Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T06:49:21.377Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An evaluation of Chinese annual earthquake predictions, 1990–1998

Part of: Geophysics (general) Geophysics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2016

Yaolin Shi ,
Jie Liu  and
Guomin Zhang
Yaolin Shi*
Affiliation:
University of Science and Technology of China and Academica Sinica
Jie Liu*
Affiliation:
University of Science and Technology of China and Academica Sinica
Guomin Zhang*
Affiliation:
China Seismological Bureau
*
1Postal address: Graduate School, University of Science and Technology, Beijing 100039, China. Email: shiyl@sun.ihep.ac.cn
2Postal address: Center for Analysis and Prediction, China Seismological Bureau, Beijing 100036, China.
2Postal address: Center for Analysis and Prediction, China Seismological Bureau, Beijing 100036, China.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The annual earthquake predictions of the China Seismological Bureau (CSB) are evaluated by means of an R score (an R score is approximately 0 for completely random guesses, and approximately 1 for completely successful predictions). The average R score of the annual predictions in China in the period 1990–1998 is about 0.184, significantly larger than 0.0. However, background seismicity is higher in seismically active regions. If a ‘random guess' prediction is chosen to be proportional to the background seismicity, the expected R score is 0.123, and the nine-year mean R score of 0.184 as observed is only marginally higher than this background value. Monte Carlo tests indicate that the probability of attaining an R score of actual prediction by background seismicity based on random guess is about . It is concluded that earthquake prediction in China is still in a very preliminary stage, barely above a pure chance level.

Keywords

Earthquake predictionprediction evaluationChinese earthquake

MSC classification

Primary: 86A15: Seismology
Type
Models and statistics in seismology
Information
Journal of Applied Probability , Volume 38 , Issue A: Probability, Statistics and Seismology , 2001 , pp. 222 - 231
Copyright
Copyright © Applied Probability Trust 2001 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

CAP, SSB (Center for Analysis and Prediction of the State Seismological Bureau) (1990-1998). Annual Summary Report on National Earthquake Trends, 1990, …, 1998.Google Scholar
Geller, R. G., Jackson, D. D., Kagan, Y. Y. and Mulargia, F. (1997). Earthquakes cannot be predicted. Science 275, 1616–1617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kagan, Y. Y. (1996). VAN earthquake predictions–an attempt as statistical evolution. Geophys. Res. Lett. 23, 1315–1318.Google Scholar
Keilis-Borok, V. I. and Knopoff, L. (1980). Burst of aftershocks of strong earthquakes. Nature 283, 259–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shirong, Mei, Deyi, Feng, Guomin, Zhang, Yueqing, Zhu, Xu, Gao and Zhaocheng, Zhang (1993). Introduction to Earthquake Prediction in China. Seismological Press, Beijing.Google Scholar
SSB (State Seismological Bureau) (1996). The Selected Papers of Earthquake Prediction in China. Seismological Press, Beijing.Google Scholar
Stark, P. B. (1996). A few considerations for ascribing statistical significance to earthquake predictions. Geophy. Res. Lett. 23, 1399–1402.Google Scholar
Stark, P. B., (1997). Earthquake prediction: the null hypothesis. Geophys. J. Internat. 131, 495–498.Google Scholar
Vere-Jones, D. (1970). Stochastic models for earthquake occurrence (with discussion). J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. B 32, 1–62.Google Scholar
Wu, F. T. (1997). The annual earthquake prediction conference in China (National consultative meeting on seismic tendency). Pure Appl. Geophys. 149, 249–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar