HypoSVI: Hypocenter inversion with Stein variational inference and Physics Informed Neural Networks

<p>High resolution earthquake hypocentral locations are of critical importance for understanding the regional context driving seismicity. We introduce a scheme to reliably approximate a hypocenter posterior in a continuous domain that relies on recent advances in deep learning.</p><p>Our method relies on a differentiable forward model in the form of a deep neural network, which is trained to solve the Eikonal equation (EikoNet). EikoNet can rapidly determine the travel-time between any source-receiver pair for a non-gridded solution. We demonstrate the robustness of these travel-time solutions are for a series of complex velocity models.</p><p>For the inverse problem, we utilize Stein Variational Inference, which is a recent approximate inference procedure that iteratively updates a configuration of particles to approximate a target posterior by minimizing the so-called Stein discrepancy. The gradients of this objective function can be rapidly calculated due to the differentiability of the EikoNet. The particle locations are updated until convergence, after which we utilize clustering techniques and kernel density methods to determine the optimal hypocenter and its uncertainty.</p><p>The inversion procedure outlined in this work is validated using a series of synthetic tests to determine the parameter optimisation and the validity for large observational datasets, which can locate earthquakes in 439s per event for 2039 observations. In addition, we apply this technique to a case study of seismicity in the Southern California region for earthquakes from 2019.</p>

[1]  C. Thurber Nonlinear earthquake location: Theory and examples , 1985 .

[2]  P. Podvin,et al.  Finite difference computation of traveltimes in very contrasted velocity models: a massively parallel approach and its associated tools , 1991 .

[3]  Jean Virieux,et al.  Probabilistic Earthquake Location in 3D and Layered Models , 2000 .

[4]  J. Shaw P-wave seismic velocity structure derived from sonic logs and industry reflection data in the Los An , 2003 .

[5]  Albert Tarantola,et al.  Inverse problem theory - and methods for model parameter estimation , 2004 .

[6]  M. Sambridge,et al.  The Fast Marching Method: An Effective Tool for Tomographic Imaging and Tracking Multiple Phases in Complex Layered Media , 2005 .

[7]  E. Hauksson,et al.  Earthquake Monitoring in Southern California for Seventy-Seven Years (1932-2008) , 2010 .

[8]  A. Allam,et al.  Seismic velocity structures in the southern California plate-boundary environment from double-difference tomography , 2011 .

[9]  En-Jui Lee,et al.  Full‐3‐D tomography for crustal structure in Southern California based on the scattering‐integral and the adjoint‐wavefield methods , 2014 .

[10]  J. Tromp,et al.  Unified Structural Representation of the southern California crust and upper mantle , 2015, Earth and Planetary Science Letters.

[11]  Jimmy Ba,et al.  Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization , 2014, ICLR.

[12]  Dilin Wang,et al.  Stein Variational Gradient Descent: A General Purpose Bayesian Inference Algorithm , 2016, NIPS.

[13]  Eran Treister,et al.  A fast marching algorithm for the factored eikonal equation , 2016, J. Comput. Phys..

[14]  Thomas H. Heaton,et al.  Generalized Seismic Phase Detection with Deep Learning , 2018, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[15]  Michael Hahsler,et al.  dbscan: Fast Density-Based Clustering with R , 2019, Journal of Statistical Software.

[16]  Gregory C. Beroza,et al.  Earthquake transformer—an attentive deep-learning model for simultaneous earthquake detection and phase picking , 2020, Nature Communications.

[17]  Kamyar Azizzadenesheli,et al.  EikoNet: Solving the Eikonal Equation With Deep Neural Networks , 2020, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.