Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
1785/0120120347
Introduction
Earthquake hypocenter locations are needed to map windows over the trace. This algorithm is rapid and remains
existing faults and to document their activity, both of which useful for detecting events in continuous databases, but it
are of prime importance in defining hazards and forecasting generally gives significantly different results from manual
events. The number of seismic stations around the world is picking (Saragiotis et al., 2002). The STA/LTA algorithm can
rapidly growing, which should provide much more detailed be applied to raw traces or to derived traces function called
information about seismically active regions, but only if seis- characteristic functions (CF). Baer and Kradolfer (1987) im-
mic events can be accurately and uniformly picked on each proved the STA/LTA by introducing the envelope function as
station. Automatic picking procedures (APP) are needed to the CF and by using a dynamic threshold to detect signals
handle the larger datasets and they must be reliable, precise, buried in noise.
and capable of distinguishing different phase onsets and Takanami and Kitigawa (1993), Sleeman and van Eck
adapting to different site and/or instrument characteristics. (1999), and Leonard and Kennett (1999) proposed another
Compared with manual picking, APP save time and should approach for automatic picking, derived from auto-regressive
be more consistent, because manual picks can differ between (AR) methods. These methods involve calculating AR mod-
analysts (Freedman, 1966; Zeiler and Velasco, 2009). els for two stationary segments. These two models will be
In seismology, the most commonly used event detection most different, when one contains only seismic noise and
algorithm is the short-term average/long-term average the others mostly signal. The Akaike Information Criterion
(STA/LTA) detector proposed by Allen (1982), which is based (AIC; Akaike, 1974), which indicates the unreliability of
on the ratio of the two averages calculated on sliding the model fit, is then used to precisely pick the onset. These
1
2 C. Baillard, W. C. Crawford, V. Ballu, C. Hibert, and A. Mangeney
methods have not been applied to many datasets, because Mathematical Background
the calculations are computationally expensive and because
Kurtosis
some arrivals are not necessarily associated with im-
portant changes in their frequency content and so are not The kurtosis is a statistical value characterizing the
detected. shape of a given distribution. It is a positive scalar defined
Saragiotis et al. (2002) was one of the first to apply as the standardized fourth moment about the mean. Using a
higher order statistical functions to seismic traces, introduc- probabilistic notation, the kurtosis K is
ing the skewness and the kurtosis functions to phase picking.
EX 4 m
Kperkoch et al. (2010) added the AIC to Saragiotis method K 44 ; 1
fEX 2 g2
EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;df1;313;647
Time [s]
(a) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100
du
0
100
% % %
(b) 150
0 10 20
150
0 10 20
150
0 5 10
50 50 50
du
0 0 0
50 50 50
20
Kurtosis
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time [s]
Figure 1. Example of a kurtosis characteristic function calculated on a seismic trace. In this example, a 5 s window is used. (a) Seismic
trace (filtered between 3 and 45 Hz for clarity). The horizontal bars indicate the three kurtosis windows examined below. (b) Kurtosis and
histograms of sample distributions for the three kurtosis windows. The solid line shows the best-fitting Gaussian curve, and dashed lines show
the outer bounds of sample values. (c) The resulting kurtosis characteristic function.
real and the eigenvectors form an orthogonal base. We T=t 1, in which t is the sample interval. The central
organize eigenvalues so that 1 2 3 . i U i are called moment of order d at sample k can be written as (Kperkoch
the principal axes of the polarization ellipsoid. et al., 2010)
We can now calculate two polarization parameters: the
degree of rectilinearity (Jurkevics, 1988) and the dip of maxi- 1X N
md k x x k d with k1; ; n; 8
mum polarization (Vidale, 1986). The first polarization N i1 ki1
EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;df8;313;414
U 1 3
Dip tan 1 p
: 7
U 1 22 U 1 12 We then define the first kurtosis CF at sample k as
EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;df7;55;250
The Characteristic Function When the sliding window integrates the first samples
of a seismic phase onset, the change in the signal distribu-
We describe here the steps we follow to create the final tion from Gaussian to non-Gaussian causes F1 to increase
CF used in the APP. The goal of this CF is to allow accurate (Fig. 1).
and precise picking of all onsets on a section of the trace. We The best alignment with manual picks is obtained when
consider a single seismic trace represented by x fx1 ; the automatic pick corresponds to the very beginning of this
x2 ; ; xn g. The CF is calculated over a sliding window increase, before its maximum value. Because no simple
on the signal: let T be the size, in seconds, of this window. mathematical tools exist to directly detect this change of
The number of samples in the windows is therefore N behavior, we apply a succession of transformations to the
4 C. Baillard, W. C. Crawford, V. Ballu, C. Hibert, and A. Mangeney
40
20
0 phase onsets, but the picker accuracy is considerably im-
(c) 150 proved by adding two intermediate stages: (1) averaging
100
of F3 over multiple window lengths and frequency band-
F2
50
0 widths; and (2) sequential onset pickingfrom long-to-short
(d) 50 time scales, using smoothing windows on F4 .
