Nature News

A neuron in opposition to deep studying in duplicate prediction

1.

DeVries, P.M. H., Viégas, F., Wattenberg, M. & Meade, B.J. To be taught in depth the patterns of aftershocks following necessary earthquakes. Nature 560, 632-634 (2018).

2

Meade, B.J., DeVries, P., R., Faller, J., Viegas, F. and Wattenberg, M. What is best than stress as a result of Coulomb failure? Classification of set off mechanisms for scalar static constraints from 105 pairs of most important shocks. Geophysics Res. Lett. 44, 11 409-11 416 (2017).

Three

Reasenberg, P. A. and Jones, L. M. Threat of earthquake after a serious shock in California. Science 243, 1173-1176 (1989).

four

Reasenberg, P.A. & Jones, L.M. Following the earthquake: replace. Science 265, 1251-1252 (1994).

5

Gerstenberger, M.C., Wiemer, S., Jones, L.M. & Reasenberg, PA Actual-time prediction of the earthquakes of tomorrow in California. Nature 435, 328-331 (2005).

6

Felzer, Okay.R. & Brodsky, E.E. The decay of the density of aftershocks with distance signifies the triggering by dynamic stress. Nature 441, 735-738 (2006).

seven.

Richards-Dinger, Okay., R., S., and Toda, S. Decay in replicate density by distance doesn’t point out triggering by dynamic stress. Nature 467, 583-586 (2010).

eight

Mignan, A. Utsu, the posterior duplicate productiveness legislation was defined from geometric operations on the everlasting static stress subject of main shocks. Nonlinear course of. Geophysics 25, 241-250 (2018).

9

Steacy, S., Gerstenberger, M., Williams, C., Rhoades, D. and Christophersen, A. A brand new hybrid Coulomb / statistical mannequin for predicting replication charges. Geophysics J. Int. 196, 918-923 (2014).

ten.

Cattania, C., Hainzl, S., Wang, L., Roth, F. and Enescu, B. Propagation of Coulomb stress uncertainties in physics-based replication fashions. J. Geophys. Res. Strong Earth 119, 7846-7864 (2014).

11

Cattania, C. et al. Predictive competence of physics-based seismicity fashions in the course of the 2010-2012 seismic sequence in Canterbury, New Zealand. Seismol. Res. Lett. 89, 1238-1250 (2018).

12

LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y. and Hinton, G. Deep Studying. Nature 521, 436-444 (2015).

13

Jordan, M. I. & Mitchell, T. M. Machine Studying: Traits, Views and Prospects. Science 349, 255-260 (2015).

14

Kong, Q. et al. Automated studying in seismology: remodeling information into concepts. Seismol. Res. Lett. 90, Three-14 (2019).

15

Beroza, G. C. Predictions of aerial replication flip to AI. Nature 560, 556-557 (2018).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *