Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Modeling spatial distribution of earthquake epicenters using inhomogeneous Log-Gaussian Cox point process

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Modeling Earth Systems and Environment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper explores the applicability of Inhomogeneous Log-Gaussian Cox point process to a complex spatial mechanism generating the tightly clustered locations of an earthquake aftershocks. The data constitutes the deadly 2023-Türkiye earthquake of magnitude 7.8 and its aftershocks of magnitudes as large as 7.5. Locations of active tectonic faults and the plate boundaries marked within the study area provide useful covariate information for explaining the aftershocks distribution pattern in 2-D spatial domain. The fitted Inhomogeneous Log-Gaussian Cox Point Process (LGCP) model is able to successfully account for this information. Intensity function of the model serves as a suitable choice to describe the intricate spatial mechanism underlying the earthquakes pattern generation. The available covariates information improves the performance of the fitted LGCP model in describing spatial variation of the density of earthquakes in terms of the distinct spatial features of the seismic region.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data used in this manuscript are available on request.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  • Ambraseys NN, Jackson JA (1998) Faulting associated with historical and recent earthquakes in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Geophys J Int 133:390–406

    Google Scholar 

  • Anwar S, Stein A, van Genderen JL (2012) Implementation of the marked Strauss point process model to the epicenters of earthquake aftershocks. In: Shi W, Goodchild MF, Lees B et al (eds) Advances in Geo-spatial Information Science, ISPRS Book Series, vol 42. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 125–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Anwar S, Yaseen M, Mahmood SA (2022) Higher order Gibbs point process modeling of Kashmir earthquakes. Model Earth Syst Environ 9(1):1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley AJ (2005) Analysing spatial point patterns in ‘R’. J R Stat Soc 67:617–666

    Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley AJ (2010) Modelling strategies. In: Gelfand AE, Diggle PJ, Fuentes M et al (eds) Handbook of spatial statistics. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 371–402

    Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley A (2023) Personal communication. Email correspondence on September 25, 2023

  • Baddeley A, Silverman BW (1984) A cautionary example on the use of second-order methods for analyzing point patterns. Biometrics 40:1089–1093

    Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley AJ, van Lieshout MNM (1995) Area-interaction point processes. Ann Inst Stat Math 47:601–619

    Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley AJ, Turner R (2005) spatstat: an R package for analyzing spatial point patterns. J Stat Soft 12(6):1–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley AJ, Turner R (2006) Modelling spatial point patterns in R. Lecture notes in Statistics. Springer, London, pp 23–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley A, Gregory P, Mateu J et al (2006) Case studies in spatial point process modeling. Lecture notes in Statistics. Springer, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley A, Rubak E, Turner R (2016) Spatial point patterns: methodology and applications with R. CRC Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley A, Davies TM, Hazelton ML et al (2022) Fundamental problems in fitting spatial cluster process models. Spat Stat 52:100709

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman M, Diggle P (1989) Estimating weighted integrals of the second-order intensity of a spatial point process. J R Stat Soc 51:81–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Besag J (1977) Contribution to the discussion on Dr Ripley’s paper. J R Stat Soc B 39:193–195

    Google Scholar 

  • Choiruddin A, Trisnisa AF, Iriawan N (2021) Quantifying the effect of geological factors on distribution of earthquake occurrences by inhomogeneous Cox processes. Pure Appl Geophys 178:1579–1592

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox DR (1955) Some statistical methods connected with series of events. J R Stat Soc Ser B (Methodol) 17:129–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox DR, Isham V (1980) Point processes. In: Monographs on applied probability and statistics, vol 12. CRC Press, Boca Raton

  • Cressie NAC (1993) Statistics for spatial data. In: Handbook of spatial statistics, 2nd edn. Wiley-Interscience, London

  • Daley DJ, vere Jones D (2002) An introduction to the theory of point Processes, vol 1. Springer, London

  • D’Angelo N, Siino M, D’Alessandro A et al (2022) Local spatial log-Gaussian Cox processes for seismic data. Adv Stat Anal 106:633–671

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Angelo N, Adelfio G, Mateu J (2023) Locally weighted minimum contrast estimation for spatio-temporal log-Gaussian Cox processes. Comput Stat Data Anal 180:107679

    Google Scholar 

  • David D (2019) Introduction to the theory of Gibbs point processes. In: Shi W, Goodchild MF, Lees B et al (eds) Stochastic geometry, vol 42. Springer, London, pp 181–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Diggle PJ (2003) Statistical analysis of spatial and spatio-temporal point patterns, vol 1. A Hodder Arnold Publication, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Diggle PJ (2013) Statistical analysis of spatial point patterns, vol 128. Chapman and Hall, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Diggle PJ, Gomez-Rubio V, Brown PE et al (2007) Second-order analysis of inhomogeneous point processes using case-control data. Biometircs 63:550–557

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dvořák J (2011) On moment estimation method for spatial Cox processes. In: WDS’11 Proceedings of Contributed Papers, Part I. MATFYZPRESS, Charles University, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Prague, Czech Republic, pp 31–36

  • Fisher RA (1915) Frequency distribution of the values of the correlation coefficient in samples from an indefinitely large population. Biometrika 10:507–521

    Google Scholar 

  • Foxall R, Baddeley A (2002) Nonparametric measures of association between a spatial point process and a random set, with geological applications. Appl Stat 51(2):165–182

