A Microseismic Phase Picking and Polarity Determination Model Based on the Earthquake Transformer
Source abstract
Abstract
Phase arrival times and polarities provide essential kinematic constraints for and dynamic insights into seismic sources, respectively. This information serves as fundamental data in seismological study. For microseismic events with smaller magnitudes, reliable phase picking and polarity determination are even more challenging but play a crucial role in source location and focal mechanism inversion. This study innovatively proposes a deep learning model suitable for simultaneous phase picking and polarity determination with continuous microseismic waveforms. Building upon the Earthquake Transformer (EQT) model, we implemented structural improvements through four distinct decoders specifically designed for three tasks of P-wave picking, S-wave picking, and P-wave first-motion polarity determination and named the model EQT-Plus (EQTP). Notably, the polarity determination task was decomposed into two independent decoders to enhance the learning of polarity characteristics. Through training on a northern California dataset and testing on microseismic events (Md < 3) in the Geysers region, the results demonstrate that the EQTP model achieves superior performance in both phase picking and polarity determination compared to the PhaseNet+ model. It not only provides accurate phase picking but also shows higher consistency with manual picking results in polarity determination. We further validated the good generalization ability of the model with the DiTing dataset from China. This study not only advances the adaptation of the Transformer model in seismology but also reliably delivers fundamental information essential for refined microseismic inversion, offering an alternative and advanced tool for the seismological community.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Seismology and Earthquake Studies · earthquake and tectonic studies · Seismic Waves and Analysis
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Key Laboratory of Metallogenic Prediction of Nonferrous Metals and Geological Environment Monitoring (Central South University), Ministry of Education, Changsha 410083, China
School of Geosciences and Info–Physics, Central South University, Changsha 410083, China
Department of Geophysics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
Funding
National Natural Science Foundation of China · Central South University Innovation−Driven Research Programme · Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of Central South University
References (55)
Show source-provided references
1. Eaton, D.W. (2018). Passive Seismic Monitoring of Induced Seismicity: Fundamental Principles and Application to Energy Technologies, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316535547 ↗
2. A Review of the Current Status of Induced Seismicity Monitoring for Hydraulic Fracturing in Unconventional Tight Oil and Gas Reservoirs10.1016/j.fuel.2019.01.026 ↗
3. Chapter Eight—Microseismic Analysis to Aid Gas Reservoir Characterization
4. An Effective Polarity Correction Method for Microseismic Migration-Based Location10.1190/geo2019-0497.1 ↗
5. Microseismicity Observed in an Underground Mine: Source Mechanisms and Possible Causes10.1016/j.gete.2019.100167 ↗
6. A New Look at the Statistical Model Identification10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705 ↗
7. Automatic Earthquake Recognition and Timing from Single Traces10.1785/BSSA0680051521 ↗
8. Automatic Bayesian Polarity Determination10.1093/gji/ggw146 ↗
9. Automatic Determination of First-Motion Polarity and Its Application to Focal Mechanism Analysis of Microseismic Events10.1007/s12303-017-0022-8 ↗
10. PhasePApy: A Robust Pure Python Package for Automatic Identification of Seismic Phases10.1785/0220160019 ↗
11. High-Resolution Synthetic Seismic Modelling: Elucidating Facies Heterogeneity in Carbonate Ramp Systems10.1144/petgeo2024-047 ↗
12. Machine Learning in Microseismic Monitoring10.1016/j.earscirev.2023.104371 ↗
13. Machine Learning for Subsurface Geological Feature Identification from Seismic Data: Methods, Datasets, Challenges, and Opportunities10.1016/j.earscirev.2024.104887 ↗
14. Deep Learning for Geophysics: Current and Future Trends10.1029/2021RG000742 ↗
15. Li, L., Zeng, X., Pan, X., Peng, L., Tan, Y., and Liu, J. (2024). Microseismic Velocity Inversion Based on Deep Learning and Data Augmentation. Appl. Sci., 14.10.3390/app14052194 ↗
16. Backpropagation Applied to Handwritten Zip Code Recognition10.1162/neco.1989.1.4.541 ↗
17. Automatic Waveform Classification and Arrival Picking Based on Convolutional Neural Network10.1029/2018EA000466 ↗
18. Seismic Event and Phase Detection Using Time–Frequency Representation and Convolutional Neural Networks10.1785/0220180308 ↗
19. P-Wave First-Motion Polarity Determination of Waveform Data in Western Japan Using Deep Learning10.1186/s40623-019-1111-x ↗
20. P Wave Arrival Picking and First-Motion Polarity Determination with Deep Learning10.1029/2017JB015251 ↗
21. Comparison of Single-trace and Multiple-trace Polarity Determination for Surface Microseismic Data Using Deep Learning10.1785/0220190353 ↗
22. Focal Mechanisms of Small Earthquakes beneath the Japanese Islands Based on First-Motion Polarities Picked Using Deep Learning10.1093/gji/ggaa401 ↗
23. Guo, T.Y., Vanorio, T., and Ding, J. (2024). A Deep-Learning P-Wave Arrival Picker for Laboratory Acoustic Emissions: Model Training and Its Performance. Rock Mech. Rock Eng.10.1007/s00603-024-04296-5 ↗
24. Improved U-Net3+ Network for First Arrival Picking of Noisy Earthquake Recordings10.1109/TGRS.2024.3387418 ↗
25. PhaseNet: A Deep-Neural-Network-Based Seismic Arrival Time Picking Method
26. PolarCAP—A Deep Learning Approach for First Motion Polarity Classification of Earthquake Waveforms
27. Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A.N., Kaiser, Ł., and Polosukhin, I. (2017). Attention Is All You Need. Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Curran Associates, Inc.