The first stage addresses a common problem of auto-
F3
0
50 matic pickers: their accuracy and reliability depend on the
(e) 0
20
frequency bandwidth used to filter the data and the size of
F4
impulsive onsets.
a F2 nF 2 1
with n1
: 12
b F2 1 PS Characterization
The final transformation makes the amplitude of the Once we have created the CF that best allows us to pick
minima amplitude scale with the total change in the kurtosis the onsets on a single trace, we need to determine whether
that follows, so that the greatest minima correspond to the those onsets correspond to surface waves or body waves or if
greatest onset strengths (Fig. 2e). The transformation pushes they are not seismic waves at all. If the onsets correspond to
the CF values down by the amplitude of the next maximum body waves, we must differentiate P and S onsets. We as-
and sets remaining positive values to zero: sume the rays arrive at the stations with a small incidence
angle to the vertical axis, meaning the P waves will have
Tk F3 k M i1 if ksi ; si1 13
mostly vertical motions and the S waves mostly horizontal
EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;df13;55;98
Table 1
Description of Parameters Used in the APP
Step Parameter Description Comments
SNR-based trace selection N b (s) SNR prewindow Long enough to represent preonset noise energy
N a (s) SNR postwindow Long enough to cover onset energy
W c (s) New analysis window Section of the trace that contains the PS onsets
vc () Maximum number of desired onsets If (number of onsets in W c ) > vc then the trace is
rejected, usually 2
T SNR (%) SNR threshold (% of max SNR) 20%, normally do not change
SNRmin () Minimum SNR to accept pick 1, generally less than 5
CF construction BW (Hz) F3 Frequency band Usually two: 1) full useful data bandwidth
and 2) bandwidth of typical arrivals
WS (s) F3 Window lengths Several equally spaced up to average PS delay
N s (samples) Smoothing window lengths From 1 to just below the average PS delay divided
by the sampling rate, spaced closely enough to not
jump onsets between smoothing windows
Polarization analysis T P () P threshold Between 0.5 and 1: the higher the numbers the more
selective the analysis
T S () S threshold Approximately T P
W pol (s) Window length for polarization analysis 4-seconds, normally do not change
() DR calculation weighting factor Between 1 and 2: higher is more selective
Pick quality analysis P0; P1; P2; P3 () P-SNR ratios for pick weight numbers 10 P0 15 (higher is more selective),
P3 SNRmin , P1 and P2 evenly spaced between
M f () (S-SNR ratios)/(P-SNR ratios) 1.25, normally do not change
Clustering rejection W P (s) P clusters cutoff Greater than largest typical t between P-phase
arrivals across network
W S (s) S clusters cutoff Approximately 1.7 times W P
Amplitude calculation APS (s) PS window length Typical PS time in dataset
A0 (s) Onset window length Typical length of energy envelope after onsets
the polarization window size are given at the end of this sec-
Table 2
tion. We then define the diprectilinearity function as
APP Parameter Values for the Vanuatu and MAR Datasets
Parameter Vanuatu MAR
N b (s) 2 0.5
DRkReck sign sinDipk Reck; 15
EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;df15;313;376
N a (s) 2 0.5
W c (s) 30 15
vc () 2 2 in which the parameter (Tables 1 and 2) is a user-defined
T SNR (%) 20 20 weighting factor between 1 and 2 that depends on the clarity
SNRmin () 5 3 of the dip and rectilinearity: a value of 2 would be appropri-
BW (Hz) [318] and [345] [530] and [318] ate for perfectly polarized data, and 1 corresponds to poorly
WS (s) 2, 4, and 6 0.5, 1, and 1.2
polarized data. The rectilinearity parameter helps to separate
N s (samples) 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 10, 20, 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 10,
40, 50, 70, and 80 20, 40, and 50 body waves (Reck close to 1) from background noise and
T P () 0.4 / surface waves, whereas the dip parameter distinguishes be-
T S () 0.4 / tween P and S waves. P waves have high dip values due to
W pol (s) 4 / their polarization along the near-vertical incidence ray
() 1.3 /
(sinjDipkj is close to 1). In contrast, S waves are polar-
P0; P1; P2; P3 () (15, 11, 7, SNRmin ) (11, 8, 5, SNRmin )
Mf () 1.25 1.25 ized horizontally (SH and SV), and sinjDipkj is close to 0.
