment, and predicted that a moderate-size earthquake would occur at Parkfield between 1985 and 1993. Their prediction was unusual both in its precision (as to location, time and magnitude) and high degree of confidence (95% within the 9-year window). Bakun and Lindh (1985) also suggested that the predicted earthquake could produce extended rupture of the San Andreas fault to the southeast, possibly growing to magnitude 6.5 to 7.0." Media attention focused on the prediction and the experiment. 122,000 pamphlets were mailed to residents of the Parkfield area, entitled "The Parkfield Earthquake Prediction." Despite the prediction, such an earthquake did not occur until after the end of the prediction window, in 2004.