28. Earthquake Transformer—An Attentive Deep-Learning Model for Simultaneous Earthquake Detection and Phase Picking10.1038/s41467-020-17591-w ↗
29. Siamese Earthquake Transformer: A Pair-Input Deep-Learning Model for Earthquake Detection and Phase Picking on a Seismic Array10.1029/2020JB021444 ↗
30. Zhao, M., Xiao, Z., Zhang, M., Yang, Y., Tang, L., and Chen, S. (2023). DiTingMotion: A Deep-Learning First-Motion-Polarity Classifier and Its Application to Focal Mechanism Inversion. Front. Earth Sci., 11.10.3389/feart.2023.1103914 ↗
31. Li, S., Fang, L., Xiao, Z., Zhou, Y., Liao, S., and Fan, L. (2023). FocMech-Flow: Automatic Determination of P-Wave First-Motion Polarity and Focal Mechanism Inversion and Application to the 2021 Yangbi Earthquake Sequence. Appl. Sci., 13.10.3390/app13042233 ↗
32. Deep Learning for P-Wave First-Motion Polarity Determination and Its Application in Focal Mechanism Inversion
33. Automatic Microseismic Event Picking via Unsupervised Machine Learning10.1093/gji/ggaa186 ↗
34. Self-Supervised Convolutional Clustering for Picking the First Break of Microseismic Recording
35. Unsupervised Clustering of Seismic Signals Using Deep Convolutional Autoencoders10.1109/LGRS.2019.2909218 ↗
36. Simultaneous Seismic Phase Picking and Polarity Determination with an Attention-based Neural Network10.1785/0220220247 ↗
37. NCEDC (2014). Northern California Earthquake Data Center. UC Berkeley Seismological Laboratory. Dataset.
38. Zhu, W., Wang, H., Rong, B., Yu, E., Zuzlewski, S., Tepp, G., Taira, T., Marty, J., Husker, A., and Allen, R.M. (2025). California Earthquake Dataset for Machine Learning and Cloud Computing. arXiv.
39. Spatiotemporal Changes, Faulting Regimes, and Source Parameters of Induced Seismicity: A Case Study from The Geysers Geothermal Field10.1002/2014JB011385 ↗
40. Moment Tensors of Induced Microearthquakes in The Geysers Geothermal Reservoir From Broadband Seismic Recordings: Implications for Faulting Regime, Stress Tensor, and Fluid Pressure10.1029/2018JB016251 ↗
41. DiTing: A Large-Scale Chinese Seismic Benchmark Dataset for Artificial Intelligence in Seismology10.1016/j.eqs.2022.01.022 ↗
42. SeisBench—A Toolbox for Machine Learning in Seismology10.1785/0220210324 ↗
43. Yin, X., Liu, Z., Liu, D., and Ren, X. (2022). A Novel CNN-Based Bi-LSTM Parallel Model with Attention Mechanism for Human Activity Recognition with Noisy Data. Sci. Rep., 12.10.1038/s41598-022-11880-8 ↗
44. Siami-Namini, S., Tavakoli, N., and Namin, A.S. (2019, January 9–12). The Performance of LSTM and BiLSTM in Forecasting Time Series. Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (big Data), Los Angeles, CA, USA.10.1109/BigData47090.2019.9005997 ↗
45. Lightweight Bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory Based on Automated Model Pruning with Application to Bearing Remaining Useful Life Prediction10.1016/j.engappai.2022.105662 ↗
46. Wind and Solar Power Forecasting Based on Hybrid CNN-ABiLSTM, CNN-Transformer-MLP Models10.1016/j.renene.2024.122055 ↗
47. Choi, Y., Nguyen, H.-T., Han, T.H., Choi, Y., and Ahn, J. (2024). Sequence Deep Learning for Seismic Ground Response Modeling: 1D-CNN, LSTM, and Transformer Approach. Appl. Sci., 14.10.3390/app14156658 ↗
48. OBSTransformer: A Deep-Learning Seismic Phase Picker for OBS Data Using Automated Labelling and Transfer Learning10.1093/gji/ggae049 ↗
49. From Labquakes to Megathrusts: Scaling Deep Learning Based Pickers over 15 Orders of Magnitude
50. Index for Rating Diagnostic Tests10.1002/1097-0142(1950)3:1<32::AID-CNCR2820030106>3.0.CO;2-3 ↗
51. Earthquake Phase Association Using a Bayesian Gaussian Mixture Model10.1029/2021JB023249 ↗
52. A Double-Difference Earthquake Location Algorithm: Method and Application to the Northern Hayward Fault, California10.1785/0120000006 ↗
53. HybridMT: A MATLAB/Shell Environment Package for Seismic Moment Tensor Inversion and Refinement10.1785/0220150251 ↗
54. Celli, N.L., Nooshiri, N., Bean, C.J., Grigoli, F., Obermann, A., and Wiemer, S. (2022, January 23–27). Manual MT Inversions in Microseismic Areas: Good Practices and Building a Reference Database for the Hengill Region, Iceland. Proceedings of the EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts, Vienna, Austria.10.5194/egusphere-egu22-11721 ↗
55. Optimization-Based Stacked Machine-Learning Method for Seismic Probability and Risk Assessment of Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls10.1016/j.eswa.2024.124897 ↗