W P (s) 10 2 In a perfect case, we could take 2, and DRk will be 1
W S (s) 30 3 for P waves and 1 for S waves. Practically, because the waves
APS (s) 10 5 are not perfectly linearly polarized and the incidence is not
A0 (s) 10 5
exactly vertical, we have to choose a smaller and define
two thresholds, T P and T S (Tables 1 and 2), with 0 < T P <
1 and T S T P . The onset is declared P if the average of the
the network geometry is adequate and can be verified for window centered on the pick is greater than zero and
each station a posteriori, after hypocenter inversion. We DR > T P somewhere in the window. The onset is declared
compute the dip and rectilinearity using a sliding window S if the average of the window centered on the pick is less
of size W pol (Tables 1 and 2) on the three components than zero and DR < T S somewhere in the window. If neither
X, Y, and Z. Further details about how to correctly choose case is satisfied, the pick is rejected (Fig. 5).
6 C. Baillard, W. C. Crawford, V. Ballu, C. Hibert, and A. Mangeney
(a) 1000
(a) 25 30
P1
35 40
P2
45 50 55 60
du 1000
0
X
0
1000
1000
(b) 2000
2000
(b) 100
Y
10 0
9
8
7
(c) 2000
500
6
Z
0
50
5
500
F3
4
3
(d) 1
2 TP
DR
1 0
0
TS
1
25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Time [s]
50
0 5 10 15 20
Time [s]
25 30 35 40
Figure 5. Example of the diprectilinearity parameter used to
identify seismic phases and reject noise and surface wave picks
(Vanuatu dataset). (ac) Filtered X, Y, and Z traces showing the
Figure 3. Illustration of the multiple window length stage: 4 s windows used for polarization analysis (centered on arrivals
(a) filtered zero-mean Z seismogram; and (b) F3 for each window P1 and P2). (d) Diprectilinearity parameter (DR). Above T P ,
(thin lines) and the average F3 (thick line). The numbers next to the pick is declared as P; below T s, the pick is declared as S.
each thin line indicate the corresponding window length in seconds. DR extrema do not correspond to wave onsets because of the shift-
ing induced by the polarization analysis.
0
This noise level decreases with increasing window sizes until
500
reaching a constant value of 0.2 for windows longer than 3T
(b) 35
30
0.01 0.1
0.2
(Fig. 6e), in which T is the longest period of energy in the
0.5
onset (3 Hz for Vanuatu data). For reliable polarization char-
F3'
25 0.8
0.8
Automatic Picking Procedure
20
27.5 28 28.5 29 29.5 We describe here the entire event extraction and auto-
Time [s]
matic picking procedure, starting with raw continuous seis-
mic traces and ending with a catalog of picked phase times
Figure 4. Illustration of the long-to-short time-scale approach
for identifying first arrivals. (a) Zoom on the second (S wave) onset and amplitudes for each event at each station.
of the trace in Figure 3. (b) F3 computed using five different Before running the APP, we extract record sections with
smoothing windows: 0.01, 0.1, 0.2, 0.5, and 0.8 s. (c) F4 calculated a high probability of containing an event from the continuous
from each F3 . Crosses represent the local minima that lead to the database. Many standard routines exist for this phase: we
final pick (solid line). The dotted line marks the pick that would
used SEISANs CONDET routine (Havskov and Ottemller,
have been made on the short time-scale data without using this ap-
proach. The time difference between the minima picked on the 2010), which is based on an STA/LTA detection algorithm run
shortest time scale data before and after applying our approach on the vertical channel of each station and which extracts a
is 0.3 s. The time difference between minima picked on the longest record for each case that has more than a threshold number of
and shortest time scale is 0.03 s. stations trigger in a specified time interval. We generally
extract a longer window than is strictly necessary, because
We performed several tests on the polarization window the first step of the APP will optimize the window length.
size to identify the best configuration. Figure 6 shows the The first step of the APP is to reduce the size of the
influence of the window size on the rectilinearity parameter. analysis window to an optimal length (parameter W c,
The longer the window is, the smoother the rectilinearity Tables 1 and 2). This speeds up subsequent processing and
function and the easier it is to characterize the waveform type helps to avoid mispicks by reducing the chance of having
(Fig. 6c,d), but a window longer than the PS delay will multiple events in one window. The algorithm calculates a
smear the effects of these two arrival types. To find the op- simplified version of F4 (equation 15) for all traces on all
timal value, we calculated the noise level for different win- stations, picks the biggest onset on each trace, and detects the
dow sizes (Fig. 6e). The noise level for a specific window region of maximum pick density using a clustering analysis.