    Google Scholar 

  • Geyer CJ (1999) Likelihood inference for spatial point processes. In: Barndorff-Nielsen OE, Kendall WS, van Lieshout MNM (eds) Stochastic Geometry: Likelihood and Computation, Monographs on Statistics and Applied Probability, vol 80. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, pp 79–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabarnik P, Särkkä A (2001) Interacting neighbour point processes: some models for clustering. J Stat Comput Simul 68(2):103–125

    Google Scholar 

  • Harte DS (2014) An ETAS model with varying productivity rates. Geophys J Int 198:270–284

    Google Scholar 

  • Högmander H, Särkkä A (1999) Multitype spatial point patterns with hierarchical interactions. Biometrics 55(4):1051–1058

    Google Scholar 

  • Illian J, Penttinen A, Stoyan H et al (2008) Statistical analysis and modelling of spatial point patterns, vol 1. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Isham V (1984) Multitype Markov point processes: some approximations. Proc R Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci 391(1800):39–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Jalilian A, Safari A, Sohrabi H (2020) Modeling spatial patterns and species associations in a Hyrcanian forest using a multivariate log-Gaussian Cox process. J Stat Model Theory Appl 1(2):59–76

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenzie D (1972) Active tectonics of the Mediterranean region. Geophys J R Astr Soc 30(2):109–185

    Google Scholar 

  • Møller J (2005) Properties of spatial Cox process models. J Stat Res Iran 2(1):2–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Molnar P, Chen WP (1982) Seismicity and mountain building. In: Mountain building processes. Academic Press, New York, pp 41–57

  • Møller J, Waagepetersen RP (2007) Modern statistics for spatial point processes. Scand J Stat 34(4):643–684

    Google Scholar 

  • Møller J, Syversveen AR, Waagepetersen RP (1998) Log Gaussian Cox Processes. Scand J Stat 25(3):451–482

    Google Scholar 

  • Naji DM, Akin MK, Cabalar AF (2021) Evaluation of seismic site classification for Kahramanmaras City, Turkey. Environ Earth Sci 80(3):97

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogata Y (1998) Space-time point-process models for earthquake occurrences. Ann Inst Stat Math 50(2):379–402

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogata Y (2011) Significant improvements of the space-time ETAS model for forecasting of accurate baseline seismicity. Earth Planets Space 63:217–229

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogata Y (2017) Statistics of earthquake activity: models and methods for earthquake predictability studies. Annu Rev Earth Planet Sci 45:497–527

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ogata Y, Zhuang J (2006) Space-time ETAS models and an improved extension. Tectonophysics 413(1–2):13–23

    Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team (2023) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. https://www.R-project.org/

  • Ripley BD (1988) Statistical inference for spatial processes. Cambridge University Press, University of Oxford, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Shearer P (2012) Space-time clustering of seismicity in California and the distance dependence of earthquake triggering. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 117(B10)

  • Siino M, Adelfio G, Mateu J et al (2017) Spatial pattern analysis using hybrid models: an application to the Hellenic seismicity. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 31:1633–1648

    Google Scholar 

  • USGS (2023) Website. https://earthquake.usgs.gov/

  • van Lieshout MNM (2010) Spatial point process theory. In: Gelfand AE, Giggle PJ, Guttorp P et al (eds) Handbook of spatial statistics, vol 1. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 263–282

    Google Scholar 

  • van Lieshout MNM (2011) A \(j\)-function for inhomogeneous point processes. Stat Neerl 65:183–201

    Google Scholar 

  • van Lieshout MNM (2019) Theory of spatial statistics: a concise introduction, vol 36. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • van Lieshout MNM, Baddeley AJ (1996) A non-parametric measure of spatial interaction in point patterns. Stat Neerl 50(3):344–361

    Google Scholar 

  • vere Jones D (2009) Some models and procedures for space-time point processes. Environ Ecol Stat 16:173–195

  • Zilio LD, Ampuero JP (2023) Earthquake doublet in Turkey and Syria. Commun Earth Environ 4(1):71

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was not funded by any grant.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Space Science, University of the Punjab, Quaid-e-Azam Campus, Lahore, 54590, Pakistan

    Salma Anwar & Muhammad Yaseen

  2. Centre for Integrated Mountain Research, University of the Punjab, Quaid-e-Azam Campus, Lahore, 54590, Pakistan

    Muhammad Yaseen & Yasir Latif

  3. Institute of Computer Sciences, Czech Academy of Sciences, 18207, Prague, Czech Republic

    Muhammad Yaseen & Yasir Latif

Authors
  1. Salma Anwar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Muhammad Yaseen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Muhammad Yaseen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yasir Latif
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Statistical analysis of the data was performed by Dr. Salma Anwar. The second coauthor Dr. Muhammad Yaseen and third coauthor Dr. Muhammad Yaseen contributed in data collection and data processing. The fourth coauthor Dr. Yasir Latif contributed in literature review and graphics preparation. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Dr. Salma Anwar and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Salma Anwar.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethics approval

This article does not contain any studies with participants performed by any of the authors.

Consent to participate

This article does not contain any studies with participants performed by any of the authors

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Anwar, S., Yaseen, M., Yaseen, M. et al. Modeling spatial distribution of earthquake epicenters using inhomogeneous Log-Gaussian Cox point process. Model. Earth Syst. Environ. 10, 2917–2933 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-023-01940-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-023-01940-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation