Testing earthquake prediction algorithms: statistically significant advance prediction of the largest earthquakes in the Circum-Pacific, 1992–1997

Kossobokov, Vladimir; Romashkova, L. L.; Keilis‐Borok, V. I.; Healy, J. H.

doi:10.1016/s0031-9201(98)00159-9

Cited by 114 publications

(86 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[13] The performance of our simple prediction algorithm is comparable to the performance of much more sophisticated ones that use numerous seismic parameters to predict large observed earthquakes [e.g., Kossobokov et al, 1999]. A very similar simple prediction scheme applies successfully to geomagnetic data [Bellanger et al, 2003].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Predictability of volcano eruption: Lessons from a basaltic effusive volcano

Grasso

Zaliapin

2004

Geophysical Research Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

[1] Volcano eruption forecast remains a challenging and controversial problem despite the fact that data from volcano monitoring significantly increased in quantity and quality during the last decades. This study uses pattern recognition techniques to quantify the predictability of the 15 Piton de la Fournaise (PdlF) eruptions in the 1988 -2001 period using increase of the daily seismicity rate as a precursor. Lead time of this prediction is a few days to weeks. We formulate a simple prediction rule, use it for retrospective prediction of the 15 eruptions, and test the prediction quality with error diagrams. The best prediction performance corresponds to averaging the daily seismicity rate over 5 days and issuing a prediction alarm for 5 days. 65% of the eruptions are predicted for an alarm duration less than 20% of the time considered. Even though this result is concomitant of a large number of false alarms, it is obtained with a crude counting of daily events that are available from most volcano observatories.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Predictability of volcano eruption: Lessons from a basaltic effusive volcano

Grasso

Zaliapin

2004

Geophysical Research Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, the efficiency of forecasts of geomagnetic activity from solar and interplanetary conditions is not systematically estimated a posteriori (Thomson, 2000), although prospective and retrospective validation is applied in other fields of geophysics (Mulargia, 1997;Kossobokov et al, 1999). Our aim was to lead a practical, rational and rigorous approach concerning what could be done, based on the knowledge of magnetic series, in the field of extreme geomagnetic activity events prediction.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictability of geomagnetic series

Bellanger

Mouël

2003

Ann. Geophys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The aim of this paper is to lead a practical, rational and rigorous approach concerning what can be done, based on the knowledge of magnetic series, in the field of prediction of the extreme geomagnetic events. We compare the magnetic vector differential at different locations computed with different resolutions, from an entire day to minutes. We study the classical correlations and the simplest possible prediction scheme to conclude a high level of predictability of the magnetic vector variation. The results obtained are far from a random guessing: the error diagrams are either comparable with earthquake prediction studies or outperform them when the minute sampling is used in accounting for hourly magnetic vector variation. We demonstrate how the magnetic extreme events can be predicted from the hourly value of the magnetic variation with a lead time of several hours. We compute the 2-D empirical distribution of consecutive values of the magnetic vector variation for the estimation of conditional probabilities of different types. The achieved results encourage further development of the approach to prediction of the extreme geomagnetic events.

show abstract

“…As we mentioned in Section 4, there is a possibility that calculating error diagrams for the M 8 program by Kossobokov et al (1999) between earthquake occurrence and report were significantly reduced and the short-term forecast issued immediately after each earthquake. K2005 claims that S = 50% is the M 8 performance estimate.…”

Section: K2005 Short-term Forecast Testmentioning

confidence: 99%