An Automatic Kurtosis-Based P- and S-Phase Picker Designed for Local Seismic Networks 7
1000
(a) P S
0
Z
1000
50 60
(b)
40
Frequency [Hz]
40
10.log (P)
20
30
0
20
20
10
40
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Time [s]
(c) 1000
500
0
Z
500
0.2 s 1.6 s 4s
1000
(d) 1
0.8
Rectilinearity
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
Time [s]
(e) 0.8
0T 1T 2T 3T 4T 5T 6T 7T 8T 9T 10T 11T 12T
0.6
Noise level
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Window size [s]
Figure 6. Effect of the polarization window size on the rectilinearity parameter. The seismogram is taken from the Vanuatu dataset.
(a) Filtered Z trace containing both P and S waves and (b) the associated spectrogram. (c) Zoom in of the Z trace around the P arrival.
(d) Rectilinearity parameter computed for three different window sizes. For the smallest window, the signal is buried in noise. Signals
computed with the two longest windows show similar patterns. (e) Noise level of the rectilinearity function of window size, expressed
in seconds, and also in number of periods T, T being the period associated with the lowest frequency contained in the onset (3 Hz in this
case). The dashed line represents minimum polarization window size over which the rectilinearity is reliable.
All subsequent analysis will be performed on the W c -second Energyk k N a
window centered on this region. SNRk20 log : 17
Energyk N b k
EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;df17;313;171
in which X, Y, and Z are the three components of the signal. fined and generally equal: N b must be long enough to cor-
The SNR at sample k is defined as rectly represent the noise level before the onset, and N a must
8 C. Baillard, W. C. Crawford, V. Ballu, C. Hibert, and A. Mangeney
(a) 200 P S
(a) 60
100
%
100
200
20
300
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
(b) 50 50 0
1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
40 0
(b)
Frequency [Hz]
30
10.log (P)
30 50
%
10 150
0 200 10
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Time [s]
0
Figure 8. Frequency content of a typical seismogram from the 1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1
Deviation between automatic and manual picks [s]
1.5
between 3 and 18 Hz, which we used as our tightest fre- 15 Spicks: 0.06 0.29 s
quency bounds (Table 2). Number of picks compared: 307
%
10
We were able to manually pick 99 of the 163 extracted
events. Of these, 93 were locatable using the HYPOCEN- 5
TER inversion program (Lienert et al., 1986; Lienert and 0
Havskov, 1995). Our APP returned 133 locatable events, 1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
Deviation between automatic and manual [s]
including all 93 events located using the manual picks.
Manual picking provided 1094 P and 507 S onsets,
Figure 10. The difference between automatic and manual pick-
whereas the APP provided 1007 P and 1002 S onsets. The ing times using the STA/LTA picking method (Vanuatu dataset). All
automatic picker thus identified many more S onsets than the values beyond 22 s are compiled at 22 s. (a) P-wave onsets
human operator, and about the same number of P onsets. and (b) S-wave onsets.
However, the onsets picked were not always the same:
720 (66%) of the manual P onsets were picked automatically, compared with P-wave picking is explained by the fact that
as were 390 (77%) of the manual S onsets. S waves are generally emergent and buried in the P coda.
To evaluate the accuracy of the automatic picker, we an- The distribution shows a small trend to negative residuals,
alyze the time differences between the automatic and manual indicating that automatic picks are slightly ahead of manual
picks (Fig. 9). For P onsets, the median difference is 0:01 picks. This may be because the kurtosis identifies the distri-
0:08 s (using the 68% interval as the variance; using the 95% bution change associated with an emergent onset before it is
interval, the variance would be 0:40 s). The small median visible to the human eye.
