The establishment of an Operational Earthquake Forecasting

The establishment of an
Operational Earthquake
Forecasting system in Italy
W. Marzocchi, A.M. Lombardi, E. Casarotti
Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia
The results shown were developed mainly within the Strategies and tools for Real-Time Earthquake Risk Reduction
(REAKT; http://www.reaktproject.eu) funded by the European Union’s Seventh Programme for research,
technological development and demonstration under grant agreement No 282862.
EGU meeting, Vienna, 27 April – 2 May, 2014
The L’Aquila earthquake legacy
International Commission on Earthquake Forecasting (ICEF)

Charged on 11 May 2009 by Dipartimento
della Protezione Civile (DPC) to:
1.
2.

Report on the current state of knowledge of
short-term prediction and forecasting of tectonic
earthquakes
Indicate guidelines for utilization of possible
forerunners of large earthquakes to drive civil
protection actions
ICEF report: “Operational Earthquake
Forecasting: State of Knowledge and
Guidelines for Utilization”


Findings & recommendations released by DPC
(Oct 2009) and endorsed by IASPEI (July 2011)
Members (9 countries):
T. H. Jordan, Chair, USA
Y.-T. Chen, China
P. Gasparini, Secretary, Italy
R. Madariaga, France
I. Main, United Kingdom
W. Marzocchi, Italy
G. Papadopoulos, Greece
G. Sobolev, Russia
K. Yamaoka, Japan
J. Zschau, Germany
Final report published in Annals of Geophysics
(Aug 2011)
http://www.annalsofgeophysics.eu/index.php/annals/article/view/5350
EGU meeting, Vienna, 27 April – 2 May, 2014
Outline of the talk

Operational Earthquake Forecasting (OEF) principles

The progresses in Italy

OEF & Decision-Making
EGU meeting, Vienna, 27 April – 2 May, 2014
OEF principles
Authoritative information about the time
dependence of seismic hazards to help communities
prepare for potentially destructive earthquakes.
EGU meeting, Vienna, 27 April – 2 May, 2014
OEF principles
Some issues on OEF...

Seismic (and risk) hazard varies with time (in particular in
the short-term)

During a seismic sequence the weekly probability of a
destructive earthquake can increase 100-1000 times with
respect to the reference level (derived from the long-term
hazard), but this probability rarely reaches 1%.

Some of the available earthquake forecasting models are
able to provide accurate estimations of such probabilities
(verified through CSEP experiment)

Despite the usual belief, such models are verified empirically
much better than long-term hazard models.
EGU meeting, Vienna, 27 April – 2 May, 2014
OEF principles
On March 11, 2011, a M9 hits the Honshu coast
Probability map for the period Jan.1-Dec.31 2011. The legend reports the annual probability map for a M≥ 8.5
earthquake in each cell of 0.1x0.1 degrees. The box is the fault of the Tohoku earthquake and the star is the epicenter .
EGU meeting, Vienna, 27 April – 2 May, 2014
OEF principles
On March 9, 2011, a M7.2 occurred in the same area
Weekly prob M8.5+=0.12%
Prob gain > 100
Probability map for the period March 9 - March 16, 2011. The legend reports the probability map for a M≥ 8.5 earthquake
in each cell of 0.1x0.1 degrees. The box is the fault of the Tohoku earthquake; the circle is around the epicenter of the
M7.2 earthquake occurred on March 9; the star is the epicenter of the Tohoku earthquake.
EGU meeting, Vienna, 27 April – 2 May, 2014
OEF in Italy
The 1-day forecasts (the palette represents the rate of M 4+)
Daily forecasts released at 8:00 AM (no overlaps)
EGU meeting, Vienna, 27 April – 2 May, 2014
OEF in Italy
The 1-day forecast since May 19
(2 independent models: Lombardi-Marzocchi & Murru-Console-Falcone)
Background probability for M4+= 0.007%
Probability gain on May 19= about 500
Probability gain on May 28= about 5000
Spatial density of the expected number of earthquakes with M4+ per km2
EGU meeting, Vienna, 27 April – 2 May, 2014
OEF in Italy
Target eqks
(M)
Value for
the real
catalog
Rate (M-F/M)= 0.23
# target eqks
anticipated by
at least one
foreshock (MF)
# PFs
Value for
the real
catalog
Rate (M-F/M) per unit
magnitude = 0.16
Rate (F/PF)= 0.008
Value for
the real
catalog
Rate (F/PF) per unit
magnitude = 0.0058
EGU meeting, Vienna, 27 April – 2 May, 2014
OEF in Italy: the Cassandra system
Centro di Pericolosità Sismica (CPS) of INGV is an
authoritative source of seismic hazard information for Civil
Protection
The philosophy of the OEF system: Accuracy, Openness,
Transparency, Reproducibility.

The model is accurate: continuously under CSEP testing
The model is open: we accept different models that are submitted in at
least one CSEP experiment


It is transparent and reproducible: all details are public
EGU meeting, Vienna, 27 April – 2 May, 2014
OEF in Italy: Cassandra
No singles models are used!
ENSEMBLE forecasting
model. Each model is
weighted according to its
forecasting performances
Selected models (constraints)
They must be submitted to at least
one CSEP experiment
EGU meeting, Vienna, 27 April – 2 May, 2014
Status Quo
Western Pacific
EU
Testing Center
SCEC
Testing Center
Global
China
Testing Center
ERI
Testing Center
Zurich
Beijing
Tokyo
Los Angeles
Italy
California
South-North
Seismic Belt
Japan
GNS Science
Testing Center
Wellington
Testing Center
Testing Region
Upcoming
Upcoming
New Zealand
EGU meeting, Vienna, 27 April – 2 May, 2014
OEF in Italy: Cassandra
CASSANDRA v01: the example of the recent seismic sequence @ Garfagnana
Evolution of the weekly probability with time for the selected area: updated every three hours
EGU meeting, Vienna, 27 April – 2 May, 2014
OEF in Italy: Cassandra
The evolution of the weekly probability since 2010 (MMI VII+)
EGU meeting, Vienna, 27 April – 2 May, 2014
Thank you
EGU meeting, Vienna, 27 April – 2 May, 2014

Download Report