and symmetrical variance distribution of time differences in- We also applied an automatic STA/LTA picker to the data
dicate there is little or no systematic shift with respect to (LTA window 10 s, STA window 1 s). The STA/LTA
manual picks. The kurtosis is known for its small systematic picker made 1220 P and 635 S picks: 674 (62%) of the manual
shifts compared with other metrics such as the skewness P onsets were picked, as were 307 (61%) of the manual S
(Kperkoch et al., 2010), which is one of the reasons we picks. The STA/LTA picker provided more P and less S onsets
chose it for onset picking. than our APP. For P onsets (Fig. 10a), the median difference
For S onsets, the median difference is 0:09 0:23 s between the STA/LTA and manual picks is 0:18 0:19 s
(0:61 s for the 95% interval). The decrease in accuracy (15:60 s for the 95% interval). The systematic offset is
10 C. Baillard, W. C. Crawford, V. Ballu, C. Hibert, and A. Mangeney
(a) (b)
1430'
P P'
0
20
1500'
P' 40
60
Depth [km]
P 80
1530'
100
120
140
1600'
160
180
0 50
1630' 200
16600' 16630' 16700' 16730' 16800' 80 40 0 40 80
20
1500'
P' 40
60
Depth [km]
P 80
1530'
100
120
140
1600'
160
180
0 50
1630' 200
16600' 16630' 16700' 16730' 16800' 80 40 0 40 80
Distance [km]
Figure 12. Map and profile views showing hypocenters resulting from automatic (kurtosis-derived and STA/LTA) and manual picking for
the Vanuatu region. Triangles, stations; circles, hypocenters derived from manual picking; and crosses, hypocenters derived from automatic
picking. (a,b) Map and profile view (using PP projection) comparing hypocenters localized using manual and kurtosis-derived picks.
(c,d) Same as (a,b), comparing manual and STA/LTA-derived hypocenters.
automatic amplitude estimates). Figure 15a shows the distri- Application to the Mid-Atlantic
bution of local magnitudes of the events we used. The events Ridge Dataset
magnitudes are between 0.7 and 3.7, with half of the events
below magnitude 1.9. There is no clear correlation between We next tested our method on a very different dataset:
magnitudes and the residuals or their variances (Fig. 15be), four ocean-bottom seismometers around a seafloor volcano
indicating that the automatic pickers accuracy (relative to (Fig. 7 inset). The network had an aperture of 7 km, the sen-
manual picking) is independent of the event magnitude. sors had a fourth channel (H) for pressure data (measured by
12 C. Baillard, W. C. Crawford, V. Ballu, C. Hibert, and A. Mangeney
(a) 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 (a) 0 1 2 3
50 0.4 Ppicks
Spicks
0.3
0.2
Median [s]
0.1
40 0
0.1
0.2
% of Ppicks
0.3
0.4
30
(b)
100
% of Ppicks
64 %
20 50
22 % 14 %
0%
0
10 (c)
100
% of Spicks
50 45 %
26 % 29 %
0 0%
0
0 1 2 3
(b) 50 Weight number
Table 3
Differences between Manual P and S Picks for Both APP and STA/LTA Picks for the Vanuatu Dataset
P Picks S Picks
Variance Variance
Method Weight Fraction (%) Residuals (s) 2 Fraction (%) Residuals (s) 2
For the APP picks, these differences and the percentage of picks assigned are also shown as a function of the quality index.
An Automatic Kurtosis-Based P- and S-Phase Picker Designed for Local Seismic Networks 13
14
(a) (a) P S
1000
500
12 Q1 Q2 Q3
0
du
500
10 Total number of events: 99 1000
Quartiles (Q1,Q2,Q3) = (1.6, 1.9, 2.3)
1500
% of events
2000
8
20 25 30 35 40 45 50
(b) 30
80
6 25 60
Frequency [Hz]
10.log (P)
20 40
4 15 20
0
10
20
2 5
40
0
20 25 30 35 40 45 50
0 Time [s]
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Local magnitude
(b) 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Figure 16. Frequency content of a typical seismogram from the
0.4 MAR dataset containing P and S onsets (station LSd1). (a) Z trace
filtered between 5 and 18 Hz for clarity. (b) Traces spectrogram in
0.2 which intensities refer to power spectral density.
Residuals [s]
0
P onset using an algorithm explained in the next paragraph.
0.2 Choice of components to be processed and energetic condi-
tioning are user-defined options that can be directly defined
0.4
in the algorithm input file. All user-defined parameters used
(c) 15
in the APP for the MAR dataset are summarized in Table 2.
In the marine data, to identify the P onset, the APP first
% of P-picks
0
whereas the APP provided 1676 P and 2349 S onsets. We
compared automatic and manual picks (Fig. 17). 1112 (61%)
0.5
of the manual P onsets and 1536 (84%) of the manual S on-
sets were picked automatically. For P waves, the median dif-
1 ference is 0:04 0:17 s, for S waves it is 0:07 0:08 s. A
(e) 12 smaller standard deviation is obtained for S than for P picks
10 because of the high energy of S onsets.
% of S-picks
2000
(a) 40 1000
LSd1 Z
Pm Pk Ps Sm S k
20
2000 LSd2 Z Ps Pm Pk Sm Sk
10
0
0
1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2000
(b) 60 500
LSd3 Z Pm Pk Ps SmS k
20 Pk Pm Ps Sm Sk
2000 LSd4 Z
0
0
1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2000
Deviation between automatic and manual picks [s] 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
Time [s]
20
These results demonstrate that the APP with our new CF
10 can be applied to a wide range of networks and instrument
0 types. The APP has also been adapted to localize rock fall
1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
(b) 80 events occurring in the crater of the Piton de la Fournaise
volcano on Runion island (Hibert et al., 2011; Hibert,
Overall Between -2 and 2 s 2012). Picking shows good performance even when dealing
60
Spicks: 9.21 15.92 s Spicks: 0.19 0.14 s
Number of picks compared: 882 Number of picks compared: 323 with emergent waves recorded on a few number of stations
%
40
(seismic network composed of five stations).
20
0 Discussion
1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
Deviation between automatic and manual picks [s]
In the past two decades, many new automatic pickers
have been proposed, using different approaches and meth-
Figure 18. The difference between automatic and manual pick-
ing times using the STA/LTA picking method (MAR dataset). All val- ods. Even if significant improvements have been made, only
ues beyond 22 seconds are compiled at 22 seconds. Median a few of these algorithms are openly available to the scien-
and standard deviations are shown for overall picks and for residuals tific community and can be rapidly implemented on new
in between 2 and 2 s. (a) P-wave onsets. (b) S-wave onsets. datasets. Two of these are included in the well-known Earth-
worm (Johnson et al., 1995) and SeisComP3 (Hanka et al.,
picks on four vertical channel traces of our network for 2000) software suites. The automatic picking module imple-
one event. Again, picks from the kurtosis-derived picker are mented in both software suites is based on the STA/LTA
closer to manual picks than the ones from the STA/LTA method introduced by Allen (1982), which is simple, robust,
picker. Moreover in this and many other cases, the STA/LTA and easily adaptable. Implementation of kurtosis-derived
Table 4
Differences between Manual P and S Picks and Both APP and STA/LTA Picks, for the
MAR Dataset
P Picks S Picks
Method Comments Residuals (s) Variance Residuals (s) Variance
methods in these suites should allow much more accurate the SNR energy ratio, and it calculates amplitudes to allow
onset picking. magnitude estimates.
Two other well-known picking algorithms are the tan- We tested the automatic pickers performance using two
dem picker (Nippress et al., 2010) and the MannekenPix datasets: a 30-instrument land-based array with wideband
(MPX) algorithm (Aldersons, 2004; Di Stefano et al., 2006). seismometers, and a four-instrument seafloor arrayoften
Both methods require operator-intensive preparation phases, without three-component datathat pushes the limits for
and neither automatically identifies phase arrivals. The MPX automatic picking and event location. For the first network,
method uses the BaerKradolfer algorithm (Baer and Kra- of 163 automatically selected events, 99 events could be
dolfer, 1987), which has been shown to be less accurate than picked manually, and 93 of these could be located, whereas
the kurtosis (Kperkoch et al., 2010), whereas the tandem the automatic picker provided 133 locations. The automatic
picker uses the kurtosis but picks at the point of maximum picker picked as many P onsets and more S onsets than
slope, which we have shown to be less accurate than picking manual picking, overlapping the manual onsets on 66% of
the initial point of inflection. the P picks and 77% of the S picks. The automatic picks de-
AR-AIC methods are powerful tools to pick onset times viated from the manual picks by 0:01 0:08 s for P and
when the SNR is very low (Takanami and Kitagawa, 1993; 0:09 0:23 s for S. The offset and deviation are much bet-
Leonard and Kennett, 1999), but their implementation is very ter than obtained using an STA/LTA picker and, in addition,
computer intensive, as a large number of AR models must be many more S arrivals were picked. The assigned pick quality
calculated. Taking into account these considerations, we be- index, based on the SNR, correlates well with manual quality
lieve the kurtosis-derived method that we developed here is indexes. The pick accuracy (relative to manual picks) is in-
the most appropriate tool for fast and automatic onset picking. dependent of the event magnitude.
The diprectilinearity polarization analysis proposed in The second dataset confirms the improved performance
this paper is well suited for independently identifying P, S, of our APP compared with the STA/LTA method, for which
and surface waves, in most cases. However, the polarization over 40% of both P and S picks were more than 2 s from the
analysis does not reliably identify P and S arrivals if the PS manual picks.
delay is shorter than the analysis window. We demonstrated The automatic picking algorithm described in this paper
that this window should be longer than three cycles of the can be a powerful tool for automatically picking P and S
lowest period of the arrival waveform: if there is a risk of onsets with high precision and accuracy and coherently
significant arrivals with shorter PS delays, it is recom- assigning their quality index. Very few manually picked
mended that the user run the algorithm twiceonce using events were lost and, for the tested datasets, the good quality
the polarization analysis and once withoutto see if signifi- and consistency of the picking allowed more events to be
cant events are lost using the polarization analysis. If this is located. The number of picked events and accuracy of the
the case, the extra events identified without the polarization picking are significantly higher using our APP than using
analysis could be manually added into the database. The non- the STA/LTA method. The picker has few and relatively sim-
polarization analysis code identifies the phase of events us- ple user-defined parameters and should be easily adaptable to
ing energetic conditioning (used in the MAR example), a wide range of local networks.
which is less discriminating than polarization analysis but
which does not rely on an analysis window length. Data and Resources
A future prospect could be to automatically switch from
polarization analysis to another method (such as energetic Data used in this paper come from projects funded
conditioning) when the time delay between identified onsets by IRD through Goazur and by the French Ministry of
is shorter than the polarization window length, or to output Research through the ANR Arc-Vanuatu program (Vanuatu
undefined arrivals with an appropriate flag. data) and by MoMAR and EMSO Azores (MAR data).
Data were analyzed using MATLAB 2012b (http://www
.mathworks.fr/products/matlab/) and SEISAN (http://seis
Conclusion
.geus.net/software/seisan/, last accessed on March 2013).
We have presented a new automated algorithm to iden-
tify and pick P- and S-wave onsets. The method uses a new Acknowledgments
CF based on the kurtosis statistical function to accurately
We would like to thank Alexandre Nercessian, Francois Beauducel,
pick seismic onsets. The CF uses several sliding window Claudio Satriano, and Pascal Bernard from the Institut de Physique du Globe
lengths and multiple frequency bandwidths, minimizing the de Paris (IPGP) seismological laboratory for their advice and contributions
dependence of the picker on these parameters. A polarization to this paper. The Vanuatu data were collected as part of the ARC-Vanuatu
analysis is applied to distinguish P waves from S waves and program funded by the French National Research Agency (ANR). We would
like to thank Marc Rgnier for his contribution to this project. The MAR data
to reject picks of surface waves or noise. A second rejection
were collected as part of the French MoMAR and EMSO Azores initiatives,
method is then applied, based on the clustering of P-onset funded by lInstitut Franais de Recherche pour lExploitation de la Mer
times, S-onset times, and PS onset time differences. The (IFREMER), lInstitut National des Sciences de lUnivers (INSU), and
algorithm includes a pick quality classification based on the Centre National de Recherche Scientifique (CNRS).
16 C. Baillard, W. C. Crawford, V. Ballu, C. Hibert, and A. Mangeney
We also thank Gilles Grandjean from the Bureau de Recherches Jurkevics, A. (1988). Polarization analysis of three-component array data,
Gologiques et Minires (BRGM) and the ANR UNDERVOLC program. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 78, 17251743.
This is IPGP contribution 3420. Kperkoch, L., T. Meier, J. Lee, and W. Friederich (2010). Automated
determination of P-phase arrival times at regional and local distances
using higher order statistics, Geophys. J. Int. 181, 11591170.
References
Leonard, M., and B. L. N. Kennett (1999). Multi-component autoregressive
Akaike, H. (1974). Markovian representation of stochastic processes and its techniques for the analysis of seismograms, Phys. Earth. Planet. In.
application to the analysis of autoregressive moving average processes, 113, 247263.
Ann. Inst. Stat. Math. 26, 363387. Lienert, B. R., and J. Havskov (1995). A computer program for locating
Aldersons, F. (2004). Toward a three-dimensional crustal structure of the earthquakes both locally and globally, Seismol. Res. Lett. 66, 2636.
Dead Sea region from local earthquake tomography, Ph.D. Thesis, Lienert, B. R., E. Berg, and L. N. Frazer (1986). Hypocenter: An earthquake
Tel Aviv University, Israel, 120 pp., http://faldersons.net (last accessed location method using centered, scaled, and adaptively damped least
June 2013). squares, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 76, 771783.
Allen, R. (1982). Automatic phase pickers: Their present use and future Nippress, S. E. J., A. Rietbrock, and A. E. Heath (2010). Optimized
prospects, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 72, S225S242. automatic pickers: Application to the ANCORP data set, Geophys.
Baer, M., and U. Kradolfer (1987). An automatic phase picker for local and J. Int. 181, 911925.
teleseismic events, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 77, 14371445. Pelletier, B., S. Calmant, and R. Pillet (1998). Current tectonics of the
Colao, A., J. Blandin, M. Cannat, T. Carval, V. Chavagnac, D. Connelly, M. TongaNew Hebrides region, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 164, 263276.
Fabian, S. Ghiron, J. Goslin, and J. M. Miranda (2011). MoMAR-D: A Saragiotis, C. D., L. J. Hadjileontiadis, and S. M. Panas (2002). PAI-S/K: A
technological challenge to monitor the dynamics of the Lucky Strike robust automatic seismic P phase arrival identification scheme, IEEE
vent ecosystem, ICES J. Mar. Sci. (J. du Conseil) 68, 416424. Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 40, 13951404.
Crawford, W. C., R. Abhishek, S. C. Singh, M. Cannat, J. Escartin, H. Wang, Sleeman, R., and T. van Eck (1999). Robust automatic P-phase picking:
R. Daniel, and V. Combier (2013). Hydrothermal seismicity beneath An on-line implementation in the analysis of broadband seismogram
the summit of Lucky Strike volcano, Mid-Atlantic Ridge, Earth Planet recordings, Phys. Earth. Planet. In. 113, 265275.
Sci. Lett. 373, 118128. Takanami, T., and G. Kitagawa (1993). Multivariate time-series model to
DeCarlo, L. T. (1997). On the meaning and use of kurtosis, Psychol. Meth. 2, estimate the arrival times of S-waves, Comput. Geosci. 19, 295301.
292307. Vidale, J. E. (1986). Complex polarization analysis of particle motion, Bull.
Di Stefano, R., F. Aldersons, E. Kissling, P. Baccheschi, C. Chiarabba, and Seismol. Soc. Am. 76, 13931405.
D. Giardini (2006). Automatic seismic phase picking and consistent Zeiler, C., and A. A. Velasco (2009). Seismogram picking error from analyst
observation error assessment: Application to the Italian seismicity, review (SPEAR): Single-analyst and institution analysis, Bull. Seismol.
Geophys. J. Int. 165, 121134. Soc. Am. 99, 27592770.
Freedman, H. W. (1966). The little variable factor a statistical discussion
of the reading of seismograms, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 56, 593604.
Gomberg, J. S., K. M. Shedlock, and S. W. Roecker (1990). The effect of Universit Paris DiderotPRES Sorbonne Paris Cit
S-wave arrival times on the accuracy of hypocenter estimation, Bull. Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris
Seismol. Soc. Am. 80, 16051628. UMR CNRS 7154
Hanka, W., A. Heinloo, and K. H. Jaeckel (2000). Networked seismographs: 1 rue Jussieu
GEOFON real-time data distribution, ORFEUS Electronic Newsl. 2. 75238 Paris, France
Havskov, J., and L. Ottemller (2010). Routine Data Processing in baillard@ipgp.fr
Earthquake Seismology: With Sample Data, Exercises and Software, crawford@ipgp.fr
Springer, New York, 326 pp. hibert@ipgp.fr
mangeney@ipgp.fr
Hibert, C. (2012). L'apport de lcoute sismique pour ltude des boule-
(C.B., W.C.C., C.H., A.M.)
ments du cratre Dolomieu, Piton de la Fournaise, La Runion, Ph.D.
Thesis, Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, France (in French).
Hibert, C., G. Grandjean, N. Shapiro, and C. Baillard (2011). Automatic
picking and localization of rockfalls from their seismic signature: Universit de La Rochelle
Application to the Piton de la Fournaise volcano, La Runion, poster, Littoral, Environnement et Socits (LIENSs)
AGU Fall Meeting 2011. UMR CNRS 7266
Hildyard, M. W., S. E. J. Nippress, and A. Rietbrock (2008). Event detection 2 rue Olympe de Gouges
and phase picking using a time-domain estimate of predominate period 17000 La Rochelle, France
Tpd, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98, 30253032. valerie.ballu@univlr.fr
(V.B.)
Johnson, C. E., A. Bittenbinder, B. Bogaert, L. Dietz, and W. Kohler (1995).
Earthworm: A flexible approach to seismic network processing, IRIS
Newsl. 14, 14. Manuscript received 29 November 2012